감성과학 (Science of Emotion and Sensibility)

  • 제24권4호
  • /
  • Pages.17-28
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1226-8593(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2383-613X(eISSN)
한국감성과학회 (Korean Society for Emotion and Sensibility)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

현실과 가상현실에서 시야각이 자기중심적 거리지각에 미치는 영향

Effect of Field of View on Egocentric Distance Perception in Real and Virtual Environment

  • 진승재 (광운대학교 사회과학대학 산업심리학과) ;
  • 김신우 (광운대학교 사회과학대학 산업심리학과) ;
  • 이형철 (광운대학교 사회과학대학 산업심리학과)
  • 투고 : 2021.08.19
  • 심사 : 2021.10.22
  • 발행 : 2021.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구의 목적은 현실, 가상현실에서 시야각 수준을 세분화하여 지각된 거리에 미치는 영향을 규명하는 것이다. 본 연구는 가상현실조건 제시에 현실조건 환경을 모방한 복제품을 사용하여 두 관찰조건을 동등하게 구성하였다. 시야각 조작을 위해 현실조건에서 시야각을 제한하는 안경을 사용하였고, 가상현실조건에서 HMD를 통해 현실과 동등한 방법으로 시야각을 제한함으로써 두 관찰조건에서 시야각 수준을 동일하게 조작하였다. 실험에 참여한 성인 18명은 현실, 가상현실 각 관찰조건에서 머리 움직임을 제한한 후 조건에 따라 상이한 제한된 시야로 대상을 관찰하였다. 이후 참가자들은 정신적으로 대상까지 걷는데 소요된 시간을 측정하는 상상보행 측정방법을 통해 지각된 거리를 보고하였다. 대상은 3 m, 4 m, 5 m 거리에 제시되었으며 각 거리수준마다 3회 반복측정 하였다. 측정한 시간 측정치는 거리로 환산하여 분석에 사용하였다. 실험 결과, 가상현실조건의 거리추정치는 현실조건보다 작았다. 또한 시야각 수준이 감소함에 따라 거리추정치가 감소하였다. 현실조건에서 거리추정치는 시야각 수준에 따라 달라지지 않았다. 그러나 가상현실조건에서 거리추정치는 시야각 수준이 감소함에 따라 감소하는 경향을 보였다. 논의에서 본 실험결과와 시사점, 한계점 및 추후 연구 방향에 대해 제시하였다.

The purpose of the research was to examine the effect of field of view on egocentric distance perception in the real and virtual environment. The replica that mimicked the real environment condition was used to create the virtual environment condition. We manipulated field of view levels equally in both viewing conditions using glasses that limit the field of view in real-world conditions and limiting the field of view in virtual-world conditions in a manner equivalent to real-world conditions via HMD. Eighteen participants observed the target with a limited field of view in a real and virtual environment without head movement. Then, we measured perceived distance using the timed imagined walking method, which measures the time taken by each participant to mentally walk to the target. The target was shown three times at three different distances from the participants: 3, 4, and 5 m. For the analysis, we converted time estimates into distance estimates. Consequently, the estimated distance in the virtual environment condition was less than the estimated distance in the real environment condition. And as the field of view shrank, the estimated distance also decreased. The estimated distance did not vary with field of view levels in real-world conditions. In the virtual environment, the estimated distance decreased as the field of view decreased, whereas in the real environment, the estimated distance increased. The implications of the results and some future research directions are discussed below.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2020년도 광운대학교 연구년(이형철)의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임.

참고문헌

  1. Andrus, S. M., Gaylor, G., & Bodenheimer, B. (2014). Distance estimation in virtual environments using different HMDs. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception, 130-130. DOI: 10.1145/2628257.2628359
  2. Buck, L. E., Young, M. K., & Bodenheimer, B. (2018). A comparison of distance estimation in hmd-based virtual environments with different hmd-based conditions. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 15(3), 1-15. DOI: 10.1145/3196885
  3. Choi, I. B., Park, J. J., Kim, S. W., & Li, H. C. O. (2020). Effect of inconsistency between visually perceived walking speed and physically perceived walking speed on VR sickness in VR-treadmill walking. Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 23(3), 79-90. DOI: 10.14695/KJSOS.2020.23.3.79
  4. Creem-Regehr, S. H., Stefanucci, J. K., Thompson, W. B., Nash, N., & McCardell, M. (2015). Egocentric distance perception in the oculus rift (dk2). In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Applied Perception, 47-50. DOI: 10.1145/2804408.2804422
  5. Creem-Regehr, S. H., Willemsen, P., Gooch, A. A., & Thompson, W. B. (2005). The influence of restricted viewing conditions on egocentric distance perception: Implications for real and virtual indoor environments. Perception, 34(2), 191-204. DOI: 10.1068/p5144
  6. Grechkin, T. Y., Nguyen, T. D., Plumert, J. M., Cremer, J. F., & Kearney, J. K. (2010). How does presentation method and measurement protocol affect distance estimation in real and virtual environments?. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 7(4), 1-18. DOI: 10.1145/1823738.1823744
  7. Jones, J. A., Suma, E. A., Krum, D. M., & Bolas, M. (2012). Comparability of narrow and wide field-of-view head-mounted displays for medium-field distance judgments. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception, 119-119. DOI: 10.1145/2338676.2338701
  8. Kuhl, S. A., Thompson, W. B., & Creem-Regehr, S. H. (2009). HMD calibration and its effects on distance judgments. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 6(3), 1-20. DOI: 10.1145/1577755.1577762
  9. Li, B., Nordman, A., Walker, J., & Kuhl, S. A. (2016). The effects of artificially reduced field of view and peripheral frame stimulation on distance judgments in HMDs. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception, 53-56. DOI: 10.1145/2931002.2931013
  10. Li, B., Walker, J., & Kuhl, S. A. (2018). The effects of peripheral vision and light stimulation on distance judgments through hmds. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 15(2), 1-14. DOI: 10.1145/3165286
  11. Li, B., Zhang, R., Nordman, A., & Kuhl, S. A. (2015). The effects of minification and display field of view on distance judgments in real and HMD-based environments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Applied Perception, 55-58. DOI: 10.1145/2804408.2804427
  12. Lin, Q., Xie, X., Erdemir, A., Narasimham, G., McNamara, T. P., Rieser, J., & Bodenheimer, B. (2011). Egocentric distance perception in real and HMD-based virtual environments: The effect of limited scanning method. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, 75-82. DOI: 10.1145/2077451.2077465
  13. Loomis, J. M., Da Silva, J. A., Fujita, N., & Fukusima, S. S. (1992). Visual space perception and visually directed action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 906-921. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.18.4.906
  14. Plumert, J. M., Kearney, J. K., Cremer, J. F., & Recker, K. (2005). Distance perception in real and virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 2(3), 216-233. DOI: 10.1145/1077399.1077402
  15. Renner, R. S., Velichkovsky, B. M., & Helmert, J. R. (2013). The perception of egocentric distances in virtual environments-a review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 46(2), 1-40. DOI: 10.1145/2543581.2543590
  16. Willemsen, P., Colton, M. B., Creem-Regehr, S. H., & Thompson, W. B. (2009). The effects of head-mounted display mechanical properties and field of view on distance judgments in virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 6(2), 1-14. DOI: 10.1145/1498700.1498702
  17. Witt, J. K., Stefanucci, J. K., Riener, C. R., & Proffitt, D. R. (2007). Seeing beyond the target: Environmental context affects distance perception. Perception, 36(12), 1752-1768. DOI: 10.1068/p5617
  18. Wu, B., Ooi, T. L., & He, Z. J. (2004). Perceiving distance accurately by a directional process of integrating ground information. Nature, 428(6978), 73-77. DOI: 10.1038/nature02350