Upload
horatio-boyd
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Quantifying Immersion A sense of “being there” Justify VR research Motivating factors –Search for possibly existent item –Control with head v. hand –Tactile input v. implied The subject “room”.
Citation preview
Quantifying Immersionin Virtual Reality
Randy Pausch Dennis Proffitt
George Williams
University of VirginiaSIGGRAPH 1997
Previous Work
• Taxonomies Robinett, Zeltzer• Subjective ratings Heeter• Fish-tank performance Arthur, McKenna• v. Hand-based analysis Chung
Quantifying Immersion
• A sense of “being there”• Justify VR research• Motivating factors
– Search for possibly existent item– Control with head v. hand– Tactile input v. implied
The subject “room”.
The Experiment
• VR mode– Input: 6DOF tracker– View: stereo vision headset,
moveable• Desktop mode
– Input: 6DOF tracker– View: stereo vision headset,
stationary• Target character (possibly)
embedded in camouflage Look familiar?
The Results• Target searching: no
VR advantage• No target present:
41% decrease• VR data was
predictable
Transfer Effects
• VR training improves spatial cognition
• Desktop use degrades “real-world” performance
Contributions
1. Indication of improved short-term memory (FoR)2. Improved traditional display use3. Suggestion 2D world limits spatial cognition4. Complement to definition of immersion
Possible Expansions
• Real-world manipulation (Voodoo dolls)• PUSH device• Further research on education through VR
manipulation for 2D tasks
Secret Slide
• Is it fair to equate the “desktop” experience with actual use?
• What is the relation in importance between target being present and not?
• Would more detailed tasks preserve the same trends?