Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revisiting affordance perception in contemporary virtual reality

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Virtual Reality Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) applications have rapidly gained renewed popularity and are extensively employed for replicating real-life scenarios that may otherwise be impractical to recreate. All such VR applications require that the environments being used provide high levels of immersion and mimic their real-world counterpart in terms of size, distance, depth, and action capabilities. Many VR applications being developed for training and entertainment require users to traverse an immersive virtual environment (IVE), where determining whether one can pass through an opening or aperture is one of the most frequently made decisions. In this experiment, we empirically compare passability judgments made in an IVE to those made in the real world. Participants judged whether they could pass through various widths of an adjustable sliding doorway in the real world and in a to-scale virtual replica viewed through an HTC Vive head-mounted display. If uncertain of their initial judgments, participants were permitted to walk towards the doorway. Results indicate that participants accurately perceive their ability to pass through doorways in both the real world and VR. However, participants in VR required more exposure to dynamic information via movement through the IVE in order to reach a real-world level of perceptual accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.allaboutvision.com/eye-test/snellen-chart.pdf.

  2. https://www.good-lite.com/cw3/Assets/documents/100050\_StereoFlyManual.pdf.

References

  • Balcetis E, Dunning D (2010) Wishful seeing: more desired objects are seen as closer. Psychol Sci 21(1):147–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhargava A et al (2018) Towards revisiting passability judgments in real and immersive virtual environments. In 2018 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR). https://doi.org/10.1109/vr.2018.8446189

  • Bryk AS, Raudenbush SW (1992) Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods. Sage Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck LE et al (2019) Interpersonal affordances and social dynamics in collaborative immersive virtual environments: passing together through apertures. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics 25(5):2123–2133

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cesari P (2005) An invariant guiding stair descent by young and old adults. Exp Aging Res 31(4):441–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cesari P, Formenti F, Olivato P (2003) A common perceptual parameter for stair climbing for children, young and old adults. Hum Mov Sci 22(1):111–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creem-Regehr SH et al (2015) Egocentric distance perception in the Oculus Rift (DK2). In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on applied perception—SAP’15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2804408.2804422

  • Fath AJ, Fajen BR (2011) Static and dynamic visual information about the size and passability of an aperture. Perception 40(8):887–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franchak JM, Celano EC, Adolph KE (2012) ‘Perception of passage through openings depends on the size of the body in motion. Exp Brain Res 223(2):301–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geuss M et al (2010) Can I pass?: using affordances to measure perceived size in virtual environments. In: The 7th symposium on applied perception in graphics and visualization

  • Geuss MN et al (2015) Effect of display technology on perceived scale of space. Hum Factors 57(7):1235–1247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Grechkin TY et al (2010) How does presentation method and measurement protocol affect distance estimation in real and virtual environments? ACM Trans Appl Percep 7(4):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grechkin TY, Plumert JM, Kearney JK (2014) Dynamic affordances in embodied interactive systems: the role of display and mode of locomotion. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Gr 20(4):596–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann DA (1997) An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. J Manag 23(6):723–744

    Google Scholar 

  • Interrante V, Ries B, Anderson L (2006) Distance perception in immersive virtual environments, revisited. In: IEEE virtual reality conference (VR 2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/vr.2006.52

  • Ishak S, Adolph KE, Lin GC (2008) ‘Perceiving affordances for fitting through apertures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 34(6):1501–1514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janeh O et al (2017) Walking in Virtual Reality. ACM Trans Appl Percep 14(2):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones JA et al (2008) The effects of virtual reality, augmented reality, and motion parallax on egocentric depth perception. In: Proceedings of the 5th symposium on applied perception in graphics and visualization—APGV’08. https://doi.org/10.1145/1394281.1394283

  • Jones JA et al (2011) Peripheral visual information and its effect on distance judgments in virtual and augmented environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on applied perception in graphics and visualization—APGV’11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2077451.2077457

  • Jones JA et al (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—SAP’12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2338676.2338701

  • Kelly JW et al (2013) More than just perception-action recalibration: walking through a virtual environment causes rescaling of perceived space. Atten Percept Psychophys 75(7):1473–1485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JW et al (2014) Recalibration of perceived distance in virtual environments occurs rapidly and transfers asymmetrically across scale. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Gr 20(4):588–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JW, Cherep LA, Siegel ZD (2017) Perceived Space in the HTC Vive. ACM Trans Appl Percept 15(1):2:1–2:16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenyon RV et al (2008) Accommodation and size-constancy of virtual objects. Ann Biomed Eng 36(2):342–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein E, Swan JE, Schmidt GS, Livingston MA, Staadt OG (2009) Measurement protocols for medium-field distance perception in large-screen immersive displays. In: 2009 IEEE virtual reality conference. IEEE, pp 107–113

  • Knapp J, Loomis J (2003) Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. In: Virtual and adaptive environments, pp 21–46

  • Konczak J, Meeuwsen HJ, Cress ME (1992) Changing affordances in stair climbing: the perception of maximum climbability in young and older adults. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18(3):691–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhl SA, Creem-Regehr SH, Thompson WB (2010) Individual differences in accuracy of blind walking to targets on the floor. J Vis 6(6):726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lappin JS, Shelton AL, Rieser JJ (2006) Environmental context influences visually perceived distance. Percept Psychophys 68(4):571–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li B, Walker J, Kuhl SA (2018) The effects of peripheral vision and light stimulation on distance judgments through HMDs. ACM Trans Appl Percept 15(2):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin Q, Rieser J, Bodenheimer B (2015) Affordance judgments in HMD-based virtual environments. ACM Trans Appl Percept 12(2):1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loomis JM, Philbeck JW (2008) Measuring spatial perception with spatial updating and action. In: Embodiment, ego-space, and action. Psychology Press, pp 17–60

  • Napieralski PE et al (2011) Near-field distance perception in real and virtual environments using both verbal and action responses. ACM Trans Appl Percept 8(3):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen TD et al (2009) Effects of scale change on distance perception in virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the 6th symposium on applied perception in graphics and visualization—APGV’09. https://doi.org/10.1145/1620993.1620999

  • Pagano CC, Isenhower RW (2008) Expectation affects verbal judgments but not reaches to visually perceived egocentric distances. Psychon Bull Rev 15(2):437–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng C-YJ, Lee KL, Ingersoll GM (2002) An Introduction to Logistic Regression Analysis and Reporting. J Educ Res 96(1):3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pointon G, Thompson C, Creem-Regehr S, Stefanucci J, Joshi M, Paris R, Bodenheimer B (2018) Judging action capabilities in augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on Applied Perception. ACM, p 6

  • Proffitt DR et al (2003) The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychol Sci 14(2):106–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renner RS, Velichkovsky BM, Helmert JR (2013) The perception of egocentric distances in virtual environments—a review. ACM Comput Surv 46(2):1–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel ZD, Kelly JW (2017) Walking through a virtual environment improves perceived size within and beyond the walked space. Atten Percept Psychophys 79(1):39–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanucci JK, Geuss MN (2009) Big people, little world: the body influences size perception. Perception 38(12):1782–1795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanucci JK, Gagnon KT, Lessard DA (2011) Follow your heart: emotion adaptively influences perception. Soc Pers Psychol Compass 5(6):296–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanucci JK et al (2012) Evaluating the accuracy of size perception in real and virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on applied perception—SAP’12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2338676.2338692

  • Stefanucci JK et al (2015) Evaluating the accuracy of size perception on screen-based displays: displayed objects appear smaller than real objects. J Exp Psychol Appl 21(3):215–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WB et al (2004) Does the quality of the computer graphics matter when judging distances in visually immersive environments? Pres Teleoper Virt Environ 13(5):560–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren WH Jr (1984) Perceiving affordances: visual guidance of stair climbing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 10(5):683–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren WH Jr, Whang S (1987) Visual guidance of walking through apertures: body-scaled information for affordances. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 13(3):371–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witt JK, Proffitt DR, Epstein W (2004) Perceiving distance: a role of effort and intent. Perception 33(5):577–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witt JK et al (2007) Seeing beyond the target: environmental context affects distance perception. Perception 36(12):1752–1768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woltman H et al (2012) An introduction to hierarchical linear modeling. Tut Quant Methods Psychol 8(1):52–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

    Ayush Bhargava, Andrew C. Robb & Sabarish V. Babu

  2. Department of Psychology, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

    Kathryn M. Lucaites, Hannah Solini & Christopher C. Pagano

  3. Human Factors Consultant at Applied Building Sciences, Inc., Charleston, SC, USA

    Leah S. Hartman

  4. Center for Workforce Development, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

    Jeffrey W. Bertrand

Authors
  1. Ayush Bhargava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kathryn M. Lucaites
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leah S. Hartman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hannah Solini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jeffrey W. Bertrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrew C. Robb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christopher C. Pagano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Sabarish V. Babu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ayush Bhargava.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (MP4 31723 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhargava, A., Lucaites, K.M., Hartman, L.S. et al. Revisiting affordance perception in contemporary virtual reality. Virtual Reality 24, 713–724 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00432-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00432-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation