Elsevier

Displays

Volume 29, Issue 2, March 2008, Pages 152-158
Displays

Adapting to virtual environments: Visual-motor skill acquisition versus perceptual recalibration

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.013Get rights and content

Abstract

Virtual environment (VE) technology exposes users to a variety of intersensory and sensory-motor discordances to which they must adapt for optimal performance. Our research has distinguished two types of adaptation: Visual-motor skill acquisition and perceptual recalibration. The first involves learning a new way to coordinate hand and eye, while the second is an automatic, restricted process of perceptual learning. We conclude that an understanding of the controlling conditions and defining characteristics of these two adaptive mechanisms allows one to predict which is the more likely to occur with a given VE and how best to train its users.

Section snippets

Problems with virtual environments and the response to users’ complaints

Despite remarkable advances over the last decade, virtual environments (VEs) continue to suffer from numerous defects, including poor lighting, unrealistic graphics, a small visual field of view (FOV), heavy headgear, and various inter-sensory and sensory-motor conflicts (e.g., [1], [2]), all of which produce a diverse array of perceptual, behavioral, and physical complaints (see Table 1). Of the latter, perhaps the most problematic is the motion sickness-like syndrome known as “cybersickness,”

Perceptual calibration versus visual-motor skill acquisition

Clower and Boussaoud [14] have proposed that adaptation to intersensory and sensory-motor rearrangements comes in two qualitatively different flavors known as perceptual recalibration and visual-motor skill acquisition. [Redding and Wallace [15] have made a very similar distinction, although with different terminology]. Perceptual recalibration exists when one sensory system (typically, proprioception) has been calibrated in terms of another sensory system (typically, vision). This is

Comparison between multi-spatial and uni-spatial rearrangements

In a series of studies from our laboratory (Cunningham & Welch, 19), participants controlled a cursor by means of a hand-held stylus applied to a horizontal digitizing tablet, both of which were shielded from sight by an occluding board. Their task was to keep the cursor centered continuously on a small, randomly moving target presented on an upright desktop computer monitor, 57 cm distant. Two stylus-cursor relationships were used: (1) the normal one in which forward-backward hand movements

Summary and conclusions

An understanding of the necessary conditions for perceptual recalibration versus visual-motor skill acquisition allows one to predict the primary type of adaptation a particular VE (or tele-operator device) will produce. If a VE entails a relatively minor inter-sensory or sensory-motor conflict that is limited to one spatial plane (e.g., a lateral misalignment of felt limb position and its visual surrogate viewed in a head-mounted display), the end product of adaptation will be perceptual

References (21)

  • E.B. Nash et al.

    International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction

    (2000)
  • R.B. Welch

    Adapting to virtual environments

  • L.J. Hettinger et al.

    Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments

    (1992)
  • F. Biocca

    Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments

    (1992)
  • J.T. Reason et al.

    Motion Sickness

    (1975)
  • R.B. Welch

    Adaptation of Space Perception

  • G.M. Redding et al.

    Adaptive Spatial Alignment

    (1997)
  • R. Held

    American Journal of Psychology

    (1955)
  • P.T. Young

    Journal of Experimental Psychology

    (1928)
  • J.C. Hay et al.

    Journal of Experimental Psychology

    (1966)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

This research was supported by a Grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Project UPN 131-20-30-00).

View full text