The Effect of Accommodative Demand,Motion Parallax and Age on Virtual Object Localizations

Abstract

Observers adjusted the position of a physical pointer to localize a computer-generated, space-stabilized, virtual object presented monocularly in a see-through, head-mounted display. Each observer rocked side to side to produce motion parallax to determine the depicted distance of the object. The depicted distance (75 and 113 cm) of the virtual object was specified by motion parallax and accommodative demand. Six younger (18-20 years) and six older (40-70 years) observers participated in the study. Both motion parallax and accommodative demand were independent, significant factors driving the localization of virtual objects. Motion parallax was markedly more influential than accommodative demand. Object localization was not affected significantly by the observers' ages, possibly due to the small change in accommodative demand and the relative strength of motion parallax.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Braunstein

M. L.

(1966). Sensitivity of the observer to transformations of the visual field. J Exp Psych, 72, 683–689.

Dees

J. W.

(1966). Accuracy of absolute visual distance and size estimation in space as a function of stereopsis and motion parallax. J Exp Psych, 72, 466–476.

Ebenholtz

S. M.

(1992). Motion sickness and oculomotor systems in virtual environments. Presence, 1, 302–305.

Ellis

S. R.

Menges

B. M.

(1998). Localization of virtual objects in the near visual field. Human Factors, 40, 415–431.

Ellis

S. R.

Menges

B. M.

(1997). Judgments of the distance to nearby virtual objects, interaction of viewing conditions and accommodative demand. Presence, 6, 452–460.

Ellis

S. R.

Menges

B. M.

Jacoby

R. H.

Adelstein

B. D.

McCandless

J. W.

(1997). Influence of head motion on the judged distance of monocularly presented virtual objects. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2, 1234–1238.

Ferris

S. H.

(1972). Motion parallax and absolute distance. J Exp Psych, 95, 258–263.

Fisher

S. K.

Ciuffreda

K. J.

(1988). Accommodation and apparent distance. Perception, 17, 609–621.

von Helmholtz

(1925). in Southall

J. P. C.

(Ed.) Helmholtz's Treatise on Physiological Optics, Vol. III. New York: Optical Soc. America.

10.

Jacoby

R. H.

Adelstein

B. D.

Ellis

S. R.

(1996). Improved temporal response in virtual environments through system hardware and software reorganization. Proc. SPIE 2653, Stereoscopic Displays and Virtual Reality Systems, III, 271–284.

11.

Kaufman

P. L.

(1992). Accommodation and presbyopia, neuromuscular and biophysical aspects. Ch. 11 in Hart

W. M.

Jr. (Ed.) Adler's Physiology of the Eye. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book.

12.

McCandless

J. W.

Ellis

S. R.

Adelstein

B. D.

(1998). Localization of a monocularly presented virtual object with delayed visual feedback. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2, 1595–1599.

13.

Mon-Williams

Wann

J. P.

Rushton

(1993). Binocular vision in a virtual world, visual deficits following the wearing of a head-mounted display. Ophthal. Physiol. Opt., 13, 387–391.

14.

Ono

M. E.

Rivest

J. R.

Ono

(1986). Depth perception as a function of motion parallax and absolute-distance information. J Exp Psych, 12, 331–337.

15.

Rogers

Graham

(1979). Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception. Perception, 8, 125–134.

16.

Rogers

Graham

(1982). Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception. Vision Research, 22, 261–270.

17.

Schor

C. M.

(1987, May). Spatial factors limiting stereopsis and fusion. Optics News, 14–17.

18.

Surdick

R. T.

Davis

E. T.

King

R. A.

Hodges

L. F.

(1997). The perception of distance in simulated visual displays, a comparison of the effectiveness of multiple depth cues across viewing distances. Presence, 6, 513–531.

19.

Turner

Braunstein

M. L.

Andersen

G. J.

(1997). Relationship between binocular disparity and motion parallax in surface detection. Perception and Psychophysics, 59, 370–380.

20.

Utsumi

Milgram

Takemura

Kishino

(1994). Investigation of errors in perception of stereoscopically presented virtual object locations in real display space. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 250-254.

21.

Vircks

R. M.

(1968). Investigation of head movement and intensity as depth cues in a perspective contact analog display. S.M. Thesis MVT-68-3, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

22.

Wann

J. P.

Rushton

Mon-Williams

(1995). Natural problems for stereoscopic depth perception in virtual environments. Vision Research, 35, 2731–2736.