Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A VE framework to study visual perception and action

  • Published:
Virtual Reality Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the real world, vision operates in harmony with self-motion yielding the observer to unambiguous perception of the three-dimensional (3D) space. In laboratory conditions, because of technical difficulties, researchers studying 3D perception have often preferred to use the substitute of a stationary observer, somehow neglecting aspects of the action-perception cycle. Recent results in visual psychophysics have proved that self-motion and visual processes interact, leading the moving observer to interpret a 3D virtual scene differently from a stationary observer. In this paper we describe a virtual environment (VE) framework which presents very interesting characteristics for designing experiments in visual perception during action. These characteristics arise in a number of ways from the design of a unique motion capture device. First, its accuracy and the minimal latency in position measurement; second, its ease of use and the adaptability to different display interfaces. Such a VE framework enables the experimenter to recreate stimulation conditions characterised by a degree of sensory coherence typical of the real world. Moreover, because of its accuracy and flexibility, the same device can be used as a measurement tool to perform elementary but essential calibration procedures. The VE framework has been used to conduct two studies which compare the perception of 3D variables of the environment in moving and in stationary observers under monocular vision. The first study concerns the perception of absolute distance, i.e. the distance separating an object and the observer. The second study refers to the perception of the orientation of a surface both in the absence and presence of conflicts between static and dynamic visual cues. In the two cases, the VE framework has enabled the design of optimal experimental conditions, permitting light to be shed on the role of action in 3D visual perception.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Riva G (1998) Virtual environments in neuroscience. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 2: 275–281

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pelz JB, Hayhoe MM, Ballard DH, Shrivastava A, Bayliss J, and von der Heyde M (1999) Development of a virtual laboratory for the study of complex human behavior. In: The engineering reality of virtual reality. Proceedings of the SPIE. San Jose, CA 3639B

  3. Findlay JM and Newell FN (1994) Perceptual cues and object recognition. In: Simulated and virtual realities: elements of perception. Carr K and England R eds. London: Taylor & Francis 113–130

    Google Scholar 

  4. Merril JR (1997) Using emerging technologies such as virtual reality and the World Wide Web to contribute to a richer understanding of the brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 820: 229–233

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ghahramani Z, Wolpert DM (1997) Modular decomposition in visuomotor learning. Nature 386: 392–395

    Google Scholar 

  6. Aguirre GK, Detre JA, Alsop DC, D'Esposito M (1996) The parahippocampus subserves topographical learning in man. Cerebral Cortex 6: 823–829

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bertin RJ, Israel I, Lappe M (2000) Perception of two-dimensional, simulated ego-motion trajectories from optic flow. Vision Research 40 (21): 2951–2971

    Google Scholar 

  8. Viaud D, Ivanenko YP, Berthoz A, Jouvent R (1998) Sex, lies and virtual reality. Nature Neuroscience 1: 15–16

    Google Scholar 

  9. Amorim MA, Trumbore B and Chogyen PL (2000) Cognitive repositioning inside a ‘desktop’ VE: the constraints introduced by first- vs. third-person imagery and mental representation richness. Presence 9: 165–186

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kennedy R, Lane N, Lilienthal M, Berbaum K, Hettinger L (1992) Profile analysis of simulator sickness symptoms: application to virtual environment systems. Presence 1: 295–301

    Google Scholar 

  11. McCauley ME, Sharkey TJ (1992) Cybersickness: perception of self-motion in virtual environment. Presence 1: 311–318

    Google Scholar 

  12. Stanney KM, Hash P (1998) Locus of user-initiated control in virtual environment: influences on cybersickness. Presence 7:447–459

    Google Scholar 

  13. Land MF (1992) Predictable eye-head coordination during driving. Nature 359: 318–320

    Google Scholar 

  14. Grasso R, Glasauer S, Takei Y, Berthoz A (1996) The predictive brain: anticipatory control of head direction for the steering of locomotion. Neuroreport 7: 1170–1174

    Google Scholar 

  15. Koch C, Poggio T (1999) Predicting the visual world: silence is golden. Nature Neuroscience 2: 9–10

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rao RPN, Ballard DH (1999) Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extraclassical receptive-field effects. Nature Neuroscience 2: 79–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Harris LR, Jenkin M, Zikovitz DC (2000) Vestibular capture of the perceived distance of passive linear self motion. Archives Italiennes de Biologie 138: 63–72

    Google Scholar 

  18. Harris LR, Jenkin M, Zikovitz DC (1998) Vestibular cues and virtual environments. In: Proceedings of VRAIS 1988. Atlanta, GA: IEEE 133–188

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hendrix C, Barfield W (1995) Presence within virtual environments as a function of visual display parameters. Presence 5: 263–273

    Google Scholar 

  20. Yoshikawa T (1990) Foundations of robotics: analysis and control. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  21. Panerai F, Hanneton S, Droulez J, Cornilleau-Pérès V (1999) A 6-dof device to measure head movements in active vision experiments: geometric modeling and metric accuracy. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 90: 97–106

    Google Scholar 

  22. Robinett W, Holloway R (1995) The visual display transformation for virtual reality. Presence 4: 1–23

    Google Scholar 

  23. Foley JD, van Dam A, Feiner SK, Hughes JF (1996) Computer graphics: principles and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

    Google Scholar 

  24. Panerai F, Comilleau-Pérès V, Droulez J (2002) Contribution of extra-retinal signals to the scaling of object distance during self-motion. Perception & Psychophysics

  25. Peh CH, Panerai F, Droulez J, Cornilleau-Peres V, Cheong LF (2002) Absolute distance perception during in-depth head movement: calibrating optic flow with extra-retinal information. Vision Research (in press)

  26. Wexler M, Panerai F, Lamouret I, Droulez J (2001) Self-motion and the perception of stationary objects. Nature 409: 85–88

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sekuler R, Blake R (1994) Perception. New York: McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rogers B, Graham M (1979) Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception. Perception 8: 125–134

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lee DN (1980) The optic flow field. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B) 290: 169–179

    Google Scholar 

  30. Koenderink JJ (1986) Optic flow. Vision Research 26: 161–180

    Google Scholar 

  31. Prazdny K (1983) Information in optic flows. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing 22: 235–259

    Google Scholar 

  32. Goodbody SJ, Wolpert DM (1999) The effects of visuomotor displacement on arm movement parts. Experimental Brain Research 127: 213–223

    Google Scholar 

  33. Flipo A (2000) TRUST: The truck simulator for training. In: Proceedings of Driving Simulation Conference (DSC2000). Paris: INRETS 293–302

    Google Scholar 

  34. Dubrovin A, Levelé J, Prevost A, Lecocq P, Canry M, Kelada JM, Kemeny A (2000) Application of real-time lighting simulation for intelligent front-lighting studies. In: Proceedings of Driving Simulation Conference (DSC2000). Paris: INRETS 333–343.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Nixon MA, McCallum BC, Fright WR, Price NB (1998) The effects of metals and interfering fields on electromagnetic trackers. Presence 7: 204–218

    Google Scholar 

  36. Witmer BG, Singer MJ (1998) Measuring presence in virtual environments: a Presence questionnaire. Presence 7: 225–240

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire de Physiologie de la Perception et de l'Action (LPPA), CNRS/Collège de France, 11 pl. Marcelin Berthelot, F-75005, Paris, France

    F. Panerai, M. Ehrette & P. Leboucher

Authors
  1. F. Panerai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Ehrette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Leboucher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Panerai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Panerai, F., Ehrette, M. & Leboucher, P. A VE framework to study visual perception and action. Virtual Reality 6, 21–32 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01408566

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01408566

Keywords

Search

Navigation