Interaction with co-located haptic feedback in virtual reality

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Curso de LaTeX$

29Colocated hapticsNo colocation, hapticsColocation, no hapticsNo colocation, No hapticsColocated hapticsNo colocation, hapticsColocation, no hapticsNo colocation, No hapticsSpatial accuracy taskSpatial response task50Time (s)403020100Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Task levelFig. 6 Results for spatial accuracyferent levels of difficulty were not of interest and in anycase it would be difficult to draw conclusions from this.However, adding these additional tasks to the designalso has the negative effect of reducing the power ofresults. This was accounted for in our analysis by theBonferroni method, thus each F-ratio computed by theANOVAs is then divided by 9 (the number of tasks).This correction method is conservative, and lowers therisk of Type I errors, although at the risk of introducingType II errors.For the spatial accuracy task, completion times weresignificantly improved (p < 0.05) by co-location at alllevels, while a marginal improvement (0.05 haptic force feedback at levelsTime (s)180160140120100806040200Spatial manipulation taskLevel 1 Level 2 Level 3Task levelFig. 7 Results for spatial manipulationColocated hapticsNo colocation, hapticsColocation, no hapticsNo colocation, No hapticsTime (s)4030201002 and 3 of the task. This suggests that for tasks requiringaccurate positioning, haptic feedback alone (i.e. whenunaccompanied by accurate proprioceptive feedback) isof less benefit than having the accurate proprioceptionprovided by co-location (with or without haptic feedback).The results for the spatial manipulation task (Fig. 7)indicate a less pronounced effect, and this is borne outby the lack of statistical significance in the data.The spatial response task was almost impossible toperform unless co-located haptic feedback is implemented.Without co-located haptic feedback, the averagetime that participants managed to maintain thejuggling of objects was less than five seconds. However,this observation is confirmed by statistically significantresults only for level 3 of the task, for which both colocationand haptic feedback elicit a significant(p < 0.05) improvement in task performance.6 ConclusionsLevel 1 Level 2 Level 3Fig. 8 Results for spatial responseTask levelPrevious studies have demonstrated the beneficial effectof haptic feedback on task performance (Hoffman 1998;Sallna¨s et al. 2000). This study additionally indicatesthat co-location is a significant factor in improvinginteraction performance in a 3D environment, for tasksrequiring accuracy and rapid motion in user interaction.The experiments described have been performed only ina desktop setting with limitations in terms of tracking,field of view, freedom of movement and the associatedloss of perceptual cues. However in spite of these limitationsand the low power of the experimental design(mainly due to the small number of participants), significantbenefits for co-location have been demonstrated.The spatial manipulation task produced no significanteffects—it is possibly the case that this type of ‘‘close
30control’’ is not benefited by co-location. It may havebeen useful to measure the relationship between thedegree of control (e.g. mean distance maintained betweenhaptic contact point and target) and task performance.The next step for this research is to extend it to a fullyimmersive VE system equipped with a larger haptic device(Frisoli et al. 2005; Dettori et al. 2003; Sato2002).Head-tracking and a larger haptic workspace will allowus to investigate more fully some of the implementationproblems described earlier. A more immersive systemwill also enable a broader investigation incorporatingthe impact of multi-sensory co-location on presence.Acknowledgements We would like to thank Deepti Narwani andEmanuele Ruffaldi for their help in the current study. The workpresented in this paper was partially funded by the collaborativeEuropean project PUREFROM (IST-2000-29580), a 3-year RTDproject funded by the 5th Framework Information Society Technologies(IST) Programme of the European Union.ReferencesArsenault R, Ware C (2000) Eye–hand co-ordination with forcefeedback. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on humanfactors in computing systems, The Hague, pp 408–414Bouguila L, Ishii M, Sato M (2000) Effect of coupling haptics andstereopsis on depth perception in virtual environment. Worldmulticonference on systemics, cybernetics and informatics (SCI2000), Orlando, pp 406–414Caclin A, Soto-Faraco S, Kingstone A, Spence C (2002) Tactile‘‘capture’’ of audition. Percept Psychophys 64(4):616–630Cheng K, Pulo K (2003) Direct interaction with large scale displaysystem using infrared laser tracking devices. In: Australasiansymposium on information visualisation, Adelaide, 2003.Conferences in research and practice in information technology,vol 24Dettori A, Avizzano CA, Marcheschi S, Angerilli M, BergamascoM, Loscos C, Guerraz A (2003) Art touch with CREATEhaptic Interface, ICAR 2003. In: 11th International conferenceon advanced robotics, University of Coimbra, Portugal, June30–July 3Dinh HG, Walker N, Hodges LF, Song C, Kobayashi A (1999)Evaluating the importance of multi-sensory input on memoryand the sense of presence in virtual environments. In: RosenblumL, Astheimer P, Teichmann D (eds) Proceedings of theIEEE virtual reality ‘99 conference. IEEE Computer SocietyPress, Los Alamitos, pp 222–228Durlach P, Fowlkes J, Metevier C (2005) Effect of variations insensory feedback on performance in a virtual reaching task.Presence 14(4):450–462Ernst MO, Banks MS, Bulthoff HH (2000) Touch can change visualslant perception. Nat Neurosci 3(1):69–73Frisoli A, Jansson G, Bergamasco M, Loscos C (2005) Evaluationof the pure-form haptic displays used for exploration of worksof art at museums, World haptics conference, Pisa, March 18–20Hayward V, Astley OR, Cruz-Hernandez M, Grant D, Robles-De-La-Torre G (2004) Haptic interfaces and devices. Sensor Rev24(1):16–29von Helmholtz H (1867) Treatise on physiological optics, vol III(English translation by Southall J, 1925)Hoffman HG (1998) Physically touching virtual objects using tactileaugmentation enhances the realism of virtual environments.In: Proceedings of the IEEE virtual reality annual internationalsymposium’98, Atlanta, pp 59–63Jack CE, Thurlow WR (1973) Effects of degree of visual associationand angle of displacement on the ‘‘ventriloquism’’ effect.Percept Mot Skills 37:967–979Loscos C, Tecchia F, Carrozino M, Frisoli A, Ritter Widenfeld H,Swapp D, Bergamasco M (2004) The museum of pure form:touching real statues in a virtual museum, VAST 2004. In: 5thInternational symposium on virtual reality, archaeology andcultural heritage, BrusselsMeehan M, Insko B, Whitton M, Brooks FP (2001) Physiologicalmeasures of presence in virtual environments. In: Proceedingsof 4th international workshop on presence, Philadelphia, pp21–23Rolland JP, Biocca FA, Barlow T, Kancherla A (1995) Quantificationof adaptation to virtual-eye location in see-thru headmounteddisplays. In: Proceedings of the VRAIS, pp 56–66Sallnäs E, Rassmus-Gro¨hn K, Sjo¨stro¨m C (2000) Supportingpresence in collaborative environments by haptic force feedback.ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 7(4):461–476Sato M (2002) Development of string-based force display: SPI-DAR. In: 8th International conference on virtual systems andmultimedia (VSMM2002), Gyeongju (alias Kyongju), KoreaShneiderman B (1983) Direct manipulation: a step beyond programminglanguages. IEEE Comput 16(8):57–69Shneiderman B (1997) Designing the user interface, Chapter 9,interaction devices (Sections 9.1–9.3), 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley,Reading, pp 306–327Stratton G (1896) Some preliminary experiments on vision withoutinversion of the retinal image. Psychol Rev 3:611–617Wall SA, Paynter K, Shillito AM, Wright M, Scali S (2002) Theeffect of haptic feedback and stereo graphics in a 3D targetacquisition task. In: Proceedings of eurohaptics 2002, Universityof Edinburgh, 8–10th July, pp 23–29Wallace M, Roberson G, Hairston W, Stein B, Vaughan J, SchirilloJ (2004) Unifying multisensory signals across time and space.Exp Brain Res 158(2):252–258Wann J, Rushton S, Mon-Williams M (1994) Natural problems forstereoscopic depth perception in virtual environments. Vis Res35(19):2731–2736Ware C, Rose J (1999) Rotating virtual objects with real handles.ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact 6(2):162–180
Page 1 and 2: Virtual Reality (2006) 10: 24-30DOI
Page 3 and 4: 26current study is performed on a d
Page 5: 28Fig. 3 Spatial manipulation, leve

Interaction with co-located haptic feedback in virtual reality

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?