Transcript PowerPoint

Quantifying Immersion
in Virtual Reality
Randy Pausch
Dennis Proffitt
George Williams
University of Virginia
SIGGRAPH 1997
Previous Work
•
•
•
•
Taxonomies Robinett, Zeltzer
Subjective ratings Heeter
Fish-tank performance Arthur, McKenna
v. Hand-based analysis Chung
Quantifying Immersion
• A sense of “being there”
• Justify VR research
• Motivating factors
– Search for possibly existent item
– Control with head v. hand
– Tactile input v. implied
The subject “room”.
The Experiment
• VR mode
– Input: 6DOF tracker
– View: stereo vision headset,
moveable
• Desktop mode
– Input: 6DOF tracker
– View: stereo vision headset,
stationary
• Target character (possibly)
embedded in camouflage
Look familiar?
The Results
• Target searching: no
VR advantage
• No target present:
41% decrease
• VR data was
predictable
Transfer Effects
• VR training improves
spatial cognition
• Desktop use degrades
“real-world” performance
Contributions
1.
2.
3.
4.
Indication of improved short-term memory (FoR)
Improved traditional display use
Suggestion 2D world limits spatial cognition
Complement to definition of immersion
Possible Expansions
• Real-world manipulation (Voodoo dolls)
• PUSH device
• Further research on education through VR
manipulation for 2D tasks
Secret Slide
• Is it fair to equate the “desktop” experience
with actual use?
• What is the relation in importance between
target being present and not?
• Would more detailed tasks preserve the
same trends?