Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring the validity of using immersive virtual reality technique on perceived crowding of recreational environment

  • Special Feature: Original Paper
  • Local Landscape Planning and Management in Rural Areas
  • Published:
Landscape and Ecological Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Perceived crowding is one of the important evaluative factors for environment quality. As a result, understanding the levels of perceived crowding is highly valued in recreation. According to previous studies, the earliest way to measure perceived crowding is to use the 9-point Likert scale. The smaller the figure, the less the users feel crowded on the spot. However, there are also different methods used in those studies to discuss the relationships between user's perceived crowding and other variables; including on-site survey, mail survey, picture simulation or virtual reality (VR). Among those different methods, as the new technology, VR may be considered the an appropriate research tool for the front-country crowing studies. In order to eliminating the limitations imposed by previous studies on measuring perceived crowding and understanding the potential of using IVR technology to measure perceived crowding. We used three studies to discuss the difference between photos and IVR, the difference between on-site experience and IVR, and the difference between on-site photo and VE in IVR method. This study progressively proves that: 1) IVR was more sensitive than photo evaluation method, and 2) IVR was not different from the on-site experience. 3) When IVR is used for research, there was no difference between on-site photo and VE. The results suggested that IVR might be more close to real on-site perceived crowding than traditional photo method; and it is possible to use 3D simulations in IVR.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelman BJE, Heberlein TA, Bonnicksen TM (1982) Social psychological explanations for the persistence of a conflict between paddling canoeists and motorcraft users in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. Leis Sci 5(1):45–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiello JR (1987) Human spatial behavior. Handb Environ Psychol 1(1987):389–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman I (1975) The environment and social behavior: privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Brooks/Cole Pub., Co., Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson M, Kerstette D, Graefe A (1998) The effects of festival attributes upon perceptions of crowding. In: Vogelsong, Hans G, comp (eds) Proceedings of the 1997 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, 1997 April 6–9, Bolton Landing, NY. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-241. Radnor, PA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, vol 241, pp 182–185

  • Armougum A, Orriols E, Gaston-Bellegarde A, Joie-La Marle C, Piolino P (2019) Virtual reality: a new method to investigate cognitive load during navigation. J Environ Psychol 65:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnberger A, Brandenburg C (2007) Past on-site experience, crowding perceptions, and use displacement of visitor groups to a peri-urban national park. Environ Manag 40(1):34–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnberger A, Mann C (2008) Crowding in European forests: a review of recent research and implications for forest management and policy. Forestry 81(4):559–571

    Google Scholar 

  • Baran PK, Tabrizian P, Zhai Y, Smith JW, Floyd MF (2018) An exploratory study of perceived safety in a neighborhood park using immersive virtual environments. Urban For Urban Green 35:72–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernath K, Roschewitz A, Studhalter S (2006) Die Wälder der Stadt Zürich als Erholungsraum. Schnee und Landschaft WSL, Birmensdorf, p S 43

    Google Scholar 

  • Birenboim A, Dijst M, Ettema D, de Kruijf J, de Leeuwd G, Dogterom N (2019) The utilization of immersive virtual environments for the investigation of environmental preferences. Landsc Urban Plan 189:129–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown TC, Richards MT, Daniel TC, King DA (1989) Recreation participation and the validity of photo-based preference judgments. J Leis Res 21(1):40–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun JB (1962) Population density and social pathology. Sci Am 206(2):139–149

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Choi SC, Mirjafari A, Weaver HB (1976) The concept of crowding: a critical review and proposal of an alternative approach. Environ Behav 8(3):345–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosma G, Ronchi E, Nilsson D (2016) Way-finding lighting systems for rail tunnel evacuation: a virtual reality experiment with Oculus Rift®. J Transp Saf Secur 8(suppl 1):101–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel TC, Boster RS (1976) Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method. Res. Pap. RM-RP-167. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Range and Experiment Station, 167, p 66

  • Dasmann RF (1964) African game ranching. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Desor JA (1972) Toward a psychological theory of crowding. J Pers Soc Psychol 21(1):79

    Google Scholar 

  • Eder R, Arnberger A (2012) The influence of place attachment and experience use history on perceived depreciative visitor behavior and crowding in an urban national park. Environ Manag 50(4):566–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Farooq B, Cherchi E, Sobhani A (2018) Virtual immersive reality for stated preference travel behavior experiments: a case study of autonomous vehicles on urban roads. Transp Res Rec 2672(50):35–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson AW, Newman P, Lawson S, Fristrup K, Benfield JA, Bell PA, Nurse GA (2014) Photograph presentation order and range effects in visual-based outdoor recreation research. Leis Sci 36(2):183–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Graefe AR, Vaske JJ, Kuss FR (1984) Social carrying capacity: an integration and synthesis of twenty years of research. Leis Sci 6(4):395–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Grechkin TY, Chihak BJ, Cremer JF, Kearney JK, Plumert JM (2013) Perceiving and acting on complex affordances: how children and adults bicycle across two lanes of opposing traffic. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 39(1):23

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta N, Singh A, Butail S (2017) The effect of instructional priming on postural responses to virtual crowds. In: Paper presented at the 2017 IEEE virtual humans and crowds for immersive environments (VHCIE), Los Angeles, California

  • Gutierrez M, Vexo F, Thalmann D (2008) Stepping into virtual reality. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas GE (2001) Visitor capacity in the national park system. Soc Sci Res Rev 2(1):1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas G (2003) Applying judicial doctrine to visitor capacity decision making. Soc Nat Resour 16(8):741–750

    Google Scholar 

  • Havitz ME (1987) An experimental examination of sector bias in the context of selected organized recreation services. Unpublished Dissertation. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

  • Heberlein TA, Vaske J (1977) Crowding and visitor conflict on the Bois Brule River. University of Wisconsin, Water Resources Center, Madison

    Google Scholar 

  • Henshel RL (1980) The purposes of laboratory experimentation and the virtues of deliberate artificiality. J Exp Soc Psychol 16:466–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Heydarian A, Carneiro JP, Gerber D, Becerik-Gerber B, Hayes T, Wood W (2015) Immersive virtual environments versus physical built environments: a benchmarking study for building design and user-built environment explorations. Autom Constr 54:116–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang J, Yoon SY, Bendle LJ (2012) Desired privacy and the impact of crowding on customer emotions and approach-avoidance responses: waiting in a virtual reality restaurant. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 24(2):224–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Iachini T, Coello Y, Frassinetti F, Senese VP, Galante F, Ruggiero G (2016) Peripersonal and interpersonal space in virtual and real environments: effects of gender and age. J Environ Psychol 45:154–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang B, Wang H, Larsen L, Bao F, Li Z, Pryor M (2019) Quality of sweatshop factory outdoor environments matters for workers’ stress and anxiety: a participatory smartphone-photography survey. J Environ Psychol 65:101336

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaya N, Erkip F (1999) Invasion of personal space under the condition of short-term crowding: a case study on an automatic teller machine. J Environ Psychol 19(2):183–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim SO, Shelby B (2006) Comparing onsite and offsite methods for measuring norms for trail impacts. Environ Manag 37(4):567–578

    Google Scholar 

  • Kronqvist A, Jokinen J, Rousi R (2016) Evaluating the authenticity of virtual environments: comparison of three devices. Adv Hum Comput Interact 2016:2937632

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuentzel WF, Heberlein TA (2003) More visitors, less crowding: change and stability of norms over time at the Apostle Islands. J Leis Res 35(4):349–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuentzel WF, Heberlein TA (2008) Life course changes and competing leisure interests as obstacles to boating specialization. Leis Sci 30(2):143–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuentzel WF, Laven D, Manning RE, Valliere WA (2008) When do normative standards matter most? Understanding the role of norm strength at multiple national park settings. Leis Sci 30(2):127–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Kus B (2019) A comparative study on spatial perception in real and virtual office environments under different lighting conditions. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara

  • Kuss FR, Graefe AR, Vaske JJ (1990) Visitor impact management: a review of research. National Parks and Conservation Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson S, Manning R, Valliere W, Wang B, Budruk M (2002) Using simulation modeling to facilitate proactive monitoring and adaptive management of social carrying capacity in Arches National Park, Utah, USA. In: Monitoring and management of visitor flows in recreational and protected areas. Proceedings of the conference held at Bodenkultur University Vienna, Austria, pp 205–210

  • Lee H, Graefe AR (2003) Crowding at an arts festival: extending crowding models to the frontcountry. Tour Manag 24(1):1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas RC (1964) Recreational capacity of the Quetico-Superior area. Lake States Forest Experiment Station, Forest Service, USDA

  • Mann C (2006) Konflikte in Erholungsgebieten: Ursachen, Wirkungen und Lösungsansätze. Kessel, Lenting

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannell RC (1980) Social psychological techniques and strategies for studying leisure experiences. In: Iso-Ahola SE (ed) Social psychological perspectives on leisure and recreation. Charles C Thomas Publisher, Springfield, pp 62–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE (1985) Crowding norms in backcountry settings: a review and synthesis. J Leis Res 17(2):75–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE (1998) To provide for the enjoyment : recreation management in the National Parks. George Wright Forum 15(1):6–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning R (2004) Recreation planning frameworks Society and natural resources: a summary of knowledge. Missouri Modern Litho, Jefferson, pp 83–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE (2010) Studies in outdoor recreation: search and research for satisfaction. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE (2007) Parks and carrying capacity: commons without tragedy. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE, Ciali CP (1980) Recreation density and user satisfaction: a further exploration of the satisfaction model. J Leis Res 12(4):329–345

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE, Freimund WA (2004) Use of visual research methods to measure standards of quality for parks and outdoor recreation. J Leis Res 36(4):557–579

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE, Valliere WA (2001) Coping in outdoor recreation: causes and consequences of crowding and conflict among community residents. J Leis Res 33(4):410–426

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning RE, Freimund WA, Lime DW, Pitt DG (1996) Crowding norms at frontcountry sites: a visual approach to setting standards of quality. Leis Sci 18(1):39–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin MW, Sell J (1979) The role of the experiment in the social sciences. Sociol Q 20:581–590

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrongiello BA, Corbett M, Milanovic M, Pyne S, Vierich R (2015) Innovations in using virtual reality to study how children cross streets in traffic: evidence for evasive action skills. Injury Prev 21(4):266–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally JC, Bernstein I (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson DG, Craig T (2014) The great outdoors? Exploring the mental health benefits of natural environments. Front Psychol 5:1178

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Peron E, Purcell AT, Staats H, Falchero S, Lamb RJ (1998) Models of preference for outdoor scenes: some experimental evidence. Environ Behav 30(3):282–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell AT (1993) Relations between preference and typicality in the experience of paintings. Leonardo 26(3):235–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Regoeczi WC (2003) When context matters: a multilevel analysis of household and neighbourhood crowding on aggression and withdrawal. J Environ Psychol 23:457–470

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichhart T, Arnberger A, Muhar A (2007) A comparison of still images and 3D animations for assessing social trail use conditions. For Snow Landsc Res 81(1/2):77–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Risto M, Martens MH (2014) Driver headway choice: a comparison between driving simulator and real-road driving. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 25:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronchi E, Kinateder M, Müller M, Jost M, Nehfischer M, Pauli P, Mühlberger A (2015) Evacuation travel paths in virtual reality experiments for tunnel safety analysis. Fire Saf J 71:257–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossetti T, Hurtubia R (2020) An assessment of the ecological validity of immersive videos in stated preference surveys. J Choice Model 34:100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2019.100198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumschlag G, Palumbo T, Martin A, Head D, George R, Commissaris RL (2015) The effects of texting on driving performance in a driving simulator: the influence of driver age. Accid Anal Prev 74:145–149

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryu J, Hashimoto N, Sato M, Soeda M, Ohno R (2007) Application of human-scale immersive VR system for environmental design assessment—a proposal for an architectural design evaluation tool. J Asian Archit Build Eng 6(1):57–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt DE, Keating JP (1979) Human crowding and personal control: an integration of the research. Psychol Bull 86(4):680

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sears DO, Freedman JL, Peplau LA (1985) Social psychology, 5th edn. Prentice Hall

  • Sharp KA (2015) Analysis of the size dependence of macromolecular crowding shows that smaller is better. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(26):7990–7995

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Shelby B, Heberlein TA (1986) Carrying capacity in recreation setting. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelby LB, Vaske JJ (2007) Perceived crowding among hunters and anglers: a meta-analysis. Hum Dimens Wildl 12(4):241–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelby B, Vaske JJ, Donnelly MP (1996) Norms, standards, and natural resources. Leis Sci 18(2):103–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelby B, Vaske JJ, Heberlein TA (1989) Comparative analysis of crowding in multiple locations: results from fifteen years of research. Leis Sci 11(4):269–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamps AE III (2010) Use of static and dynamic media to simulate environments: a meta-analysis. Percept Mot Skills 111(2):355–364

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stankey GH (1973) Visitor perception of wilderness recreation carrying capacity. Res. Pap. INT-RP-142. Ogden, UT: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station

  • Stankey GH, Lime DW (1973) Recreational carrying capacity: an annotated bibliography. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station

  • Stankey G, Manning R (1986) Carrying capacity of recreation settings A literature review: the president’s commission on American outdoors. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp M47–M57

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart TR, Middleton P, Downton M, Ely D (1984) Judgments of photographs vs. field observations in studies of perception and judgment of the visual environment. J Environ Psychol 4(4):283–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokols D (1972) On the distinction between density and crowding: Some implications for future research. Psychol Rev 79(3):275

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner EL (1936) Special report on a wildlife study of the High Sierra in Sequoia and Yosemite National Parks and adjacent territory. US Department of the Interior, National Park Service

  • Sundstrom E (1975) An experimental study of crowding: effects of room size, intrusion, and goal blocking on nonverbal behavior, self-disclosure, and self-reported stress. J Pers Soc Psychol 32(4):645

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tabrizian P, Baran PK, Smith WR, Meentemeyer RK (2018) Exploring perceived restoration potential of urban green enclosure through immersive virtual environments. J Environ Psychol 55:99–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaske JJ, Donnelly MP (2002) Generalizing the encounter–norm–crowding relationship. Leis Sci 24(3–4):255–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaske JJ, Shelby LB (2008) Crowding as a descriptive indicator and an evaluative standard: results from 30 years of research. Leis Sci 30(2):111–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaske JJ, Donnelly MP, Heberlein TA (1980) Perceptions of crowding and resource quality by early and more recent visitors. Leis Sci 3(4):367–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Vince J (2004) Introduction to virtual reality. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagar JA (1964) The carrying capacity of wild lands for recreation. For Sci 10(2):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker AJ, Ryan RL (2008) Place attachment and landscape preservation in rural New England: a Maine case study. Landsc Urban Plan 86(2):141–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Worchel S, Teddie C (1976) The experience of crowding: a two-factor theory. J Pers Soc Psychol 34(1):30

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yu C-P, Lee H-Y, Luo X-Y (2018) The effect of virtual reality forest and urban environments on physiological and psychological responses. Urban For Urban Green 35:106–114

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, National Taiwan University, No. 1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, 10617, Taiwan, ROC

    Ting-Hsuan Wang, Wan-Hsuan Wu & Chia-Kuen Cheng

  2. Department of Social and Regional Development, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan

    Li Shen

Authors
  1. Ting-Hsuan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wan-Hsuan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Li Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chia-Kuen Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chia-Kuen Cheng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, TH., Wu, WH., Shen, L. et al. Exploring the validity of using immersive virtual reality technique on perceived crowding of recreational environment. Landscape Ecol Eng 17, 299–308 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-020-00422-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-020-00422-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation