Abstract
This research investigated the effects of virtual displays on kinematic parameters during direct pointing at a virtual target. Two virtual displays, three egocentric distances, and three indices of difficulty (IDs) were the independent variables considered in the study. Twelve participants (M = 29.8 ± 3.45 years of age) with normal visual acuity performed a pointing movement in the two VR displays, a stereoscopic widescreen display (SWD) and a head-mounted display (HMD). The movement data were compiled using a motion system. The outcomes revealed that peak velocity and reaction time differed significantly between the SWD and HMD conditions; peak velocity was higher and reaction time was shorter with the SWD than with the HMD. Nonetheless, the effective movement time and confirmation time were not significantly different between the two VR displays. In addition, the distance judgment accuracies of the HMD and SWD were 96% and 86%, respectively; distance was underestimated in the HMD and overestimated in the SWD. Moreover, both peak velocity and reaction time were significantly lower at high ID than at low and medium IDs. The results suggested that using an SWD could be more effective and efficient than an HMD for restoring motor function in upper and lower limbs. On the other hand, an HMD might be appropriate for applications which require exocentric distance judgment precision, such as architecture or medical visualization. Moreover, such findings provide valuable information for developers and designers of human interfaces and applications in virtual reality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adamovich SV, Fluet GG, Tunik E, Merians AS (2009) Sensorimotor training in virtual reality: a review. NeuroRehabilitation 25:29–44. https://doi.org/10.3233/nre-2009-0497
Balasubramanian S, Colombo R, Sterpi I, Sanguineti V, Burdet E (2012) Robotic assessment of upper limb motor function after stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 91:S255-269. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0b013e31826bcdc1
Beggs WDA, Howarth CI (1970) Movement control in a repetitive motor task. Nature 225:752–753. https://doi.org/10.1038/225752a0
Bruder G, Argelaguet F, Olivier A, Lécuyer A (2016a) CAVE size matters: effects of screen distance and parallax on distance estimation in large immersive display setups. Presence 25:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00241
Bruder G, Argelaguet F, Olivier AH, Lecuyer A (2016b) CAVE size matters: effects of screen distance and parallax on distance estimation in large immersive display setups. Presence-Teleoper Virtual Environ 25:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00241
Crosbie JH, Lennon S, Basford JR, McDonough SM (2007) Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: still more virtual than real. DisabilRehabil 29:1139–1146. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280600960909(discussion1147-1152)
Crossman ERFW, Goodeve PJ (1983) Feedback control of hand-movement and Fitts’ law. Q J ExpPsychol Sect A 35:251–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748308402133
Cutting JE, Vishton PM (1995) Perceiving layout and knowing distances: the integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth. In: Perception of space and motion. Handbook of perception and cognition (2nd ed.). Academic Press, San Diego, CA, US, pp 69–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012240530-3/50005-5
Deutsch JE, Merians AS, Burdea GC, Boian R, Adamovich SV, Poizner H (2002) Haptics and virtual reality used to increase strength and improve function in chronic individuals post-stroke: two case reports. J NeurolPhysTher 26:79–86
Elliott D et al (2020) The multiple process model of goal-directed aiming/reaching: insights on limb control from various special populations. Exp Brain Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-05952-2
Elliott D, Hansen S, Grierson L, Lyons J, Bennett S, Hayes S (2010) Goal-directed aiming: two components but multiple processes. Psychol Bull 136:1023–1044. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020958
Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A-G (2009) Statistical power analyses using G*Power 31: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41:1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Fernandez L, Bootsma RJ (2004) Effects of biomechanical and task constraints on the organization of movement in precision aiming. Exp Brain Res 159:458–466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-1964-4
Gandevia SC, Burke D (2011) Does the nervous system depend on kinesthetic information to control natural limb movements? Behav Brain Sci 15:614–632. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0007254X
Grechkin TY, Nguyen TD, Plumert JM, Cremer JF, Kearney JK (2010) How does presentation method and measurement protocol affect distance estimation in real and virtual environments? ACM Trans Appl Percept 7:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/1823738.1823744
Greeno J (1994) Gibson’s affordances. Psychol Rev 101:336–342. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.336
Henry D, Furness T (1993) Spatial perception in virtual environments: evaluating an architectural application. In: Proceedings of IEEE virtual reality annual international symposium 1993, pp 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1109/VRAIS.1993.380801
Hoffman DM, Girshick AR, Akeley K, Banks MS (2008) Vergence–accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. J Vis 8:33.31–3330. https://doi.org/10.1167/8.3.33
ISO (2000) 9241-9: ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals, non-keyboard input device requirements. International Organization for Standardization. https://doi.org/10.3403/BSENISO9241
Joe Lin C, Abreham BT, Caesaron D, Woldegiorgis BH (2020) Exocentric distance judgment and accuracy of head-mounted and stereoscopic widescreen displays in frontal planes. ApplSci 10:1427
Kay B, Munhall K, Bateson E, Kelso J (1985) A note on processing kinematic data: sampling, filtering, and differentiation. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, vol 81, pp 291–303
Kelly JW, Cherep LA, Siegel ZD (2017) Perceived space in the HTC vive. ACM Trans Appl Percept 15:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3106155
Kim H-Y (2013) Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restor Dent Endod 38:52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
Kim K, Rosenthal MZ, Zielinski D, Brady R (2012) Comparison of desktop, head mounted display, and six wall fully immersive systems using a stressful task. In: 2012 IEEE virtual reality workshops (VRW), 4–8 March 2012, pp 143–144. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2012.6180922
Klein E, Swan JE, Schmidt GS, Livingston MA, Staadt OG (2009) Measurement protocols for medium-field distance perception in large-screen immersive displays. In: 2009 IEEE virtual reality conference, 14–18 March 2009, pp 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2009.4811007
Kwakkel G et al (2017) Standardized measurement of sensorimotor recovery in stroke trials: consensus-based core recommendations from the stroke recovery and rehabilitation. Roundtable Int J Stroke Off J Int Stroke Soc 12:451–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493017711813
Langolf GD, Chaffin DB, Foulke JA (1976) An investigation of fitts’ law using a wide range of movement amplitudes. J Motor Behav 8:113–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1976.10735061
Lee YH, Wu SK, Liu YP (2013) Performance of remote target pointing hand movements in a 3D environment. Hum Mov Sci 32:511–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2012.02.001
Levin MF, Magdalon EC, Michaelsen SM, Quevedo AAF (2008) Comparison of reaching and grasping kinematics in patients with hemiparesis and in healthy controls in virtual and physical environments. In: 2008 virtual rehabilitation, 25–27 Aug. 2008, pp 60–60. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVR.2008.4625123
Levin MF, Knaut LAM, Magdalon EC, Subramanian S (2009) Virtual reality environments to enhance upper limb functional recovery in patients with hemiparesis. Stud Health Technol Inform 145:108. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-018-6-94
Lin CJ, Woldegiorgis BH (2015) Interaction and visual performance in stereoscopic displays: a review. J SocInfDisp 23:319–332. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsid.378
Lin CJ, Woldegiorgis BH (2017) Egocentric distance perception and performance of direct pointing in stereoscopic displays. Appl Ergon 64:66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.05.007
Lin CJ, Woldegiorgis BH (2018) Kinematic analysis of direct pointing in projection-based stereoscopic environments. Hum Mov Sci 57:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2017.11.002
Lin CJ, Chen H-J, Cheng P-Y, Sun T-L (2015a) Effects of displays on visually controlled task performance in three-dimensional virtual reality environment. Hum Fact Ergon ManufServInd 25:523–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20566
Lin CJ, Woldegiorgis BH, Caesaron D, Cheng L-Y (2015b) Distance estimation with mixed real and virtual targets in stereoscopic displays. Displays 36:41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2014.11.006
Lin CJ, Abreham BT, Woldegiorgis BH (2019) Effects of displays on a direct reaching task: a comparative study of head mounted display and stereoscopic widescreen display. Int J IndErgonom 72:372–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.06.013
Magdalon EC, Michaelsen SM, Quevedo AA, Levin MF (2011) Comparison of grasping movements made by healthy subjects in a 3-dimensional immersive virtual versus physical environment. ActaPsychol (Amst) 138:126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.05.015
Marathe AR, Carey HL, Taylor DM (2008) Virtual reality hardware and graphic display options for brain-machine interfaces. J Neurosci Methods 167:2–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.09.025
Meyer DE, Abrams RA, Kornblum S, Wright CE (1988) Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements. Psychol Rev 95:340–370
Mittelstaedt J, Wacker J, Stelling D (2018) Effects of display type and motion control on cybersickness in a virtual bike simulator. Displays 51:43–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2018.01.002
Naceri A, Chellali R, Dionnet F, Toma S (2010) Depth perception within virtual environments: comparison between two display technologies. Int J Adv Intell Syst 2:51–64
Nordin N, Xie SQ, Wünsche B (2014) Assessment of movement quality in robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: a review. J NeuroEngRehabil 11:137. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-137
Park KS, Hong GB, Lee S (2012) Fatigue problems in remote pointing and the use of an upper-arm support. Int J Ind Ergon 42:293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2012.02.005
Rand D, Kizony R, Feintuch U, Katz N, Josman N, Rizzo A, Weiss PL (2005) Comparison of two VR platforms for rehabilitation: video capture versus HMD. Presence 14:147–160. https://doi.org/10.1162/1054746053967012
Renner RS, Velichkovsky BM, Helmert JR (2013a) The perception of egocentric distances in virtual environments—a review. ACM ComputSurv. https://doi.org/10.1145/2543581.2543590
Renner RS, Velichkovsky BM, Helmert JR (2013b) The perception of egocentric distances in virtual environments—a review. ACM ComputSurv 46:1–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/2543581.2543590
Santos PD, Pimentel A, Baggerman J-W, Ferreira C, Silva S, Madeira J (2008) Head-mounted display versus desktop for 3D navigation in virtual reality: a user study. Multimed Tools Appl 41:161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-008-0223-2
Schmidt RA, Lee TD (2005) Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis, 4th ed. Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis, 4th ed. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL
Schmidt RA, Zelaznik H, Hawkins B, Frank JS, Quinn JT Jr (1979) Motor-output variability: a theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. Psychol Rev 47:415–451
Schmidt RA, Sherwood DE, Zelaznik HN, Leikind B (1985) Speed-accuracy trade-offs in motor behavior: theories of impulse variability. Motor behavior: programming, control, and acquisition. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69749-4
Soukoreff RW, MacKenzie IS (2004) Towards a standard for pointing device evaluation, perspectives on 27 years of Fitts’ law research in HCI. Int J Hum Comput Stud 61:751–789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2004.09.001
Stefanucci JK, Creem-Regehr SH, Thompson WB, Lessard DA, Geuss MN (2015) Evaluating the accuracy of size perception on screen-based displays: displayed objects appear smaller than real objects. J ExpPsycholAppl 21:215–223. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000051
Subramanian SK, Levin MF (2011) Viewing medium affects arm motor performance in 3D virtual environments J NeuroEng Rehabil 8:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-8-36
Subramanian S, Beaudoin C, Levin MF (2008) Arm pointing movements in a three dimensional virtual environment: effect of two different viewing media. In: 2008 virtual rehabilitation, pp 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVR.2008.4625157
Sveistrup H (2004) Motor rehabilitation using virtual reality. J NeuroEngRehabil 1:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-1-10
Swan JE, Singh G, Ellis SR (2015) Matching and reaching depth judgments with real and augmented reality targets. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Gr 21:1289–1298. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2015.2459895
Thompson SG, McConnell DS, Slocum JS, Bohan M (2007) Kinematic analysis of multiple constraints on a pointing task. Hum MovSci 26:11–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2006.09.001
Viau A, Feldman AG, McFadyen BJ, Levin MF (2004) Reaching in reality and virtual reality: a comparison of movement kinematics in healthy subjects and in adults with hemiparesis. J NeuroEngRehabil 1:11–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-1-11
Waller D (1999) Factors affecting the perception of interobject distances in virtual environments. Presence 8:657–670. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474699566549
Willemsen P, Colton MB, Creem-Regehr SH, Thompson WB (2009) The effects of head-mounted display mechanical properties and field of view on distance judgments in virtual environments. ACM Trans Appl Percept 6:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/1498700.1498702
Wolpert DM, Landy MS (2012) Motor control is decision-making. CurrOpinNeurobiol 22:996–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2012.05.003
Woodworth RS (1899) The accuracy of voluntary movement. Columbia university contributions to philosophy. PsycholEduc 5(4):1
Wright DB, Herrington JA (2011) Problematic standard errors and confidence intervals for skewness and kurtosis. Behav Res Methods 43:8–17. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-010-0044-x
Acknowledgments
This paper was partially funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST-107-2218-E-011-019-MY3).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lin, C.J., Abreham, B.T. & Woldegiorgis, B.H. Kinematics of direct reaching in head-mounted and stereoscopic widescreen virtual environments. Virtual Reality 25, 1015–1028 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-021-00505-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-021-00505-6