Sensory Contributions to Spatial Knowledge of Real and Virtual Environments

Chapter

Abstract

Most sensory systems are able to inform people about the spatial structure of their environment, their place in that environment, and their movement through it. We discuss these various sources of sensory information by dividing them into three general categories: external (vision, audition, somatosensory), internal (vestibular, kinesthetic) and efferent (efference copy, attention). Research on the roles of these sensory systems in the creation of environmental knowledge has shown, with few exceptions, that information from a single sensory modality is often sufficient for acquiring at least rudimentary knowledge of one’s immediate environment and one’s movement through it. After briefly discussing the ways in which sources of sensory information commonly covary in everyday life, we examine the types and quality of sensory information available from contemporary virtual environments, including desktop, CAVE, and HMD-based systems. Because none of these computer mediated systems is yet able to present a perfectly full and veridical sensory experience to its user, it is important for researchers and VE developers to understand the circumstances, tasks, and goals for which different sensory information sources are most critical. We review research on these topics, as well as research on how the omission, limitation, or distortion of different information sources may affect the perception and behavior of users. Finally, we discuss situations in which various types of virtual environment systems may be more or less useful.

Keywords

Sensory information Spatial knowledge Virtual environment Walking parameters Walking Locomotion 

References

  1. 1.
    Alais D, Burr D (2004) No direction-specific bimodal facilitation for audiovisual motion detection. Cogn Brain Res 19:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alfano PL, Michel GF (1990) Restricting the field of view: perceptual and performance effects. Percept Motor Skills 70:25–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alibali MW (2005) Gesture in spatial cognition: expressing, communicating and thinking about spatial information. Spatial Cogn Comput 5:307–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allen GL, Siegel AW, Rosinski R (1978) The role of perceptual context in structuring spatial knowledge. J Experim Psychol Human Learn Mem 4:617–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arsenault R, Ware C (2002) Frustum view angle, observer view angle and VE navigation. In: Vidal CA, Kimer C (eds) Proceedings of the V Simposio de Realidade Virtual, Brazilian Computer Society, pp 15–25Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bachmann E, Calusdian J, Hodgson E, Yun X, Zmuda M (2012) Going anywhere anywhere—creating a low cost portable immersive VE system. Manuscript submitted for publicationGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bakker NH, Werkhoven PJ, Passenier PO (1999) The effects of proprioceptive and visual feedback on geographical orientation in virtual environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 8:36–53Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Becker W, Nasios G, Raab S, Jürgens R (2002) Fusion of vestibular and podokinesthetic information during self-turning towards instructed targets. Exp Brain Res 144:458–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berger DR, Schulte-Pelkum J, Bülthoff HH (2010) Simulating believable forward accelerations on a Steward motion platform. ACM Trans Appl Percept 7(1):1–27 (Article 5)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Besson P, Richiardi J, Bourdin C, Bringoux L, Mestre DR, Vercher J (2010) Bayesian networks and information theory for audio-visual perception modeling. Biol Cybern 103:213–226MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Biocca F, Kim J, Choi Y (2000) Visual touch in virtual environments: an exploratory study of presence, multimodal interfaces, and cross-modal sensory illusions. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 10:247–265Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blakemore SJ (2003) Deluding the motor system. Conscious Cogn 12:647–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bruggeman H, Piuneu VS, Rieser JJ (2009) Biomechanical versus inertial information: stable individual differences in perception of self-rotation. J Exp Psychol Human Percept Perform 35:1472–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Butler JS, Smith ST, Campos JL, Bülthoff HH (2010) Bayesian integration of visual and vestibular signals for heading. J Vis 10:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Campos JL, Byrne P, Sun HJ (2010) The brain weights body-based cues higher than vision when estimating walked distances. Eur J Neurosci 31:1889–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chance SS, Gaunet F, Beall AC, Loomis JM (1998) Locomotion mode affects the updating of objects encountered during travel: the contribution of vestibular and proprioceptive inputs to path integration. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 7:168–178Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cheng K, Shettleworth SJ, Huttenlocher J, Rieser JJ (2007) Bayesian integration of spatial information. Psychol Bull 133:625–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chrastil ER, Warren WH (2012) Active and passive contributions to spatial learning. Psychon Bull Rev 19:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Christou CG, Bülthoff HH (1999) View dependence in scene recognition after active learning. Memory Cogn 27:996–1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cohen HS (2000) Vestibular disorders and impaired path integration along a linear trajectory. J Vestib Res 10:7–15Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Couclelis H (1996) Verbal directions for way-finding: space, cognition, and language. In: Portugali J (ed) The construction of cognitive maps. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 133–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cruz-Neira C, Reiners D, Springer JP (2010) An affordable surround-screen virtual reality display. Soc Inf Disp 18:836–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cruz-Neira C, Sandin DJ, DeFanti TA, Kenyon RV, Hart JC (1992) The cave: audio visual experience automatic virtual environment. Commun ACM 35:64–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cutting JE, Vishton PM (1995) Perceiving layout: the integration, relative dominance, and contextual use of different information about depth. In: Epstein W, Rogers S (eds) Handbook of perception and cognition: Vol. 5: perception of space and motion. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Darken RP, Cockayne WR, Carmein D (1997) The omni-directional treadmill: a locomotion device for virtual worlds. In: Proceedings of ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, pp 213–221Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fortenbaugh FC, Hicks JC, Turano KA (2008) The effect of peripheral visual field loss on representations of space: evidence for distortion and adaptation. Investig Ophthalmol Visual Sci 49:2765–2772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Frenz H, Bremmer F, Lappe M (2003) Discrimination of travel distance from ‘situated’ optic flow. Vis Res 43:2173–2183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gallistel CR (1990) The organization of learning. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gibson JJ (1958) Visually controlled locomotion and visual orientation in animals. Br J Psychol 49:182–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Glasauer S, Amorim MA, Vitte E, Berthoz A (1994) Goal directed linear locomotion in normal and labyrinthine-defective subjects. Exp Brain Res 98:323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goldin SE, Thorndyke PW (1982) Simulating navigation for spatial knowledge acquisition. Human Factors 24:457–471Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Golledge R, Klatzky R, Loomis J (1996) Cognitive mapping and wayfinding by adults without vision. In: Portugali J (ed) The construction of cognitive maps. Kluwer, The Netherlands, pp 215–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Grant SC, Magee LE (1998) Contributions of proprioception to navigation in virtual environments. Human Factors 40:489–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Guidice NA, Bakdash JZ, Legge GE (2007) Wayfinding with words: spatial learning and navigation using dynamically updated verbal descriptions. Psychol Res 71:347–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Harm DL (2002) Motion sickness neurophysiology, physiological correlates, and treatment. In: Stanney KM (ed) Handbook of virtual environments: design, implementation, and applications. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 637–661Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Harris LR, Jenkin M, Zikovitz DC (2000) Visual and non-visual cues in the perception of linear self-motion. Exp Brain Res 135:12–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hay JC, Pick HL Jr (1965) Visual capture produced by prism spectacles. Psychon Sci 2:215–216Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Heilig M (1992) El cine de futro: the cinema of the future. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 1:279–294 (Original work published 1955)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Heft H (1996) The ecological approach to navigation: A Gibsonian perspective. In: Portugali J (ed) The construction of cognitive maps. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrect, pp 105–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Heft H (1997) The relevance of Gibson’s ecological approach for environment-behavior studies. In: Moore GT, Marans RW (eds) Advances in environment, behavior, and design, vol 4. Plenum, New York, pp 71–108Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hettinger LJ (2002) Illusory self-motion in virtual environments. In: Stanney KM (ed) Handbook of Virtual Environments. Erlbaum, New Jersey, pp 471–492Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hilsendeger A, Brandauer S, Tolksdorf J, Fröhlich C (2009) Navigation in virtual reality with the wii balanceboard\(^{TM}\). In: GI-Workshop Virtuelle und Erweiterte Realität, ACMGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hodgson E, Bachmann E, Waller D (2011) Redirected walking to explore virtual environments: assessing the potential for spatial interference. ACM Trans Appl Percept 8, Article 22Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hollerbach JM (2002) Locomotion interfaces. In: Stanney KM (ed) Handbook of virtual environments: design, implementation, and applications. Erlbaum, New Jersey, pp 239–254Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    von Holst E, Mittlestaedt H (1950) Das reafferenz princip: (Wedlselwirkungen zwischen Zentrainervensystem und Peripherie.) Die Naturwissenschften, 37, 464–476. Translated in: Dodwell PC, ed (1971) Perceptual processing: stimulus equivalence and pattern recognition (pp. 41–72). Appleton-Century-Crofts, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Huang J, Chiu W, Lin Y, Tsai M, Bai H, Tai C, Gau C, Lee H (2000) The gait sensing disc: a compact locomotion device for the virtual environment. In: Proceedings of the international conference in central Europe on computer graphics, visualization and interactive digital media. Pilsen, Czech RepublicGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Iwata H (2000) Locomotion interface for virtual environments. In: Hollerbach J, Koditshek D (eds) Robotics research: the ninth international symposium. Springer-Verlag, London, pp 275–282Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Iwata H, Yano H, Fukushima H, Noma H (2005) CirculaFloor. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 25:64–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Iwata I, Yano H, Nakaizumi F (2001) Gait master: a versatile locomotion interface for uneven virtual terrain. In: Proceedings of IEEE virtual reality conference, pp. 131–137Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Jürgens R, Becker W (2006) Perception of angular displacement without landmarks: evidence for Bayesian fusion of vestibular, optokinetic, podokinesthetic, and cognitive information. Exp Brain Res 174:528–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Jürgens R, Boß T, Becker W (1999) Estimation of self-turning during active and passive rotation in the dark. Exp Brain Res 128:491–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kearns MJ, Warren WH, Duchon AP, Tarr MJ (2002) Path integration from optic flow and body senses in a homing task. Perception 31:349–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Klatzky RL, Loomis JM, Beall AC, Chance SS, Golledge RG (1998) Updating an egocentric spatial representation during real, imagined, and virtual locomotion. Psychol Sci 9:293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kubovy M (1986) The psychology of linear perspective and renaissance art. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lackner JP, DiZio P (2005) Vestibular, proprioceptive, and haptic contributions to spatial orientation. Ann Rev Psychol 56:115–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lappe M, Bremmer F, van den Berg AV (1999) Perception of self-motion from visual flow. Trends Cogn Sci 3:329–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Larish JF, Flach JM (1990) Sources of optical information useful for perception of speed of rectilinear self-motion. J Exp Psychol Human Percept Perform 16:295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL (2009) Haptic perception: a tutorial. Atten Percept Psychophys 71:1439–1459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Lepecq J, Giannopulu I, Baudonnière P (1995) Cognitive effects on visually induced body motion in children. Perception 24:435–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Loomis JM, Klatzky RL, Golledge RG, Philbeck JW (1999) Human navigation by path integration. In: Golledge RG (ed) Wayfinding: cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, pp 125–151Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Loomis JM, Klatzky RL, Avraamides M, Lippa Y, Golledge RG (2007) Functional equivalence of spatial images produced by perception and spatial language. In: Mast F, Jäncke L (eds) Spatial processing in navigation, imagery, and perception. Springer, New York, pp 29–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    May M, Klatzky RL (2000) Path integration while ignoring irrelevant movement. J Exp Psychol Learn Memory Cogn 26:169–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Medina E, Fruland R, Weghorst S (2008) Virtusphere: walking in a human size VR “hamster ball”. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society, pp 2102–2106Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mittelstaedt H (1996) Somatic graviception. Biol Psychol 42:53–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Mittelstaedt ML, Mittelstaedt H (2001) Idiothetic navigation in humans: estimation of path length. Exp Brain Res 139:318–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Nardini M, Jones P, Bedford R, Braddick O (2008) Development of cue integration in human navigation. Curr Biol 18:689–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Neider MB, Gaspar JG, McCarley JS, Crowell J, Kaczmarski H, Kramer AF (2011) Walking and talking: dual-task effects on street crossing behavior in older adults. Psychology and Aging (Advance online publication)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Nielsen TI (1963) Volition: a new experimental approach. Scand J Psychol 4:225–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Nitzshe N, Hanebeck UD, Schmidt G (2004) Motion compression for telepresent walking in large target environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 13:44–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Noë A (2004) Action in perception. MIT Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Ohmi M (1996) Egocentric perception through interaction among many sensory systems. Cogn Brain Res 5:87–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Peck TC, Whitton MC, Fuchs H (2009) Evaluation of reorientation techniques for walking in large virtual environments. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 15:121–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Péruch P, Borel L, Magnan J, Lacour M (2005) Direction and distance deficits in path integration after unilateral vestibular loss depends on task complexity. Cogn Brain Res 25:862–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Péruch P, May M, Wartenberg F (1997) Homing in virtual environments: effects of field of view and path layout. Perception 26:301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Potegal M (1982) Vestibular and neostriatal contributions to spatial orientation. In: Potegal M (ed) Spatial abilities development and physiological foundations. Academic Press, New York, pp 361–387Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Pratt DR, Barham PT, Locke J, Zyda MJ, Eastman B, Moore T et al (1994) Insertion of an articulated human into a networked virtual environment. In: Proceedings of the 1994 AI, simulation, and planning in high autonomy systems conference. University of Florida, GainesvilleGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Prinz W (1997) Perception and action planning. Eur J Cogn Psychol 9:129–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Proffitt DR (2006) Distance perception. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 15:131–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Razzaque S (2005) Redirected walking. Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel HillGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Razzaque S, Swapp D, Slater M, Whitton MC, Steed A (2002) Redirected walking in place. In: Muller S, Stuzlinger W (eds) Proceedings of the eurographics workshop on virtual environments. Eurographics Association, pp 123–130Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Riecke BE, Cunningham DW, Bülthoff HH (2007) Spatial updating in virtual reality: the sufficiency of visual information. Psychol Res 71:298–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Riecke B, Feuereissen D, Rieser JJ (2009) Auditory self-motion simulation is facilitated by haptic and vibrational cues suggesting the possibility of actual motion. ACM Trans Appl Percept 6, Article 20Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Riecke BE, van Veen HAHC, Bülthoff HH (2002) Visual homing is possible without landmarks: a path integration study in virtual reality. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 11:443–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Rossano MJ, West SO, Robertson TJ, Wayne MC, Chase RB (1999) The acquisition of route and survey knowledge from computer models. J Environ Psychol 19:101–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ruddle RA (2001) Navigation: am I really lost or virtually there? In: Harris D (ed) Engineering psychology and cognitive ergonomics, vol 6. Ashgate, Burlington, pp 135–142Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Ruddle RA, Lessels S (2009) The benefits of using a walking interface to navigate virtual environments. ACM Trans Comput Human Interact 16:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ruddle RA, Payne SJ, Jones DM (1997) Navigating buildings in “desk-top” virtual environments: experimental investigations using extended navigational experience. J Exp Psychol Appl 3:143–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Sandvad J (1999) Auditory perception of reverberant surroundings. J Acoust Soc Am 105:1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Schenkman BN, Nilsson ME (2010) Human echolocation: blind and sighted persons’ ability to detect sounds recorded in the presence of a reflected object. Perception 39:483–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Shelton AL, McNamara TP (1997) Multiple views of spatial memory. Psychon Bull Rev 4:102–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Shin YK, Proctor RW, Capaldi EJ (2010) A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychol Bull 136:943–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Sholl MJ (1989) The relation between horizontality and rod-and-frame and vestibular navigational performance. J Exp Psychol Learn Memory Cogn 15:110–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Sholl MJ (1996) From visual information to cognitive maps. In: Portugali J (ed) The construction of cognitive maps. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 157–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Souman JL, Giordano PR, Schwaiger M, Frissen I, Thümmel T, Ulbrich H, De Luca A, Bülthoff HH, Ernst MO (2011) CyberWalk: enabling unconstrained omnidirectional walking through virtual environments. ACM Trans Appl Percept 8, Article 25Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Stanton DEB, Wilson PN, Foreman N (2003) Human shortcut performance in a computer-simulated maze: a comparative study. Spatial Cogn Comput 3:315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Stoffregen TA, Pittenger JB (1995) Human echolocation as a basic form of perception and action. Ecol Psychol 7:181–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Stratton G (1896) Some preliminary experiments on vision without inversion of the retinal image. Psychol Rev 3:341–360Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Steinicke F, Bruder G, Jerald J, Frenz H, Lappe M (2009) Estimation of detection thresholds for redirected walking techniques. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 16(1):17–27Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    St. George RJ, Fitzpatrick RC (2011) The sense of self-motion, orientation and balance explored by vestibular stimulation. J Physiol 589:807–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Sun HJ, Campos JL, Chan GSW (2004) Multisensory integration in the estimation of relative path length. Exp Brain Res 154:246–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Telford L, Howard IP, Ohmi M (1995) Heading judgments during active and passive self-motion. Exp Brain Res 104:502–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Templeman JN, Denbrook PS, Sibert LE (1999) Virtual locomotion: walking in place through virtual environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 8:598–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Thorndyke PW, Hayes-Roth B (1982) Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cogn Psychol 14:560–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Toet A, Jansen SEM, Delleman NJ (2007) Effects of field-of-view restrictions on speed and accuracy of manoeuvring. Percept Motor Skills 105:1245–1256Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Turvey MT, Carello C (1986) The ecological approach to perceiving-acting: a pictorial essay. Acta Psychol 63:133–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Van Erp JBF, Van Veen HAHC, Jansen C, Dobbins T (2005) Waypoint navigation with a vibrotactile waist belt. ACM Trans Appl Percept 2:106–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Waller D, Bachmann E, Hodgson E, Beall AC (2007) The HIVE: A Huge Immersive Virtual Environment for research in spatial cognition. Behav Res Methods 39:835–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Waller D, Greenauer N (2007) The role of body-based sensory information in the acquisition of enduring spatial representations. Psychol Res 71:322–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Waller D, Hunt E, Knapp D (1998) The transfer of spatial knowledge in virtual environment training. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 7:129–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Waller D, Loomis JM, Haun DBM (2004) Body-based senses enhance knowledge of directions in large-scale environments. Psychon Bull Rev 11:157–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Waller D, Loomis JM, Steck S (2003) Inertial cues do not enhance knowledge of environmental layout. Psychon Bull Rev 10:987–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Witmer BG, Bailey JH, Knerr BW, Parsons KC (1996) Virtual spaces and real world places: transfer of route knowledge. Int J Human Comput Stud 45:413–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Yardley L (1992) Motion sickness and perception: a reappraisal of the sensory conflict approach. Br J Psychol 83:449–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Yardley L, Higgins M (1998) Spatial updating during rotation: the role of vestibular information and mental activity. J Vestib Res 8:435–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Yost WA (2001) Auditory localization and scene perception. In: Goldstein EB (ed) Blackwell handbook of perception. Blackwell Publishers, Malden, pp 437–468Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Zhang H, Mou W, McNamara TP (2011) Spatial updating according to the intrinsic reference direction of a briefly viewed layout. Cognition 119:419–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMiami UniversityOxfordUSA

Personalised recommendations