How People Use Visual Landmarks for Locomotion Distance Estimation: The Case Study of Eye Tracking
Research has been focusing on how people navigate in the virtual space since the technology of virtual reality was developed. However, not enough has been known about the process of the virtual space cognition. During locomotion, distance could be visually accessed by integrating motion cues, such as optic flow, or by the self-displacement process in which people compare the change of their self-position relative to individual identifiable objects (i.e. landmarks) in the environment along the movement. In this study, we attempted to demonstrate the effect of the later mechanism by separating the static visual scenes from the motion cues in a simulated self-movement using a static-frame paradigm. In addition, we compared the eye tracking pattern in the static scene condition (without motion cues) with the eye tracking pattern in the full visual cue condition (with motion cues). The results suggested that when only static visual scenes were available during the simulated self-movement, people were able to reproduce the traveled distance. The eye tracking results also revealed there were two different perceptual processes for locomotion distance estimation and it was suggested that locomotion distance could be estimated not only by optic flow as we already knew, but also by the self-displacement process from the visual static scenes.
KeywordsLandmarks Locomotion distance estimation Eye tracking
We would like to thank Dr. Frances Wang from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Dr. Wang Ying from Institute of Psychology, CAS for their instructions and constructive suggestions on our study. And we thank Dr. Yao Lin from Institute of Psychology, CAS for his help on data analysis. Special thanks are given to our participants for their patience and valuable time.
- 3.Klatzky RL, Loomis JM, Golledge RG (1997) Encoding spatial representations through nonvisually guided locomotion: tests of human path integration. In: Medin D The psychology of learning and motivation, Academic Press, San Diego, pp 41–84Google Scholar
- 7.Wan X, Wang RF, Crowell JA (2012) The effect of landmarks in human path integration. Acta Psychologica 140(1):7–12Google Scholar
- 9.Gibson JJ (1950) Perception of the visual world. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
- 14.Riecke BE, van Veen HACH, Bülthoff HH (2002) Visual homing is possible without landmarks: a path integration study in virtual reality. Presence 11(5):443–473Google Scholar
- 19.Frenz H, Lappe M (2006) Visual distance estimation in static compared to moving virtual scenes. Span J Psychol 9(2):321–331Google Scholar
- 21.Loomis JM, Klatzky RL, Golledge RG, Cicinelli JG, Pellegrino JW, Fry PA (1993) Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: assessment of path integration ability. J Exp Psychol Gen 122(1):73–91Google Scholar
- 22.Loomis JM, Knapp JM (2003) Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. In: Hettinger LJ, Haas MW (eds) Virtual and adaptive environments. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 21–46Google Scholar