Encyclopedia of Robotics

Living Edition
| Editors: Marcelo H Ang, Oussama Khatib, Bruno Siciliano

Virtual and Augmented Reality Interfaces

  • Fernanda HerreraEmail author
  • Jeremy BailensonEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41610-1_32-1

Synonyms

Definition

Virtual Reality :

Virtual reality (VR) interfaces are fully immersive digital environments that allow the user to interact with virtual content.

Augmented Reality :

Augmented reality (AR) interfaces superimpose virtual content onto the user’s real world environment, thereby providing additional information to the user about his or her surroundings.

Overview

The goal of VR interfaces is to surround the user with virtual stimuli that the user can naturally interact with. There are different types of VR systems that can accomplish this goal, the most common ones being projection systems and head-mounted display (HMD) systems (Bailenson, 2018). Projection systems, like the CAVE (Cruz-Neira et al. 1992), accurately display virtual content on the walls of the room surrounding the user. Users are able to interact with the virtual content in real time and are able to see their own bodies because the virtual environment is...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ahn SJ, Le AMT, Bailenson JN (2013) The effect of embodied experiences on self-other merging, attitude, and helping behavior. Media Psychol 16:7–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson P, Rothbaum BO, Hodges LF (2003) Virtual reality exposure in the treatment of social anxiety. Cogn Behav Pract 10:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Azuma RT (1997) A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleop Virt 6:355–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bailenson JN (2018) Experience on demand: what virtual reality is, how it works, and what it can do. W. W. Norton and Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Blascovich J, Bailenson J (2011) Infinite reality: avatars, eternal life, new worlds, and the dawn of the virtual revolution. William Morrow & Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Blascovich J, Loomis J, Beall AC, Swinth KR, Hoyt CL, Bailenson JN (2002) Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychol Inq 13:103–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cruz-Neira C, Sandin DJ, DeFanti TA, Kenyon RV, Hart JC (1992) The CAVE: audio visual experience automatic virtual environment. Commun ACM 35:64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cummings JJ, Bailenson JN (2015) How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychol 19:272–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fatharany F, Hariadi R R, Herumurti D, Yuniarti A (2016, October) Augmented reality application for cockroach phobia therapy using everyday objects as marker substitute. In: Information & Communication Technology and Systems (ICTS), 2016 International Conference on IEEE, pp 49–52Google Scholar
  10. González-Franco M, Peck TC, Rodríguez-Fornells A, Slater M (2014) A threat to a virtual hand elicits motor cortex activation. Exp Brain Res 232:875–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haque S, Srinivasan S (2006) A meta-analysis of the training effectiveness of virtual reality surgical simulators. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 10:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoffman HG, Patterson DR, Seibel E, Soltani M, Jewett-Leahy L, Sharar SR (2008) Virtual reality pain control during burn wound debridement in the hydrotank. Clin J Pain 24:299–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Juan MC, Alcaniz M, Monserrat C, Botella C, Banos RM, Guerrero B (2005) Using augmented reality to treat phobias. IEEE Computer Graphics 25:31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kim K, Bruder G, Maloney D, Welch G (2016) The influence of real human personality on social presence with a virtual human in augmented reality. In: International conference on artificial reality & telexistence and Eurographics symposium on virtual environments, Little Rock, pp 115–122Google Scholar
  15. Kim K, Maloney D, Bruder G, Bailenson JN, Welch GF (2017) The effects of virtual human's spatial and behavioral coherence with physical objects on social presence in AR. Comp Anim Virtual Worlds 28:e1771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lohse KR, Hilderman CG, Cheung KL, Tatla S, Van der Loos HM (2014) Virtual reality therapy for adults post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis exploring virtual environments and commercial games in therapy. PLoS One 9:e93318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lombard M, Ditton T (1997) At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. J Comput-Mediat Commun 3 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x
  18. Mihelj M, Novak D, Beguš S (2014) Virtual reality technology and applications. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Monferrer A, Bonyuet D (2002) Cooperative robot teleoperation through virtual reality interfaces. In: Proceedings of IEEE sixth international conference on information visualization, pp 243–248Google Scholar
  20. Oh SY, Bailenson J, Weisz E, Zaki J (2016a) Virtually old: embodied perspective taking and the reduction of ageism under threat. Comput Hum Behav 60:398–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oh S Y, Shriram K, Laha B, Baughman S, Ogle E, Bailenson J (2016b) Immersion at Scale: researcher’s guide to ecologically valid mobile experiments. In: Proceedings of IEEE virtual reality (VR)Google Scholar
  22. Peck TC, Seinfeld S, Aglioti SM, Slater M (2013) Putting yourself in the skin of a black avatar reduces implicit racial bias. Conscious Cogn 22:779–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rosenberg RS, Baughman SL, Bailenson JN (2013) Virtual superheroes: using superpowers in virtual reality to encourage prosocial behavior. PLoS One 8:1–9Google Scholar
  24. Saposnik G, Levin M, Stroke Outcome Research Canada (SORCan) Working Group (2011) Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 42:1380–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, Satava RM (2002) Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 236:458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Slater M, Perez-Marcos D, Ehrsson HH, Sanchez-Vives MV (2009) Inducing illusory ownership of a virtual body. Front Neurosci 3:214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slater M, Spanlang B, Sanchez-Vives MV, Blanke O (2010) First person experience of body transfer in virtual reality. PLoS One 5(5):e10564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steam (2017, July 22nd) Retrieved from http://store.steampowered.com/vr/
  29. Tang A, Owen C, Biocca F,Mou W (2003, April) Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. pp 73–80Google Scholar
  30. Wiederhold MD, Wiederhold BK (2007) Virtual reality and interactive simulation for pain distraction. Pain Med 8:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yee N, Bailenson JN, Ducheneaut N (2009) The Proteus effect: implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behavior. Commun Res 36:285–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CommunicationStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Jee-Hwan Ryu
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringKorea University of Technology & EducationCheon-AnRepublic of Korea