The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Walking > walking-in-place > flying, in virtual environments
Open accessAbstract
A study by Slater, et al., [1995] indicated that naive subjects in an immersive virtual environment experience a higher subjective sense of presence when they locomote by walking-in-place (virtual walking) than when they push-button-fly (along the floor plane).We replicated their study, adding real walking as a third condition.Our study confirmed their findings.We also found that real walking is significantly better than both virtual walking and flying in ease (simplicity, straightforwardness, naturalness) as a mode of locomotion.The greatest difference in subjective presence was between flyers and both kinds of walkers.In addition, subjective presence was higher for real walkers than virtual walkers, but the difference was statistically significant only in some models.Follow-on studies show virtual walking can be substantially improved by detecting footfalls with a head accelerometer.As in the Slater study, subjective presence significantly correlated with subjects' degree of association with their virtual bodies (avatars).This, our strongest statistical result, suggests that substantial potential presence gains can be had from tracking all limbs and customizing avatar appearance.An unexpected by-product was that real walking through our enhanced version of Slater's visual-cliff virtual environment (Figure 1) yielded a strikingly compelling virtual experience-the strongest we and most of our visitors have yet experienced.The most needed system improvement is the substitution of wireless technology for all links to the user.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness
Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S., & Lilienthal, M. G. (1993) · The International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3 · Cited by 5,457
Cited by
Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments
Slater, M. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0138 · Cited by 2,691
Self-citationEnhancing Our Lives with Immersive Virtual Reality
Slater, M., & Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2016) · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · doi:10.3389/frobt.2016.00074 · Cited by 1,993
Self-citationFrom presence to consciousness through virtual reality.
Sanchez-Vives, M. V., & Slater, M. (2005) · Nature reviews. Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1651 · Cited by 1,831
Self-citationPresence and Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Are Negatively Related: A Review
Weech, S., Kenny, S., & Barnett-Cowan, M. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00158 · Cited by 913
State of the art of virtual reality technology
Anthes, C., Garcia-Hernandez, R. J., Wiedemann, M., & Kranzlmuller, D. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Aerospace Conference · doi:10.1109/aero.2016.7500674 · Cited by 541
Metadata
- Authors
- Usoh, M., Arthur, K., Whitton, M. C., Bastos, R., Steed, A., Slater, M., & Brooks, F. P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques - SIGGRAPH '99
- Publisher
- ACM Press
- Published
- 1999
- Pages
- 359-364
- OpenAlex
- W2234777211
- Cited by
- 921
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.30
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Walking > walking-in-place > flying, in virtual environments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/311535.311589
- The paper
- Usoh, M., Arthur, K., Whitton, M. C., Bastos, R., Steed, A., Slater, M., & Brooks, F. P. (1999). Walking > walking-in-place > flying, in virtual environments. Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques - SIGGRAPH '99. https://doi.org/10.1145/311535.311589
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.