Judging Perceived and Traversed Distance in Virtual Environments
Abstract
The ability to accurately estimate distance is an essential component of navigating large-scale spaces. Although the factors that influence distance estimation have been a topic of research in real-world environments for decades and are well known, research on distance estimation in virtual environments (VEs) has only just begun. Initial investigations of distance estimation in VEs suggest that observers are less accurate in estimating distance in VEs than in the real world (Lampton et al., 1995). Factors influencing distance estimates may be divided into those affecting perceived distance (visual cues only) and those affecting traversed distance to include visual, cognitive, and proprioceptive cues. To assess the contribution of the various distance cues in VEs, two experiments were conducted. The first required a static observer to estimate the distance to a cylinder placed at various points along a 130-foot hallway. This experiment examined the effects of floor texture, floor pattern, and object size on distance estimates in a VE. The second experiment required a moving observer to estimate route segment distances and total route distances along four routes, each totaling 1210 feet. This experiment assessed the effects of movement method, movement speed, compensatory cues, and wall texture density. Results indicate that observers underestimate distances both in VEs and in the real world, but the underestimates are more extreme in VEs. Texture did not reliably affect the distance estimates, providing no compensation for the gross underestimates of distance in VE. Traversing a distance improves the ability to estimate that distance, but more natural means of moving via a treadmill do not necessarily improve distance estimates over traditional methods of moving in VE (e.g., using a joystick). The addition of compensatory cues (tone every 10 feet traversed on alternate route segments) improves VE distance estimation to almost perfect performance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Better performance in VR may in part be due to the superior depth information available when using VRHMDs.
“As depth information is important in manipulation tasks, we can infer that better performance in VR may in part be due to the superior information available when using VRHMDs.”
From Study of Multimodal Interfaces and the Improvements on Teleoperation (2020) · cites this paper as [20]
Cites
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception
Bornstein, M. H., & Gibson, J. J. (1980) · The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism · doi:10.2307/429816 · Cited by 22,935 · see citing works
Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology
Loomis, J. M., Blascovich, J. J., & Beall, A. C. (1999) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03200735 · Cited by 717 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The human hippocampus and spatial and episodic memory
Burgess, N., Maguire, E. A., & O'Keefe, J. (2002) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00830-9 · Cited by 2,401 · see citing works
How Immersive Is Enough? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Immersive Technology on User Presence
Cummings, J. J., & Bailenson, J. N. (2016) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740 · Cited by 1,749 · see citing works
Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology
Loomis, J. M., Blascovich, J. J., & Beall, A. C. (1999) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03200735 · Cited by 717 · see citing works
Study of Multimodal Interfaces and the Improvements on Teleoperation
Triantafyllidis, E., Mcgreavy, C., Gu, J., & Li, Z. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2990080 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
“This supports current literature [8], [20], [21].”
BackgroundTemporal Presence Variation in Immersive Computer Games
Chung, J., & Gardner, H. J. (2012) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.627298 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
- Authors
- Witmer, B. G., & Kline, P. B.
- Affiliations
- U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (US)
- Corresponding author
- Witmer, Bob G.
- Kline, Paul B.
- Venue
- Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 144-167
- ISSN
- 1054-7460 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2151102910
- Cited by
- 335
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 20.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- PRESENCE Virtual and Augmented Reality (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- distance estimation, virtual worlds, perceived distance, distance underestimation, visual cues, floor patterns, object size, treadmill walking, movement speed, route length
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