de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Poster

Perceiving and controlling simulated ego-rotations by optic flow: Influence of field of view (FOV) and display devices on ego-motion perception

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84199

Schulte-Pelkum,  J
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84170

Riecke,  BE
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84287

von der Heyde,  M
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons83839

Bülthoff,  HH
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Schulte-Pelkum, J., Riecke, B., von der Heyde, M., & Bülthoff, H. (2002). Perceiving and controlling simulated ego-rotations by optic flow: Influence of field of view (FOV) and display devices on ego-motion perception. Poster presented at 10th Annual Worksop on Object Perception and Memory (OPAM 2002), Kansas City, KS, USA.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-DEAD-5
Abstract
This study investigated humans ability to control simulated ego-rotations from optic flow. The stimuli consisted of limited lifetime dots on a dark background. In a within-subject design, performance was tested using a curved projection screen (FOV 86°×63°), a HMD (40°×30°), and blinders (40°×30°) that restricted the FOV on the screen. Participants typically undershot intended turn angles. Performance was best with the screen (gain factor 0.77) and worst with the HMD (gain 0.57). A significant difference between blinders (gain 0.73) and HMD indicates that different display devices can influence ego-motion perception differentially, even if the physical FOVs are equal.