The Effect of Environmental Features, Self-Avatar, and Immersion on Object Location Memory in Virtual Environments

Abstract

One potential application for virtual environments (VEs) is the training of spatial knowledge. A critical question is what features the VE should have in order to facilitate this training. Previous research has shown that people rely on environmental features, such as sockets and wall decorations, when learning object locations. The aim of this study is to explore the effect of varied environmental feature fidelity of VEs, the use of self-avatars, and the level of immersion on object location learning and recall. Following a between-subjects experimental design, participants were asked to learn the location of three identical objects by navigating one of the three environments: a physical laboratory or low and high detail VE replicas of this laboratory. Participants who experienced the VEs could use either a head-mounted display (HMD) or a desktop computer. Half of the participants learning in the HMD and desktop systems were assigned a virtual body. Participants were then asked to place physical versions of the three objects in the physical laboratory in the same configuration. We tracked participant movement, measured object placement, and administered a questionnaire related to aspects of the experience. HMD learning resulted in statistically significant higher performance than desktop learning. Results indicate that, when learning in low detail VEs, there is no difference in performance between participants using HMD and desktop systems. Overall, providing the participant with a virtual body had a negative impact on performance. Preliminary inspection of navigation data indicates that spatial learning strategies are different in systems with varying levels of immersion.

Object location memory error in virtual and real environments

“…Our results show no statistically significant effect of locomotion technique on placement error. We also found that the mean placement error for all locomotion techniques highly resembles the mean placement error for a specific experimental condition in a previous experiment [6]. This was a surprise because we expected the locomotion techniques to inhibit spatial learning.…”

“…This is different to the previous study [6], where participants learnt and recalled the location of three identical objects in each trial. The object used in the study was a white Tam Tam plastic stool from Habitat.…”

“…Previous research has also assessed the effect of level of immersion, selfavatar and environmental fidelity on object location memory in virtual environments (VEs) [6]. That study found that HMD learning resulted in statistically significant higher performance than desktop learning and that the use of a virtual body had a negative effect on object location memory.…”

“…We then compared our results with results corresponding to the HMD -No Body -High Detail VE condition from a previous study on spatial memory in immersive VR [6], as this experimental condition represents the equivalent experimental setup but using a different locomotion technique (physical walking). Table 1 shows the mean placement error and standard deviations for each of the locomotion techniques.…”

“…Based on previous research [6], our study examines the effect of locomotion technique on object location memory in VEs. A total of 18 participants (9 female, 9 male; average age 26.4 years, SD = 1.8) were recruited from the student and staff population at University College London.…”