MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3133050188 · doi:10.5167/uzh-196626

The impact of 3D virtual environments with different levels of realism on route learning: a focus on age-based differences

2020· dissertation· en· W3133050188 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Ismini-Eleni Lokka

Notice bibliographique

RevueZurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) · 2020
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesMcMaster UniversityMcGill UniversitySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
Mots-clésRealismProcess (computing)CognitionComputer sciencePsychologyHuman–computer interaction

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

With technological advancements, it has become notably easier to create virtual environments (VEs) depicting the real world with high fidelity and realism. These VEs offer some attractive use cases for navigation studies looking into spatial cognition. However, such photorealistic VEs, while attractive, may complicate the route learning process as they may overwhelm users with the amount of information they contain. Understanding how much and what kind of photorealistic information is relevant to people at which point on their route and while they are learning a route can help define how to design virtual environments that better support spatial learning. Among the users who may be overwhelmed by too much information, older adults represent a special interest group for two key reasons: 1) The number of people over 65 years old is expected to increase to 1.5 billion by 2050 (World Health Organization, 2011); 2) cognitive abilities decline as people age (Park et al., 2002). The ability to independently navigate in the real world is an important aspect of human well-being. This fact has many socio-economic implications, yet age-related cognitive decline creates difficulties for older people in learning their routes in unfamiliar environments, limiting their independence. This thesis takes a user-centered approach to the design of visualizations for assisting all people, and specifically older adults, in learning routes while navigating in a VE. Specifically, the objectives of this thesis are threefold, addressing the basic dimensions of: ❖ Visualization type as expressed by different levels of realism: Evaluate how much and what kind of photorealistic information should be depicted and where it should be represented within a VE in a navigational context. It proposes visualization design guidelines for the design of VEs that assist users in effectively encoding visuospatial information. ❖ Use context as expressed by route recall in short- and long-term: Identify the implications that different information types (visual, spatial, and visuospatial) have over short- and long-term route recall with the use of 3D VE designs varying in levels of realism. ❖ User characteristics as expressed by group differences related to aging, spatial abilities, and memory capacity: Better understand how visuospatial information is encoded and decoded by people in different age groups, and of different spatial and memory abilities, particularly while learning a route in 3D VE designs varying in levels of realism. In this project, the methodology used for investigating the topics outlined above was a set of controlled lab experiments nested within one. Within this experiment, participants’ recall accuracy for various visual, spatial, and visuospatial elements on the route was evaluated using three visualization types that varied in their amount of photorealism. These included an Abstract, a Realistic, and a Mixed VE (see Figure 2), for a number of route recall tasks relevant to navigation. The Mixed VE is termed “mixed” because it includes elements from both the Abstract and the Realistic VEs, balancing the amount of realism in a deliberate manner (elaborated in Section 3.5.2). This feature is developed within this thesis. The tested recall tasks were differentiated based on the type of information being assessed: visual, spatial, and visuospatial (elaborated in Section 3.6.1). These tasks were performed by the participants both immediately after experiencing a drive-through of a route in the three VEs and a week after that; thus, addressing short- and long-term memory, respectively. Participants were counterbalanced for their age, gender, and expertise while their spatial abilities and visuospatial memory capacity were controlled with standardized psychological tests. The results of the experiments highlight the importance of all three investigated dimensions for successful route learning with VEs. More specifically, statistically significant differences in participants’ recall accuracy were observed for: 1) the visualization type, highlighting the value of balancing the amount of photorealistic information presented in VEs while also demonstrating the positive and negative effects of abstraction and realism in VEs on route learning; 2) the recall type, highlighting nuances and peculiarities across the recall of visual, spatial, and visuospatial information in the short- and long-term; and, 3) the user characteristics, as expressed by age differences, but also by spatial abilities and visuospatial memory capacity, highlighting the importance of considering the user type, i.e., for whom the visualization is customized. The original and unique results identified from this work advance the knowledge in GIScience, particularly in geovisualization, from the perspective of the “cognitive design” of visualizations in two distinct ways: (i) understanding the effects that visual realism has—as presented in VEs—on route learning, specifically for people of different age groups and with different spatial abilities and memory capacity, and (ii) proposing empirically validated visualization design guidelines for the use of photorealism in VEs for efficient recall of visuospatial information during route learning, not only for shortterm but also for long-term recall in younger and older adults.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,895
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,731

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,211
Écart entre enseignants0,198 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueZurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)Même sujetSpatial Cognition and NavigationTravaux en français237 207