MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record 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 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ismini-Eleni Lokka

Bibliographic record

VenueZurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster UniversityMcGill UniversitySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRealismProcess (computing)CognitionComputer sciencePsychologyHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)Same topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207