Realism and Field of View Affect Presence in VR but Not the Way You Think

Title of the Paper

"Realism and Field of View Affect Presence in VR but Not the Way You Think"

Bibliographic Information

• Subject Area: Virtual Reality (VR)
• Keywords: Virtual reality, perceived presence, emotion, interaction, realism, field of view

Research Background and Problem

• Identified Problem or Challenge: Factors influencing perceived presence in virtual reality include both technical aspects (e.g., visual realism and field of view) and human-centric elements (e.g., emotion and interaction). However, the way these factors interact to affect perceived presence remains unclear.
• Significance: Presence in VR is critical for the effectiveness of many applications, especially in areas such as entertainment, therapy, and crisis management training, where enhancing user experience is essential.
• Research Motivation: There is a lack of systematic research on the interaction between technical and human-centric factors, with a particular need to study the impact of emotions (especially fear). This research can help optimize VR design to enhance presence.

Solution

• Proposed Method or Solution: The authors introduced a new structural equation model, TAP-Fear, to describe how technical factors (such as visual realism and field of view) and human-centric factors (such as fear and interaction) jointly influence presence.
• Innovations:
  • The model systematizes the interaction between technical and human-centric factors, focusing not only on the impact of individual factors but also exploring their combined effects.
  • It highlights the unique role of fear in shaping presence.
• Implementation Steps and Key Techniques:
  • Conducted a user experiment with 360 participants, testing 16 different combinations (2×2×2×2 design) of visual realism, field of view, emotion (fear/happiness), and interaction (with/without interaction).
  • Applied structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis to propose and validate the TAP-Fear model.

Research Findings

• Specific Findings:
  1. Visual realism and field of view have negligible direct effects on presence.
  2. Visual realism indirectly enhances presence by amplifying fear, while the impact of field of view is only evident when users perceive interaction.
  3. Human-centric factors have a significantly greater influence than technical factors, with fear and interaction contributing most prominently to presence.
• Advantages Over Existing Solutions:
  • Compared to previous studies, this model systematically reveals the interaction between technical and human-centric factors rather than focusing on individual factors.
  • Provides more detailed design optimization strategies, such as prioritizing visual realism in fear-driven scenarios.
• Experimental or Evaluation Results:
  • The TAP-Fear model evaluated the significant roles of fear and interaction and improved model fit through the interactive effects of technical factors (e.g., the support of field of view for interaction perception).
  • Quantified the indirect effects of technical factors on presence and compared them to the contributions of human-centric factors.
• Limitations and Future Directions:
  1. Only two emotions (fear and happiness) and limited technical factors (realism and field of view) were tested; future studies should expand to include more emotions and technical metrics.
  2. Experiments used a park scene; future research should incorporate more diverse virtual environments (e.g., fantasy or abstract scenes).
  3. The current model primarily targets consumer-grade VR devices; further exploration is needed to assess the potential impact of advanced technologies (e.g., wide field of view) on presence.

Impact and Conclusion

• Impact: The study emphasizes the need to prioritize human-centric factors, particularly emotions (fear) and interaction, when designing VR systems. This provides specific design recommendations for applications in game design, virtual training, and therapeutic virtual environments.
• Conclusion:
  1. The influence of technical features (e.g., visual realism and field of view) is relatively indirect, while human-centric factors (especially fear and interaction) significantly determine the effectiveness of presence.
  2. The TAP-Fear model lays the foundation for developing more universal models of VR presence and clarifies the user-experience-centered approach required for optimizing technical features.