物理物体和虚拟现实中亮度恒常性的等效光源分析。

IF 4.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Khushbu Y Patel, Laurie M Wilcox, Laurence T Maloney, Krista A Ehinger, Jaykishan Y Patel, Richard F Murray
{"title":"物理物体和虚拟现实中亮度恒常性的等效光源分析。","authors":"Khushbu Y Patel, Laurie M Wilcox, Laurence T Maloney, Krista A Ehinger, Jaykishan Y Patel, Richard F Murray","doi":"10.3758/s13428-025-02688-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several previous studies have found significant differences between visual perception in real and virtual environments. Given the increasing use of virtual reality (VR) in performance-critical applications such as medical training and vision research, it is important to understand these differences. Here, we compared lightness constancy in physical and VR environments using a task where viewers matched the reflectance of a fronto-parallel match patch to the reflectance of a reference patch at a range of 3D orientations relative to a light source. We used a custom-built physical apparatus and four VR conditions: (1) All-Cue (replicating the physical apparatus), (2) Reduced-Depth (no disparity or parallax), (3) Shadowless (no cast shadows), and (4) Reduced-Context (no surrounding objects). Lightness constancy was markedly better in the physical condition than in all four VR conditions. Surprisingly, viewers achieved a degree of lightness constancy even in the Reduced-Context condition, despite the absence of lighting cues. In a follow-up experiment, we re-tested the All-Cue and Reduced-Context conditions in VR with new observers, each participating in only one condition. Here, we found lower levels of constancy than in the first experiment, suggesting that experience across multiple experimental settings and possibly exposure to the physical apparatus during instructions had enhanced performance. We conclude that even when robust lighting and shape cues are available, lightness constancy is substantially better in real environments than in virtual environments. We consider possible explanations for this finding, such as the imperfect models of materials and lighting that are used for rendering in real-time VR.</p>","PeriodicalId":8717,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Research Methods","volume":"57 6","pages":"170"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An equivalent illuminant analysis of lightness constancy with physical objects and in virtual reality.\",\"authors\":\"Khushbu Y Patel, Laurie M Wilcox, Laurence T Maloney, Krista A Ehinger, Jaykishan Y Patel, Richard F Murray\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13428-025-02688-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Several previous studies have found significant differences between visual perception in real and virtual environments. Given the increasing use of virtual reality (VR) in performance-critical applications such as medical training and vision research, it is important to understand these differences. Here, we compared lightness constancy in physical and VR environments using a task where viewers matched the reflectance of a fronto-parallel match patch to the reflectance of a reference patch at a range of 3D orientations relative to a light source. We used a custom-built physical apparatus and four VR conditions: (1) All-Cue (replicating the physical apparatus), (2) Reduced-Depth (no disparity or parallax), (3) Shadowless (no cast shadows), and (4) Reduced-Context (no surrounding objects). Lightness constancy was markedly better in the physical condition than in all four VR conditions. Surprisingly, viewers achieved a degree of lightness constancy even in the Reduced-Context condition, despite the absence of lighting cues. In a follow-up experiment, we re-tested the All-Cue and Reduced-Context conditions in VR with new observers, each participating in only one condition. Here, we found lower levels of constancy than in the first experiment, suggesting that experience across multiple experimental settings and possibly exposure to the physical apparatus during instructions had enhanced performance. We conclude that even when robust lighting and shape cues are available, lightness constancy is substantially better in real environments than in virtual environments. We consider possible explanations for this finding, such as the imperfect models of materials and lighting that are used for rendering in real-time VR.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavior Research Methods\",\"volume\":\"57 6\",\"pages\":\"170\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavior Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02688-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02688-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

之前的一些研究已经发现了真实和虚拟环境中视觉感知的显著差异。鉴于在医疗培训和视觉研究等性能关键应用中越来越多地使用虚拟现实(VR),了解这些差异非常重要。在这里,我们通过一个任务比较了物理和VR环境中的亮度常数,在这个任务中,观众在相对于光源的3D方向范围内将正面平行匹配补丁的反射率与参考补丁的反射率相匹配。我们使用了定制的物理设备和四种VR条件:(1)All-Cue(复制物理设备),(2)Reduced-Depth(无视差或视差),(3)Shadowless(无投射阴影)和(4)Reduced-Context(无周围物体)。物理条件下的亮度稳定性明显优于所有四种VR条件。令人惊讶的是,即使在没有灯光提示的情况下,观众也能在一定程度上保持亮度不变。在后续实验中,我们用新的观察者重新测试了VR中的All-Cue和Reduced-Context条件,每个观察者只参与一个条件。在这里,我们发现与第一个实验相比,稳定性水平较低,这表明跨越多个实验环境的经验以及可能在指令期间接触物理设备的经验提高了表现。我们得出的结论是,即使有强大的照明和形状线索,真实环境中的亮度稳定性也比虚拟环境好得多。我们考虑了对这一发现的可能解释,例如用于实时VR渲染的材料和照明的不完美模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An equivalent illuminant analysis of lightness constancy with physical objects and in virtual reality.

Several previous studies have found significant differences between visual perception in real and virtual environments. Given the increasing use of virtual reality (VR) in performance-critical applications such as medical training and vision research, it is important to understand these differences. Here, we compared lightness constancy in physical and VR environments using a task where viewers matched the reflectance of a fronto-parallel match patch to the reflectance of a reference patch at a range of 3D orientations relative to a light source. We used a custom-built physical apparatus and four VR conditions: (1) All-Cue (replicating the physical apparatus), (2) Reduced-Depth (no disparity or parallax), (3) Shadowless (no cast shadows), and (4) Reduced-Context (no surrounding objects). Lightness constancy was markedly better in the physical condition than in all four VR conditions. Surprisingly, viewers achieved a degree of lightness constancy even in the Reduced-Context condition, despite the absence of lighting cues. In a follow-up experiment, we re-tested the All-Cue and Reduced-Context conditions in VR with new observers, each participating in only one condition. Here, we found lower levels of constancy than in the first experiment, suggesting that experience across multiple experimental settings and possibly exposure to the physical apparatus during instructions had enhanced performance. We conclude that even when robust lighting and shape cues are available, lightness constancy is substantially better in real environments than in virtual environments. We consider possible explanations for this finding, such as the imperfect models of materials and lighting that are used for rendering in real-time VR.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.30%
发文量
266
期刊介绍: Behavior Research Methods publishes articles concerned with the methods, techniques, and instrumentation of research in experimental psychology. The journal focuses particularly on the use of computer technology in psychological research. An annual special issue is devoted to this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信