10.1145/3359996.3364248acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesvrstConference Proceedings
research-article
Free Access

Investigating the Detection of Bimanual Haptic Retargeting in Virtual Reality

ABSTRACT

Haptic retargeting is a virtual reality (VR) interaction technique enabling virtual objects to be ”remapped” to different haptic proxies by offsetting the user’s virtual hand from their physical hand. While researchers have investigated single-hand retargeting, the effects of bimanual interaction in the context of haptic retargeting have been less explored. In this study, we present an evaluation of perceptual detection rates for bimanual haptic retargeting in VR. We tested 64 combinations of simultaneous left- and right-hand retargeting ranging from − 24° to + 24° offsets and found that bimanual retargeting can be more noticeable to users when the hands are redirected in different directions as opposed to the same direction.

References

  1. ”Oculus Rift”. https://www.oculus.com/rift/. Accessed: 2019-07-13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. ”OptiTrack Prime 13”. https://optitrack.com/products/prime-13/. Accessed: 2019-07-13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Parastoo Abtahi and Sean Follmer. 2018. Visuo-Haptic Illusions for Improving the Perceived Performance of Shape Displays. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 150.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Mahdi Azmandian, Mark Hancock, Hrvoje Benko, Eyal Ofek, and Andrew D Wilson. 2016. Haptic retargeting: Dynamic repurposing of passive haptics for enhanced virtual reality experiences. In Proceedings of the 2016 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1968–1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Eric Burns, Sharif Razzaque, Abigail T Panter, Mary C Whitton, Matthew R McCallus, and Frederick P Brooks. 2005. The hand is slower than the eye: A quantitative exploration of visual dominance over proprioception. In IEEE Proceedings. VR 2005. Virtual Reality, 2005.IEEE, 3–10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Lung-Pan Cheng, Eyal Ofek, Christian Holz, Hrvoje Benko, and Andrew D Wilson. 2017. Sparse haptic proxy: Touch feedback in virtual environments using a general passive prop. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3718–3728.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Simone Cardoso de Oliveira and Sébastien Barthélémy. 2005. Visual feedback reduces bimanual coupling of movement amplitudes, but not of directions. Experimental brain research 162, 1 (2005), 78–88.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jörn Diedrichsen, Rohit Nambisan, Steve W Kennerley, and Richard B Ivry. 2004. Independent on-line control of the two hands during bimanual reaching. European Journal of Neuroscience 19, 6 (March 2004), 1643–1652.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Walter H Ehrenstein and Addie Ehrenstein. 1999. Psychophysical methods. In Modern techniques in neuroscience research. Springer, 1211–1241.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. James J Gibson. 1933. Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of curved lines.Journal of experimental psychology 16, 1 (1933), 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dustin T Han, Mohamed Suhail, and Eric D Ragan. 2018. Evaluating remapped physical reach for hand interactions with passive haptics in virtual reality. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 24, 4(2018), 1467–1476.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Hunter G Hoffman. 1998. Physically touching virtual objects using tactile augmentation enhances the realism of virtual environments. In Proceedings. IEEE 1998 Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (Cat. No. 98CB36180). IEEE, 59–63.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Brent Edward Insko. 2001. Passive Haptics Significantly Enhances Virtual Environments. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Shailesh Kantak, Steven Jax, and George Wittenberg. 2017. Bimanual coordination: A missing piece of arm rehabilitation after stroke. Restorative neurology and neuroscience 35, 4 (2017), 347–364.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacqlyn King and Andrew Karduna. 2014. Joint position sense during a reaching task improves at targets located closer to the head but is unaffected by instruction. Experimental Brain Research 232, 3 (01 Mar 2014), 865–874. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3799-3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Luv Kohli. 2010. Redirected touching: Warping space to remap passive haptics. In 2010 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). IEEE, 129–130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Luv Kohli. 2013. Redirected touching. Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Thomas H Massie, J Kenneth Salisbury, 1994. The phantom haptic interface: A device for probing virtual objects. In Proceedings of the ASME winter annual meeting, symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems, Vol. 55. Citeseer, 295–300.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Brandon J Matthews, Bruce H Thomas, Stewart Von Itzstein, and Ross T Smith. 2019. Remapped Physical-Virtual Interfaces with Bimanual Haptic Retargeting. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. William A McNeely. 1993. Robotic graphics: a new approach to force feedback for virtual reality. In Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium. IEEE, 336–341.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Kristina Neely, Gordon Binsted, and Matthew Heath. 2005. Manual asymmetries in bimanual reaching: The influence of spatial compatibility and visuospatial attention. Brain and Cognition 57, 1 (2005), 102–105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Gonçalo Padrao, Mar Gonzalez-Franco, Maria V Sanchez-Vives, Mel Slater, and Antoni Rodriguez-Fornells. 2016. Violating body movement semantics: Neural signatures of self-generated and external-generated errors. Neuroimage 124(2016), 147–156.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Stephan Riek, James R Tresilian, M Mon-Williams, Vanessa L Coppard, and Richard G Carson. 2003. Bimanual aiming and overt attention: one law for two hands. Experimental brain research 153, 1 (2003), 59–75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Adalberto L Simeone, Eduardo Velloso, and Hans Gellersen. 2015. Substitutional reality: Using the physical environment to design virtual reality experiences. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3307–3316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. William A Simpson. 1988. The method of constant stimuli is efficient. Perception & psychophysics 44, 5 (1988), 433–436.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Alexa F Siu, Eric J Gonzalez, Shenli Yuan, Jason B Ginsberg, and Sean Follmer. 2018. Shapeshift: 2D spatial manipulation and self-actuation of tabletop shape displays for tangible and haptic interaction. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 291.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Richard Stoakley, Matthew J Conway, and Randy Pausch. 1995. Virtual reality on a WIM: interactive worlds in miniature. In CHI, Vol. 95. 265–272.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Felix A Wichmann and N Jeremy Hill. 2001. The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling. Perception & psychophysics 63, 8 (2001), 1314–1329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. André Zenner and Antonio Krüger. 2019. Estimating Detection Thresholds for Desktop-Scale Hand Redirection in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality 2019. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Yiwei Zhao and Sean Follmer. 2018. A Functional Optimization Based Approach for Continuous 3D Retargeted Touch of Arbitrary, Complex Boundaries in Haptic Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format

Access Granted

The conference sponsors are committed to making content openly accessible in a timely manner.
This article is provided by ACM and the conference, through the ACM OpenTOC service.
About Cookies On This Site

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

Learn more

Got it!