Fig 1.
Snapshot views of the experimental platform.
How individuals were seated, the two monitor positions (sideways and straight ahead), and examples of the 2D (top) and 2D fisheye (bottom) viewing conditions are shown. In the “natural” direct viewing condition, the subject was positioned as in the Oculus head-mounted virtual 3D stereo viewing scenario (left).
Fig 2.
The ideal object trajectory, from position zero to positions one, two, three, four, five, and then back to zero, is indicated by the white line here. Participants had to pick and place a small foam cube with blue top on the centers of the grey target areas in the order shown here, as precisely as possible and as swiftly as possible.
Table 1.
Means (M), standard errors (SEM), and F statistics from the 5-Way ANOVA.
Fig 3.
Data distributions around the medians in the four different viewing conditions.
Data for ‘time’ (top) and ‘precision’ (bottom) from the group with the 2D monitor positioned straight ahead are shown on the left and data from the group with the monitor positioned sideways are shown on the right. Note that in the stereoscopic 3D condition (v4), the viewing monitor is head-mounted and moves along naturally with the head of the subject.
Table 2.
Means (M), standard errors (SEM), and F statistics from the 4-way ANOVA on the data of the "straight ahead" group.
Table 3.
Means (M), standard errors (SEM), and F statistics from the 4-way ANOVA on the data of the "sideways" group.
Fig 4.
Task execution times (top) and pixel-based precision parameters (bottom) are shown as a function of the four different viewing conditions and the two manipulation conditions, for the straight ahead group (left) and the sideways group (right).