Comparative evaluation of display technologies for collaborative design review

Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 125-138

  Hou, Ming ^a   Hollands, Justin G ^a   Scipione, Andrea ^b   Magee, Lochlan ^a   Greenley, Mike ^b  

^a DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CANADA   (Canada)

^b CAE Professional Services   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 68149096713     PISSN: 10547460     EISSN: 15313263     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/pres.18.2.125     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Barfield, W., Zeltzer, D., Sheridan, T., & Slater, M. (1995). Presence and performance within virtual environments. In W. Barfield & T. A. Furness III (Eds.), Virtual environments and advanced interface design (pp. 474-513). New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bolstad, C. A., & Endsley, M. R. (1999). Information dissonance, shared mental models and shared displays: An empirical evaluation of information dominance techniques (AFRL-HE-WP-TR-1999-0213). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force Research Laboratory.
3. Bowman, D. A., Datey, A., Young, S. R., Umer, F., & Omar, V. (2002). Empirical comparison of human behaviour and performance with different display devices for virtual environments. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 2134-2138). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
4. Brooks, F. (1999). What's real about virtual reality? IEEE Computer Graphics & Applications, 19(6), 16-27.
5. Commission of the European Communities. (2000). Commission recommendation on safe and efficient in-vehicle information and communication systems: A European statement of principles on human machine interface. Brussels, Belgium: European Union.
6. Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D. J., & DeFanti, T. A. (1993). Surround-screen projection-based virtual reality: The design and implementation of the CAVE. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, SIGGRAPH '93 (pp. 135-142). New York: ACM.
7. Dede, C., Salzman, M. C., & Loftin, R. B. (1996). Maxwell World: Learning complex scientific concepts via immersion in virtual reality. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 22-29). New York: Academic Press.
8. Dynott, R., Lemoine, P., Piechulla W., Stefani, O., Wakula, J., & Williams, M. (2002). Virtual reality systems for perceived ergonomic quality testing of driving task and design (Tech. Rep. No. 3). Regensburg, Germany: Universität Regensburg, Traffic Research Group.
9. Green, P., Levison, W., Paelke, G., & Serafin, C. (1994). Suggested human factors design guidelines for driver information systems (Tech. Rep. UMTRI-93-21). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan, Transportation Research Institute.
10. Howell, D. C. (1999). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences (4th ed). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
11. Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. (2000). Guideline for in-vehicle display systems. Tokyo, Japan: JAMA.
12. Keppel, G. (1982). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
13. Kocian, D. F., & Task, H. L. (1995). Visually coupled systems hardware and the human interface. In W. Barfield & T. A. Furness III (Eds.) Virtual environments and advanced interface design (pp. 175-257). New York: Oxford University Press.
14. McCormick, E. P., Wickens, C. D., Banks, R., & Yeh, M. (1998). Frame of reference effects on scientific visualization subtasks. Human Factors, 40, 443-451.
15. Olmos, O., Wickens, C. D., & Chudy, A. (2000). Tactical displays for combat awareness: An examination of dimensionality and frame of reference concepts and the application of cognitive engineering. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 10, 247-271.
16. Owen, S. (1999). HyperVIS: Teaching scientific visualisation using hypermedia. Report to the Project of the ACM SIGGRAPH Education Committee, the National Science Foundation, and the Hypermedia and Visualization Laboratory, Georgia State University.
17. Peterson, B., Wells, M., Furness, T. A., III, & Hunt, E. (1998). The effects of the interface on navigation in virtual environments. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting (pp. 1496-1500). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
18. Planchard, D. C., & Planchard, M. P. (2001). Engineering design with SolidWorks 2001. Mission, KS: Schroff Development Corporation.
19. Snow, M. P., & Williges, R. C. (1997). Empirical modeling of perceived presence in virtual environments using sequential exploratory techniques. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomic Society 41st Annual Meeting (pp. 1224-1228). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
20. Tickoo, S. (2002). Pro/Engineer for designers. Schererville, IN: Cadcim Technologies.
21. Werkhoven, P. J., & Groen, J. (1998). Manipulation performance in interactive virtual environments. Human Factors, 40,432-442.
22. Wickens, C. D. (2000). The when and how of using 2-D and 3-D displays for operational tasks. In Proceedings of the IEA2000/HFES 2000 Congress, 3 (pp. 403-406). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
23. Wickens, C. D., & Hollands, J. G. (2000). Engineering psychology and human performance (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
24. Wickens, C. D., Thomas, L., Merlo, J., & Hah, S. (1999). Immersion and battlefield visualization: Does it influence cognitive tunnelling. In Proceedings of the Third Annual Army Federated Lab Symposium. College Park, MD: US Army Research Federated Lab Consortium.
25. Woods, D. D. (1984). Visual momentum: A concept to improve the cognitive coupling of person and computer. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 21, 229-244.