Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Depth Perception and Spatial Vision

Depth Perception and Spatial Vision

Depth perception is the ability to perceive objects three-dimensionally. It relies on two types of cues: binocular and monocular. Binocular cues depend on the combination of images from both eyes and how the eyes work together. Since the eyes are in slightly different positions, each eye captures a slightly different image. This disparity between images, known as binocular disparity, helps the brain interpret depth. When the brain compares these images, it determines the distance to an object.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Insights into knowledge evolution based on semantic representation and dynamic visual analytics.

Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.))·2026

Same author

Enhancing User Experience in Virtual Reality Through Optical Flow Simplification with the Help of Physiological Measurements: Pilot Study.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026

Same author

Environment Spatial Restitution for Remote Physical AR Collaboration.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2025

Same author

The Influence of Virtual Forest Walk on Physiological and Psychological Responses.

International journal of environmental research and public health·2021

Same author

Enhancement of Anticipatory Postural Adjustments by Virtual Reality in Older Adults with Cognitive and Motor Deficits: A Randomised Trial.

Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland)·2021

Same author

Frontal Electroencephalogram Alpha Asymmetry during Mental Stress Related to Workplace Noise.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2021

Same journal

Virtual reality enhances affective valence and attentional dissociation during exercise but not exercise-induced hypoalgesia.

Virtual reality·2026

Same journal

Beyond flatland: naturalistic three-dimensional stimuli and visual working memory processing.

Virtual reality·2026

Same journal

A grounded study in user preference for immersive sound in extended reality environments.

Virtual reality·2026

Same journal

Cross-modal synchrony between music and visual motion modulates vection, urge to move, and comfort in VR.

Virtual reality·2026

Same journal

XR body illusion for managing pain in fibromyalgia: examining optimal duration.

Virtual reality·2026

Same journal

Stressful urban walks: an experimental design for measuring physiological and psychological stress in virtual urban environments.

Virtual reality·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 25, 2025

An Open-Source Virtual Reality System for the Measurement of Spatial Learning in Head-Restrained Mice

An Open-Source Virtual Reality System for the Measurement of Spatial Learning in Head-Restrained Mice

Published on: March 3, 2023

CAVE and HMD: distance perception comparative study.

Théo Combe¹, Jean-Rémy Chardonnet¹, Frédéric Merienne¹

¹Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, LISPEN, HESAM Université, UBFC, F-71100, 2 Rue Thomas Dumorey, 71100 Chalon-sur-Saône, France.

Virtual Reality

|June 26, 2023

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

This study compares user experience with Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE) and Head-Mounted Display (HMD) systems. HMD weight did not affect distance perception, and both systems showed similar results for short-distance interaction tasks.

Keywords:

CAVE Distance perception HMD Interaction paradigms Virtual reality

More Related Videos

Human Fear Conditioning Conducted in Full Immersion 3-Dimensional Virtual Reality

Human Fear Conditioning Conducted in Full Immersion 3-Dimensional Virtual Reality

Published on: August 9, 2010

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios

Published on: October 6, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 25, 2025

An Open-Source Virtual Reality System for the Measurement of Spatial Learning in Head-Restrained Mice

An Open-Source Virtual Reality System for the Measurement of Spatial Learning in Head-Restrained Mice

Published on: March 3, 2023

Human Fear Conditioning Conducted in Full Immersion 3-Dimensional Virtual Reality

Human Fear Conditioning Conducted in Full Immersion 3-Dimensional Virtual Reality

Published on: August 9, 2010

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios

Published on: October 6, 2020

Area of Science:

Virtual Reality
Human-Computer Interaction
Immersive Technologies

Background:

Comparative studies on user experience with different immersive devices are lacking.
Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE) and Head-Mounted Display (HMD) are prominent virtual reality technologies.
Understanding user experience differences is crucial for designing effective immersive applications.

Purpose of the Study:

To compare user experience between CAVE and HMD systems.
To investigate the impact of device type on visualization and interaction.
To analyze differences in distance perception between CAVE and HMD.

Main Methods:

Two experiments were conducted using CAVE and HMD systems.
Experiment 1 assessed distance perception during walking, considering HMD weight.
Experiment 2 evaluated distance perception in short-distance interaction tasks.

Main Results:

HMD weight did not significantly impact distance perception over distances greater than three meters.
Both CAVE and HMD systems resulted in significant underestimation of distances.
No significant differences in distance perception were found between CAVE and HMD systems for short-distance interaction.

Conclusions:

HMD weight is not a significant factor for distance perception in walking tasks beyond three meters.
User experience regarding distance perception is comparable between CAVE and HMD systems.
This research contributes to understanding the nuances of user experience with different immersive virtual reality displays.