With the increasing complexity of the road traffic system, GPS has become indispensable for many people, especially car drivers. However, using a GPS device while driving can be distracting and increase the cognitive load on the driver, leading to decreased navigation performance and potential safety hazards. To improve navigation performance and reduce the cognitive load caused by using GPS navigation, it is important to design a user-friendly interface. Numerous studies have examined the effects of physical factors, such as visual clutter, on drivers' navigation performance, but less attention has been paid to mental factors such as drivers' sense of immersion. According to the Embodied Cognitive Theory, immersion in the environment provides people with a spatial reference representation of the world, thus affecting their performance on tasks. As a result, it is important to consider both physical and mental factors when designing a user-friendly GPS interface.
In this study, we used static images of driving scenes to simulate real-world driving scenarios and recruited 30 and 28 participants for Experiments 1 and 2, respectively. In Experiment 1, we aimed to examine the effects of visual clutter and immersion on participants’ navigation performance. We manipulated visual clutter by varying the amount of detail in the picture and manipulated immersion by adjusting the angle of view with the horizon. In Experiment 2, we further examined the effect of participants' spatial reference frames (egocentric or allocentric) on navigation performance, while manipulating the level of immersion under the condition of low clutter. In both experiments, navigation performance was assessed using several indices, including reaction time (RT), number of fixations, time spent on areas of interest (AOIs), heart rate (HR), skin conductivity (SC), and subjective rating scores.
In Experiment 1, we observed that regardless of the level of immersion, participants performed better when the interface had low clutter, as indicated by faster response times, fewer fixation points, and lower cognitive load. This suggests that participants were more focused on extracting effective navigation information. However, when the interface had high clutter, performance improved with higher levels of immersion, as shown by faster response times, shorter duration of Areas of Interest (AOIs), and a higher preference level. Building upon these findings, Experiment 2 further demonstrated the beneficial effects of high immersion levels. Participants performed better when using an egocentric reference frame, as evidenced by faster response times, lower cognitive load, and higher preference. These results are consistent with the theory of embodied cognition.
In conclusion, our study demonstrated the impact of visual clutter, level of immersion, and spatial reference frame on navigation performance. The results suggest that designers could consider developing GPS interfaces with low display clutter and high levels of immersion to improve navigation performance. These findings contribute to our understanding of the cognitive mechanisms and human-computer interaction processes involved in navigation interfaces, and they may have practical implications for improving navigation performance. Future studies can be conducted in tasks that more closely replicate real-world driving scenarios, such as driving simulations or on-road experiments, to increase ecological validity and explore the influence of immersion on navigation performance in more detail.
Key words
display clutter /
immersion /
spatial reference frame /
navigation performance /
embodied cognition
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] 房慧聪, 周琳. (2012). 性别、寻路策略与导航方式对寻路行为的影响. 心理学报, 44(8), 1058-1065.
[2] 姬鸣. (2012). 任务优先及中断——基于“专家”飞行员的CTM失误研究 (博士学位论文). 陕西师范大学,西安.
[3] 刘丽虹, 张积家, 王惠萍. (2005). 习惯的空间术语对空间认知的影响. 心理学报, 37(4), 469-475.
[4] 叶浩生. (2010). 具身认知: 认知心理学的新取向. 心理科学进展, 18(5), 705-710.
[5] 叶浩生. (2014). “具身”涵义的理论辨析. 心理学报, 46(7), 1032-1042.
[6] 余萌, 李晶. (2021). 涉空对话中表征对齐的产生机制. 心理科学进展, 29(3), 450-459.
[7] Bacim F., Ragan E., Scerbo S., Polys N. F., Setareh M., & Jones B. D. (2013). The effects of display fidelity, visual complexity, and task scope on spatial understanding of 3D graphs. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface. Sascatchewan, Regina, Canada.
[8] Bowman, D. A., & McMahan, R. P. (2007). Virtual reality: How much immersion is enough? Computer, 40(7), 36-43.
[9] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
[10] Faul F., Erdfelder E., Lang A. -G., & Buchner A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
[11] Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Houghton Mifflin.
[12] Gopher D.,& Koriat, A. (1999). Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application The MIT Press Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application. The MIT Press.
[13] Gorisse G., Christmann O., Amato E. A., & Richir S. (2017). First- and third-person perspectives in immersive virtual environments: Presence and performance analysis of embodied users. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 4, Article 33.
[14] Gramann K., Müller H. J., Eick E. M., & Schönebeck B. (2005). Evidence of separable spatial representations in a virtual navigation task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(6), 1199-1223.
[15] Gugerty, L., & Brooks, J. (2004). Reference-frame misalignment and cardinal direction judgments: Group differences and strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10(2), 75-88.
[16] Guo F., Cao Y. Q., Ding Y., Liu W. L., & Zhang X. F. (2015). A multimodal measurement method of users' emotional experiences shopping online. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industries, 25(5), 585-598.
[17] Jennett C., Cox A. L., Cairns P., Dhoparee S., Epps A., Tijs T., & Walton A. (2008). Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(9), 641-661.
[18] Jund T., Capobianco A., & Larue F. (2016). Impact of frame of reference on memorization in virtual environments. In 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. Austin, TX, USA.
[19] Kaber D. B., Alexander A. L., Stelzer E. M., Kim S. H., Kaufmann K., & Hsiang S. (2008). Perceived clutter in advanced cockpit displays: Measurement and modeling with experienced pilots. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 79(11), 1007-1018.
[20] Kaber D. B., Kaufmann K., Alexander A. L., Kim S.-H., Naylor J. T., Prinzel III L. J., & Gil G. H. (2013). Testing and validation of a psychophysically defined metric of display clutter. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, 10(8), 359-368.
[21] Lawton, C. A. (1994). Gender differences in way-finding strategies: Relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles, 30(11-12), 765-779.
[22] Liu, Y., & Lourenco, S. F. (2021). Visual perception of apparent motion abides by minimization principles of geometry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 47(9), 1247-1252.
[23] McNamara, T. P. (2003). How are the locations of objects in the environment represented in memory? In C. Freksa, W. Brauer, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (Eds.), Spatial cognition III: Routes and navigation, human memory and learning, spatial representation and spatial learning (pp. 174-191). Springer.
[24] Moacdieh, N., & Sarter, N. (2015). Clutter in electronic medical records: Examining its performance and attentional costs using eye tracking. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(4), 591-606.
[25] Nash E. B., Edwards G. W., Thompson J. A., & Barfield W. (2000). A review of presence and performance in virtual environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 12(1), 1-41.
[26] Norman, D. (1986). Cognitive engineering. In D. A. Norman & S. Draper (Eds.), User centered system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction (pp. 31-61). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[27] Paillard, J. (1991). Motor and representational framing of space. In J. Paillard (Ed.), Brain and space (pp. 163-182). Oxford University Press.
[28] Pankok C., Jr., & Kaber D. (2017). Influence of task knowledge and display features on driver attention to cluttered navigation displays. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 61(1), 1768-1772.
[29] Pankok C., Jr., & Kaber D. (2018). The effect of navigation display clutter on performance and attention allocation in presentation- and simulator-based driving experiments. Applied Ergonomics, 69, 136-145.
[30] Pazzaglia, F., & De Beni, R. (2001). Strategies of processing spatial information in survey and landmark-centred individuals. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13(4), 493-508.
[31] Pérez-Edgar K., MacNeill L. A., & Fu X. X. (2020). Navigating through the experienced environment: Insights from mobile eye tracking. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 286-292.
[32] Raja D., Bowman D. A., Lucas J., & North C. (2004). Exploring the benefits of immersion in abstract information visualization. In Proceedings of the 8th Immersive Projection Technology Workshop. Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
[33] Schneider, G. E. (1969). Two visual systems: Brain mechanisms for localization and discrimination are dissociated by tectal and cortical lesions. Science, 163(3870), 895-902.
[34] Sedgwick, H. A. (2021). JJ Gibson' s “Ground theory of space perception”. i-Perception, 12(3), 1-55.
[35] Sholl M. J. (2001). The role of a self-reference system in spatial navigation. In Proceedings of International Conference on Spatial Information Theory: Foundations of Geographic Information Science. Springer, Morro Bay, CA, USA.
[36] Siegel, A. W., & White, S. H. (1975). The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 10, 9-55.
[37] Sinatra A. M., Pollard K. A., Oiknine A., Patton D., Ericson M., & Dalangin B. (2020). The impact of immersion level and virtual reality experience on outcomes from navigating in a virtual environment. In Proceedings of the SPIE 11426, Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality (XR) Technology for Multi-Domain Operations. SPIE, Online, USA
[38] Vasquez H. M., Hollands J. G., Jamieson G. A., & Agnew M. J. (2022). A mirror in the sky: The effects of map format and user expertise on navigation performance and mental workload. Ergonomics, 65(4), 604-617.
[39] Vincow, M. A., & Wickens, C. D. (1998). Frame of reference and navigation through document visualizations: Flying through information space. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 42(5), 511-515.
[40] Weibel R. P., Grübel J., Zhao H. T., Thrash T., Meloni D., Hölscher C., & Schinazi V. R. (2018). Virtual reality experiments with physiological measures. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 138, Article 58318.
[41] Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 159-177.
[42] Wickens, C. D., & Long, J. (1995). Object versus space-based models of visual attention: Implications for the design of head-up displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1(3), 179-193.
[43] Wickens C. D., Thomas L. C., & Young R. (2000). Frames of reference for the display of battlefield information: Judgment-display dependencies. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 42(4), 660-675.
PDF(1390 KB)
