The Nature of Difference in User Behavior Between Real and Virtual Environment: A Preliminary Study

  • Takehiko YamaguchiEmail author
  • Hiroki Iwadare
  • Kazuya Kamijo
  • Daiji Kobayashi
  • Tetsuya Harada
  • Makoto Sato
  • Sakae Yamamoto
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10904)


In this study, we examined the effect of different types of behavioral strategy on performance as well as on behavior in three types of different information representation method such as real task environment, VR-based task environment, and MR-based task environment in order to identify some features that enable to be applied for performance-based/behavioral-based measurement for the characterization of the SoE and its sub-components. As the results, we found that there was a significant difference in task performance such as time completion time, and parameter of time-to-collision distribution, as well as on user behavior such as decomposed motion data.


The sense of embodiment Virtual reality Singular value decomposition method 



This work was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) from Ministry of Education, Japan, Grant Number: 17H01782.


  1. 1.
    Satava, R.M.: Virtual reality surgical simulator. Surg. Endosc. 7, 203–205 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bainbridge, W.S.: The scientific research potential of virtual worlds. Science 317, 472–476 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fink, P.W., Foo, P.S., Warren, W.H.: Catching fly balls in virtual reality: a critical test of the outfielder problem. J. Vis. 9, 14 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Banakou, D., Groten, R., Slater, M.: Illusory ownership of a virtual child body causes overestimation of object sizes and implicit attitude changes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 12846–12851 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kilteni, K., Groten, R., Slater, M.: The sense of embodiment in virtual reality. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 21, 373–387 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lenggenhager, B., Mouthon, M., Blanke, O.: Spatial aspects of bodily self-consciousness. Conscious. Cogn. 18, 110–117 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blanke, O., Metzinger, T.: Full-body illusions and minimal phenomenal selfhood. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13, 7–13 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Argelaguet, F., Hoyet, L., Trico, M., Lécuyer, A.: The role of interaction in virtual embodiment: effects of the virtual hand representation. In: 2016 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), pp. 3–10. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Longo, M.R., Schüür, F., Kammers, M.P.M., Tsakiris, M., Haggard, P.: What is embodiment? A psychometric approach. Cognition 107, 978–998 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aspell, J.E., Lenggenhager, B., Blanke, O.: Keeping in touch with one’s self: multisensory mechanisms of self-consciousness. PLoS ONE 4, e6488 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee, J.-H., Poliakoff, E., Spence, C.: The effect of multimodal feedback presented via a touch screen on the performance of older adults. In: Altinsoy, M.E., Jekosch, U., Brewster, S. (eds.) HAID 2009. LNCS, vol. 5763, pp. 128–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takehiko Yamaguchi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hiroki Iwadare
    • 1
  • Kazuya Kamijo
    • 1
  • Daiji Kobayashi
    • 2
  • Tetsuya Harada
    • 3
  • Makoto Sato
    • 4
  • Sakae Yamamoto
    • 3
  1. 1.Tokyo University of ScienceChino-CityJapan
  2. 2.Chitose Institute of Science and TechnologyChitoseJapan
  3. 3.Tokyo University of ScienceKatsushika-kuJapan
  4. 4.Tokyo Metropolitan UniversityHino-shiJapan

Personalised recommendations