path preference and path geometry

Download Path preference and path geometry

Post on 06-Jan-2016

23 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Path preference and path geometry. John Zacharias, Concordia University, Montréal (Québec) Canada H3G 1M8 tel: 514-848-2424 ext 2058 e-mail: zachar@vax2.concordia.ca. The research questions: 1. The cognitive map. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

  • Path preference and path geometryJohn Zacharias, Concordia University, Montral (Qubec) Canada H3G 1M8tel: 514-848-2424 ext 2058e-mail: zachar@vax2.concordia.ca

  • The research questions:1. The cognitive mapDo pedestrians make path choices based on cognition of the whole environment, or alternatively, are choices primarily made from information available locally?Do pedestrians tend to move straight ahead; for example, bisecting the environment?Do pedestrians choose pathways offering them more path options?

  • The research questions:2. Environmental contentAre people primarily drawn to pathways and places with signs of human activity?(Zacharias, J. 2001. Path choice and visual stimuli: signs of human activity and architecture. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 341-352)Are people drawn to pathways and places with particular geometry?

  • Indoor city of Montral (22 km corridors)

  • Three intersections in Place Montral-Trust, Montral Indoor city

  • The view down the corridor from the intersection

  • Experiment IParticipants (n=40) are recruited who do not know the Indoor cityThey are asked to freely explore the Indoor city and talk about what they see and why they are making path choicesThe choices are recorded by the research assistant who also records their travel account

  • Experiment I continuedA new group of participants (n=40) is recruitedThey sit individually in the lab and explore the same environment represented in virtual reality (VR)The VR is created using VR Authoring Studio while the choices are recorded manually by the research assistant

  • Expressed preference for path choicesMotivationn%

    People18827Store18627Design9614Light7711Path to new6910Smell193Music51Avoid repeated path91Avoid dead-end91Other101(participants=40; n=668)

    Table 4. Path choice motivation and agreement

    motivation

    n%

    people

    18827

    store

    18627

    design

    9614

    light

    7711

    music

    51

    smell

    193

    path to new

    6910

    non-repeat

    91

    avoid dead-end

    91

    other

    101

  • Directional bias in navigationStraightLeftRightn%n%n%

    Real37138.126827.528629.3

    VR24336.413219.914622.0

  • Search for innovative experienceTotal%Choose same path second timeReal environment55.1VR environment1122.4

    Choose different path second timeReal environment9394.9VR environment3877.6

  • Aggregate distribution of paths selected by participants in the real environment (a) and the VR environment (b)

  • Real vs VR explorationNo difference in path choice is detectable between real and VR exploration11 intersections, 37 path choicesWilcoxon test: +T = 371.5; -T = 331.5; p = .47

    No difference in path choice is detectable in first path choices either10 intersections, 33 path choicesWilcoxon test: +T = 287.5; -T = 307.5; p = .39

  • Boundary relations (BR)For example, do people choose paths that offer them more options for future path choices e.g. more visible path choices?

    Boundary relations in Real: 214; VR: 166

    1 < BR < 5; mean = 1.9

    Real: r = .071, p = .48; VR, r = -.046, p = .65.

  • Experiment IITo test the hypothesis that path preference is related to the visible geometry of the intersection, a hypothetical environment is created with different intersection configurationsThe 3D environment is created in Bryce and exported to VR Authoring StudioParticipants are recruited to freely explore the VR environment for 20 individual path choices

  • VR environment for path choice study

  • VR explorationParticipants navigate using a mouse and can advance into the hallway as well as select a pathway

  • Aggregate choices at intersections

  • ConclusionsParticipants navigate in the VR with a modest preference for straight-ahead choices

    No left- or right-hand bias is detected that is stronger than the straight-ahead bias

    No geometrical configuration resulting in a particular path preference can be detected (in this relatively small sample)