One of the more debated issues regarding training simulators is their validity for transfer of skills to sensory environments that differ from the simulator. In two experiments, the advantages of three-dimensional (3D) and collocated (Col) visual displays were evaluated in a realistic and complex visuomotor task. The two factors were evaluated independently, comparing Col-2D with dislocated-2D (experiment 1) and with Col-3D (experiment 2). As expected, in both cases the more immersive presentation condition facilitated better performance. Furthermore, improvement following training in the more immersive condition carried over to the following less immersive condition but there was no carry over in the opposing order of presentation. This is taken as an indication for the differential development of skills conditioned by the level of immersiveness of the training environment. This further suggests that learning of complex realistic tasks is not carried over from less immersive simulator to the complex sensory environment of reality, due to the large gap in sensory patterns. 1. Introduction Virtual environments of various levels of immersiveness are widely used for training. One of the more debated issues regarding training simulators is their validity for transfer of skills to sensory environments that differ from the simulator. The question of validity is composed of two underlying questions: what is the quality of learning using training simulators, and what is the quality of transfer of manual skills from a training simulator to real life tasks. The first relates to the characteristics of the simulator—whether it provides the sensory cues needed for optimal learning. The second is especially crucial: it is the newly acquired skills exported to new, less or more immersive sensory environments? For instance does training on surgical incisions in “Flatandia” type of world [1], a two-dimensional screen without touch, carry over to space-land (ibid), a 3-dimensional virtual world with haptics? The first being evolutionary alien, while the second is friendly and well experienced. The skills for successful performance in each do not overlap. An additional level of learning and transfer difficulty is added when haptics is dislocated from the visual cues. For instance, if playing virtual tennis, you feel the ball hitting your arm, but see the hit on your iphone. Dislocation and flatness change drastically the sensory input in the active exploration cycle [2]. The active exploration cycle refers to the continuous cyclic process that involves sensory scanning,
References
[1]
E. A. Abbott, Flatland: A Romance in Many Dimensions, Dover Thrift Edition (1992 Unabridged), New York, NY, USA, 1884.
[2]
M. Reiner, “The role of haptics in immersive telecommunication environments,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 392–401, 2004.
[3]
D. Hecht, M. Reiner, and A. Karni, “Multisensory enhancement: gains in choice and in simple response times,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 189, no. 2, pp. 133–143, 2008.
[4]
D. Hecht, M. Reiner, and A. Karni, “Repetition priming for multisensory stimuli: task-irrelevant and task-relevant stimuli are associated if semantically related but with no advantage over uni-sensory stimuli,” Brain Research, vol. 1251, pp. 236–244, 2009.
[5]
D. Hecht and M. Reiner, “Stroop interference and facilitation effects in kinesthetic and haptic tasks,” Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 2010, Article ID 852420, 2010.
[6]
D. Hecht, M. Reiner, and A. Karni, “Enhancement of response times to bi- and tri-modal sensory stimuli during active movements,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 185, no. 4, pp. 655–665, 2008.
[7]
D. D. Lev, R. Rozengurt, T. Gelfeld, A. Tarchenshvili, and M. Reiner, “The effects of 3d collocated presentation of visuo-haptic information on performance in a complex realistic visuo-motor task,” in Haptics: Generating and Perceiving Tangible Sensations (EuroHaptics '10), A. M. L. Kappers, J. B. F. van Erp, W. M. B. Tiest, and F. C. T. van der Helm, Eds., pp. 432–437, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2010.
[8]
R. Held, A. Efstathiou, and M. Greene, “Adaptation to displaced and delayed visual feedback from the hand,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 887–891, 1966.
[9]
A. S. Kornheiser, “Adaptation to laterally displaced vision: a review,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 83, no. 5, pp. 783–816, 1976.
[10]
R. Arsenault and C. Ware, “The importance of stereo and eye-coupled perspective for eye-hand coordination in fish tank VR,” Presence, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 549–559, 2004.
[11]
D. Swapp, V. Pawar, and C. Loscos, “Interaction with co-located haptic feedback in virtual reality,” Virtual Reality, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 24–30, 2006.
[12]
P. M. Fitts, “The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 381–391, 1954.
[13]
R. J. Teather, R. S. Allison, and W. Stuerzlinger, “Evaluating visual/motor co-location in fish-tank virtual reality,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Toronto International Conference—Science and Technology for Humanity (TIC-STH '09), pp. 624–629, September 2009.
[14]
O. Ben-Porat, M. Shoham, and J. Meyer, “Control design and task performance in endoscopic teleoperation,” Presence, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 256–267, 2000.
[15]
P. M. Fitts and R. L. Deininger, “S-R compatibility: correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 483–492, 1954.
[16]
R. Berguer, D. L. Forkey, and W. D. Smith, “Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery,” Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 466–468, 1999.
[17]
K. T. den Boer, T. de Jong, J. Dankelman, and D. J. Gouma, “Problems with laparoscopic instruments: opinions of experts,” Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques A, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 149–155, 2001.
[18]
M. Silvennoinen, J. P. Mecklin, P. Saariluoma, and T. Antikainen, “Expertise and skill in minimally invasive surgery,” Scandinavian Journal of Surgery, vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 209–213, 2009.
[19]
M. Wentink, J. J. Jakimowicz, L. M. Vos, D. W. Meijer, and P. A. Wieringa, “Quantitative evaluation of three advanced laparoscopic viewing technologies: a stereo endoscope, an image projection display, and a TFT display: do these new viewing technologies improve depth perception and hand-eye coordination?” Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1237–1241, 2002.
[20]
B. Zheng, Z. Janmohamed, and C. L. MacKenzie, “Reaction times and the decision-making process in endoscopic surgery: an experimental study,” Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 1475–1480, 2003.
