Exploring the validity of using immersive virtual reality technique on perceived crowding of recreational environment

• Published in: Landscape and ecological engineering Vol. 17; no. 3; pp. 299 - 308
• Main Authors: Wang, Ting-Hsuan, Wu, Wan-Hsuan, Shen, Li, Cheng, Chia-Kuen
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Tokyo Springer Japan 01.07.2021; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Biomedical and Life Sciences; Civil Engineering; Computer applications; Crowding; Environmental Management; Evaluation; Immersive virtual reality; Landscape Ecology; Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning; Life Sciences; Nature Conservation; New technology; Onsite; Plant Ecology; Polls & surveys; Sensitivity analysis; Special Feature: Original Paper; Virtual reality; Visual approach; Validity; Immersive virtual reality
• ISSN: 1860-1871; 1860-188X
• DOI: 10.1007/s11355-020-00422-x

Perceived crowding is one of the important evaluative factors for environment quality. As a result, understanding the levels of perceived crowding is highly valued in recreation. According to previous studies, the earliest way to measure perceived crowding is to use the 9-point Likert scale. The smaller the figure, the less the users feel crowded on the spot. However, there are also different methods used in those studies to discuss the relationships between user's perceived crowding and other variables; including on-site survey, mail survey, picture simulation or virtual reality (VR). Among those different methods, as the new technology, VR may be considered the an appropriate research tool for the front-country crowing studies. In order to eliminating the limitations imposed by previous studies on measuring perceived crowding and understanding the potential of using IVR technology to measure perceived crowding. We used three studies to discuss the difference between photos and IVR, the difference between on-site experience and IVR, and the difference between on-site photo and VE in IVR method. This study progressively proves that: 1) IVR was more sensitive than photo evaluation method, and 2) IVR was not different from the on-site experience. 3) When IVR is used for research, there was no difference between on-site photo and VE. The results suggested that IVR might be more close to real on-site perceived crowding than traditional photo method; and it is possible to use 3D simulations in IVR.