The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.04 - April (2013 vol.19)
pp: 583-590
W. Steptoe , Univ. Coll. London, London, UK
A. Steed , Univ. Coll. London, London, UK
M. Slater , ICREA, Univ. of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
ABSTRACT
This paper explores body ownership and control of an 'extended' humanoid avatar that features a distinct and flexible tail-like appendage protruding from its coccyx. Thirty-two participants took part in a between-groups study to puppeteer the avatar in an immersive CAVETM -like system. Participantsa' body movement was tracked, and the avatara's humanoid body synchronously reflected this motion. However, sixteen participants experienced the avatara's tail moving around randomly and asynchronous to their own movement, while the other participants experienced a tail that they could, potentially, control accurately and synchronously through hip movement. Participants in the synchronous condition experienced a higher degree of body ownership and agency, suggesting that visuomotor synchrony enhanced the probability of ownership over the avatar body despite of its extra-human form. Participants experiencing body ownership were also more likely to be more anxious and attempt to avoid virtual threats to the tail and body. The higher task performance of participants in the synchronous condition indicates that people are able to quickly learn how to remap normal degrees of bodily freedom in order to control virtual bodies that differ from the humanoid form. We discuss the implications and applications of extended humanoid avatars as a method for exploring the plasticity of the braina's representation of the body and for gestural human-computer interfaces.
INDEX TERMS
Avatars, Games, Tracking, Hip, Visualization, Educational institutions, Joints,gestural interfaces., Avatars, virtual reality, body ownership, agency, body schema, plasticity
CITATION
W. Steptoe, A. Steed, M. Slater, "Human Tails: Ownership and Control of Extended Humanoid Avatars", IEEE Transactions on Visualization & Computer Graphics, vol.19, no. 4, pp. 583-590, April 2013, doi:10.1109/TVCG.2013.32
REFERENCES
[1] M. Botvinick and J. Cohen., Rubber hands' feel'touch that eyes see. Nature, 391(6669): 756-756, 1998.
[2] S. Canavero, V. Bonicalzi, G. Castellano, P. Perozzo,, and B. Massa-Micon., Painful supernumerary phantom arm following motor cortex stimulation for central poststroke pain. Journal of neurosurgery, 91(1): 121-123, 1999.
[3] H. Ehrsson, C. Spence,, and R. Passingham., That's my hand! activity in premotor cortex reflects feeling of ownership of a limb. Science, 305(5685): 875-877. 2004.
[4] J. Fox and J. Bailenson., Virtual self-modeling: The effects of vicarious reinforcement and identification on exercise behaviors. Media Psychology, 12(1): 1-25, 2009.
[5] M. González-Franco,D. Pérez-Marcos,B. Spanlang,, and M. Slater., The contribution of real-time mirror reflections of motor actions on virtual body ownership in an immersive virtual environment. In Virtual Reality Conference (VR), 2010 IEEE, pages 111-114. IEEE, 2010.
[6] A. Haans and W. IJsselsteijn., Embodiment and telepresence: Toward a comprehensive theoretical framework. Interacting with Computers, 2012.
[7] H. Head and G. Holmes., Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain, 34(2-3): 102–254, 1911.
[8] S. Higuchi, H. Imamizu,, and M. Kawato., Special issue: Original article cerebellar activity evoked by common tool-use execution and imagery tasks: An fmri study. Cortex, 43: 350-358, 2007.
[9] R. Kline., Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press, 2010.
[10] J. Lackner., Some proprioceptive influences on the perceptual representation of body shape and orientation. Brain, 111(2): 281-297, 1988.
[11] J. Lanier., Homuncular Flexibility, http://www.edge.org/q2006q06_print.html#lanier. Edge Foundation, Inc., 2006.
[12] B. Lenggenhager, T. Tadi, T. Metzinger,, and O. Blanke., Video ergo sum: manipulating bodily self-consciousness. Science, 317(5841): 1096-1099, 2007.
[13] A. Maravita and A. Iriki., Tools for the body (schema). Trends in cognitive sciences, 8(2): 79-86, 2004.
[14] M. Meijsing., Real people and virtual bodies: How disembodied can embodiment be? Minds and Machines, 16(4): 443-461, 2006.
[15] J. Normand, E. Giannopoulos, B. Spanlang,, and M. Slater., Multisensory stimulation can induce an illusion of larger belly size in immersive virtual reality. PloS one, 6(1):e16128, 2011.
[16] D. Perez-Marcos, M. Slater,, and M. Sanchez-Vives., Inducing a virtual hand ownership illusion through a brain-computer interface. Neuroreport, 20(6):589. 2009.
[17] V. Ramachandran, D. Rogers-Ramachandran,, and S. Cobb., Touching the phantom limb. Nature, 377(6549): 489-490, 1995.
[18] M. Schaefer, H. Flor, H. Heinze,, and M. Rotte., Morphing the body: Illusory feeling of an elongated arm affects somatosensory homunculus. Neuroimage, 36(3): 700-705, 2007.
[19] J. Shotton, A. Fitzgibbon, M. Cook, T. Sharp, M. Finocchio, R. Moore, A. Kipman,, and A. Blake., Real-time human pose recognition in parts from single depth images. In CVPR, volume 2, page 7, 2011.
[20] M. Slater, D. Perez-Marcos, H. Ehrsson,, and M. Sanchez-Vives., Towards a digital body: the virtual arm illusion. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2, 2008.
[21] Stelarc. Third Hand, http://www.stelarc.org?catID=20265, 1980.
[22] W. Steptoe, A. Steed, A. Rovira,, and J. Rae., Lie tracking: social presence, truth and deception in avatar-mediated telecommunication. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 1039-1048. ACM, 2010.
[23] J. Tukey., Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA, 231, 1977.
[24] E. Von Holst., Relations between the central nervous system and the peripheral organs. British Journal of Animal Behaviour, 1954.
[25] N. Yee and J. Bailenson., The Proteus effect: the effect of transformed self-representation on behavior. Human Communication Research, 33(3):271, 2007.
[26] Y. Yuan and A. Steed., Is the rubber hand illusion induced by immersive virtual reality? In Virtual Reality Conference (VR), 2010 IEEE, pages 95-102. IEEE, 2010.
41 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool