149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11540610)
1. Judgments of the distance to nearby virtual objects: interaction of viewing conditions and accommodative demand.
Ellis SR; Menges BM
Presence (Camb); 1997 Aug; 6(4):452-60. PubMed ID: 11540610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Localization of virtual objects in the near visual field.
Ellis SR; Menges BM
Hum Factors; 1998 Sep; 40(3):415-31. PubMed ID: 11536894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Designing a successful HMD-based experience.
Pierce JS; Pausch R; Sturgill CB; Christiansen KD
Presence (Camb); 1999 Aug; 8(4):469-73. PubMed ID: 11676445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Spatial judgments with monoscopic and stereoscopic presentation of perspective displays.
Yeh YY; Silverstein LD
Hum Factors; 1992 Oct; 34(5):583-600. PubMed ID: 1459568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. When two eyes are better than one in prehension: monocular viewing and end-point variance.
Loftus A; Servos P; Goodale MA; Mendarozqueta N; Mon-Williams M
Exp Brain Res; 2004 Oct; 158(3):317-27. PubMed ID: 15164152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Localization of a time-delayed, monocular virtual object superimposed on a real environment.
McCandless JW; Ellis SR; Adelstein BD
Presence (Camb); 2000 Feb; 9(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 11543296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Binocular vision in a virtual world: visual deficits following the wearing of a head-mounted display.
Mon-Williams M; Wann JP; Rushton S
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1993 Oct; 13(4):387-91. PubMed ID: 8278192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Influence of Monocular Spatial Cues on Vergence Eye Movements in Monocular and Binocular Viewing of 3-D and 2-D Stimuli.
Batvinionak AA; Gracheva MA; Bolshakov AS; Rozhkova GI
Perception; 2015; 44(8-9):1077-84. PubMed ID: 26562921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Perceived orientation in physical and virtual environments: changes in perceived orientation as a function of idiothetic information available.
Lathrop WB; Kaiser MK
Presence (Camb); 2002 Feb; 11(1):19-32. PubMed ID: 12096756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Egocentric depth judgments in optical, see-through augmented reality.
Swan JE; Jones A; Kolstad E; Livingston MA; Smallman HS
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph; 2007; 13(3):429-42. PubMed ID: 17356211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Drilling into the functional significance of stereopsis: the impact of stereoscopic information on surgical performance.
Al-Saud LM; Mushtaq F; Mirghani I; Balkhoyor A; Keeling A; Manogue M; Mon-Williams MA
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 Jul; 37(4):498-506. PubMed ID: 28656672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Change Blindness Phenomena for Virtual Reality Display Systems.
Steinicke F; Bruder G; Hinrichs K; Willemsen P
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph; 2011 Sep; 17(9):1223-33. PubMed ID: 21301028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of a head-mounted display on the oculomotor system of children.
Kozulin P; Ames SL; McBrien NA
Optom Vis Sci; 2009 Jul; 86(7):845-56. PubMed ID: 19543140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Stereoscopic depth constancy for physical objects and their virtual counterparts.
Hartle B; Wilcox LM
J Vis; 2022 Mar; 22(4):9. PubMed ID: 35315875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A novel prototype for an optical see-through head-mounted display with addressable focus cues.
Liu S; Hua H; Cheng D
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph; 2010; 16(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 20224134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Parallactic movement beats binocularity in the presence of external visual noise.
Voges N; Bach M; Kommerell G
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2012 Jul; 32(4):308-16. PubMed ID: 22697215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The design of telepresence systems: the task-dependent use of binocular disparity and motion parallax.
Parton AD; Bradshaw MF; De Bruyn B
Int J Cogn Ergon; 1999; 3(3):189-202. PubMed ID: 11543418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evidence for good recovery of lengths of real objects seen with natural stereo viewing.
Frisby JP; Buckley D; Duke PA
Perception; 1996; 25(2):129-54. PubMed ID: 8733143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of Display Technology on Perceived Scale of Space.
Geuss MN; Stefanucci JK; Creem-Regehr SH; Thompson WB; Mohler BJ
Hum Factors; 2015 Nov; 57(7):1235-47. PubMed ID: 26060237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Judgments of azimuth and elevation as a function of monoscopic and binocular depth cues using a perspective display.
Barfield W; Rosenberg C
Hum Factors; 1995 Mar; 37(1):173-81. PubMed ID: 7790007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
