Is Virtual Reality an Effective Experimental Tool for Window View Studies with Dynamic Content Involved?

References

• Abd-Alhamid F, Kent M, Bennett C, Calautit J, Wu Y. 2019. Developing an innovative method for visual perception evaluation in a physical-based virtual environment. Build Environ. 162. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abd-Alhamid F, Kent M, Calautit J, Wu Y. 2020. Evaluating the impact of viewing location on view perception using a virtual environment. Build Environ. 180:106932.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baquero Sastre GA, Vasquez A. 2017. Prevalence of cerebral palsy between the neurological diseases with attention in pediatric population in physical therapy services. J Neurol Sci. 381:188–189. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2017.08.538
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batool A, Rutherford P, McGraw P, Ledgeway T, Altomonte S. 2021. View preference in urban environments. Lighting Res Technol. 53(7):613–636.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellazzi A, Bellia L, Chinazzo G, Corbisiero F, D’Agostino P, Devitofrancesco A, Fragliasso F, Ghellere M, Megale V, Salamone F. 2021. Virtual reality for assessing visual quality and lighting perception: A systematic review. Build Environ. 209:108674.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carbonell-Carrera C, Saorín JL. 2017. Geospatial google street view with virtual reality: a motivational approach for spatial training education. ISPRS Int J Geoinf. 6(9):261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CEN/TC 169. 2018. European standard EN 17037: daylight in buildings. Hørsholm, Denmark: European Committee for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Chamilothori K, Wienold J, Andersen M. 2019. Adequacy of immersive virtual reality for the perception of daylit spaces: comparison of real and virtual environments. LEUKOS. 15(2–3):203–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang E, Kim HT, Yoo B. 2020. Virtual reality sickness: a review of causes and measurements. Int J Hum Comput Int. 36(17):1658–1682.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher AV, Godwin KE, Seltman H. 2014. Visual environment, attention allocation, and learning in young children: when too much of a good thing may be bad. Psychol Sci. 25(7):1362–1370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilchrist K, Brown C, Montarzino A. 2015. Workplace settings and wellbeing: greenspace use and views contribute to employee wellbeing at peri-urban business sites. Landsc Urban Plan. 138:32–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grinde B, Patil GG. 2009. Biophilia: does visual contact with nature impact on health and well-being? Int J Env Res Pub He. 6(9):2332–2343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris AH, Fernandes-Taylor S, Giori N. 2012. “Not statistically different” does not necessarily mean “the same”: the important but underappreciated distinction between difference and equivalence studies. JBJS. 94(5):e29.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heschong L. 2021. Visual delight in architecture: daylight, vision, and view. London (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Higuera-Trujillo JL, Maldonado JL-T, Millán CL. 2017. Psychological and physiological human responses to simulated and real environments: A comparison between photographs, 360 panoramas, and virtual reality. Appl Ergon. 65:398–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong T, Lee M, Yeom S, Jeong K. 2019a. Occupant responses on satisfaction with window size in physical and virtual built environments. Build Environ. 166:106409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong T, Lee M, Yeom S, Jeong K. 2019b. Occupant responses on satisfaction with window size in physical and virtual built environments. Build Environ. 166:166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IPC. 2016. Igroup Presence Questionnaire. [accessed 2023 Apr 8]. http://www.igroup.org/pq/ipq/index.php.
   Google Scholar
• Kent M, Schiavon S. 2020. Evaluation of the effect of landscape distance seen in window views on visual satisfaction. Build Environ. 183:107160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim W, Lee S, Bovik AC. 2021. VR sickness versus VR presence: A statistical prediction model. IEEE Trans Image Process. 30:559–571. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2020.3036782
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klepeis NE, Nelson WC, Ott WR, Robinson JP, Tsang AM, Switzer P, Behar JV, Hern SC, Engelmann WH. 2001. The national human activity pattern survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 11(3):231–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ko WH, Kent MG, Schiavon S, Levitt B, Betti G. 2021. A window view quality assessment framework. Leukos. 18:1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ko WH, Kent MG, Schiavon S, Levitt B, Betti G. 2022. A window view quality assessment framework. Leukos. 18(3):268–293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konstantzos I, Chan Y-C, Seibold JC, Tzempelikos A, Proctor RW, Protzman JB. 2015. View clarity index: a new metric to evaluate clarity of view through window shades. Build Environ. 90:206–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ko WH, Schiavon S, Zhang H, Graham LT, Brager G, Mauss I, Lin Y-W. 2020. The impact of a view from a window on thermal comfort, emotion, and cognitive performance. Build Environ. 175:106779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuliga SF, Thrash T, Dalton RC, Hölscher C. 2015. Virtual reality as an empirical research tool—exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model. Comput Environ Urban Syst. 54:363–375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin T-Y, Le A-V, Chan Y-C. 2022. Evaluation of window view preference using quantitative and qualitative factors of window view content. Build Environ. 213:108886.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li D, Sullivan WC. 2016. Impact of views to school landscapes on recovery from stress and mental fatigue. Landsc Urban Plan. 148:149–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lottrup L, Grahn P, Stigsdotter UK. 2013. Workplace greenery and perceived level of stress: benefits of access to a green outdoor environment at the workplace. Landsc Urban Plan. 110:5–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus TA. 1967. The function of windows—A reappraisal. Buil Sci. 2(2):97–121.
   Google Scholar
• Masoudinejad S, Hartig T. 2020. Window view to the sky as a restorative resource for residents in densely populated cities. Environ Behav. 52(4):401–436.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matusiak BS, Klöckner CA. 2016. How we evaluate the view out through the window. Archit Sci Rev. 59(3):203–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscoso C, Nazari M, Matusiak BS. 2022. Stereoscopic images and virtual reality techniques in daylighting research: a method-comparison study. Build Environ. 214:108962.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orquin JL, Loose SM. 2013. Attention and choice: a review on eye movements in decision making. Acta Psychol (Amst). 144(1):190–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer JF, Hoffman RE. 2001. Rating reliability and representation validity in scenic landscape assessments. Landsc Urban Plan. 54(1–4):149–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park S, Lee G. 2020. Full-immersion virtual reality: adverse effects related to static balance. Neurosci Lett. 733:134974.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockcastle S, Danell M, Calabrese E, Sollom-Brotherton G, Mahic A, Van Den Wymelenberg K, Davis R. 2021. Comparing perceptions of a dimmable LED lighting system between a real space and a virtual reality display. Lighting Res Technol. 53(8):701–725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez F, Garcia-Hansen V, Allan A, Isoardi G. 2021. Subjective responses toward daylight changes in window views: assessing dynamic environmental attributes in an immersive experiment. Build Environ. 195:107720.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roettl J, Terlutter R, Triberti S. 2018. The same video game in 2D, 3D or virtual reality–how does technology impact game evaluation and brand placements? PLOS ONE. 13(7):e0200724.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell JA. 1980. A circumplex model of affect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 39(6):1161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scarpina F, Tagini S. 2017. The stroop color and word test. Front Psychol. 8:557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SLL. 2014. Lighting guide 10: daylighting - a guide for designers. London (UK): Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE).
   Google Scholar
• Son H, Jeon HJ, Kwon S. 2017. Study on distortion and field of view of contents in VR HMD. J Adv Smart Convergence. 6(1):18–25.
   Google Scholar
• Stefánsson SB, Jónsdóttir TJ. 1996. Auditory event-related potentials, auditory digit span, and clinical symptoms in chronic schizophrenic men on neuroleptic medication. Biol Psychiatry. 40(1):19–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svobodova K, Vojar J, Sklenicka P, Filova L. 2018. Presentation matters: causes of differences in preferences for agricultural landscapes displayed via photographs and videos. Space Cult. 21(3):259–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanaka N, Takagi H. 2004. Virtual reality environment design of managing both presence and virtual reality sickness. J Physiol Anthropol Appl Human Sci. 23(6):313–317.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tennessen CM, Cimprich B. 1995. Views to nature: effects on attention. J Environ Psychol. 15(1):77–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuaycharoen N, Tregenza P. 2005. Discomfort glare from interesting images. Lighting Res Technol. 37(4):329–338.
   Google Scholar
• USGBC. 2018. LEED v4.1 interior design and construction. Washington (DC): U.S Green Building Council.
   Google Scholar
• Watanabe H, Ujike H. 2008. The activity of ISO/study group on “image safety” and three biological effect. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Second International Symposium on Universal Communication. Osaka (Japan): IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Watson D, Tellegen A. 1985. Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychol Bull. 98(2):219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeom S, Kim H, Hong T, Park HS, Lee D-E. 2020. An integrated psychological score for occupants based on their perception and emotional response according to the windows’ outdoor view size. Build Environ. 180:107019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeo NL, White MP, Alcock I, Garside R, Dean SG, Smalley AJ, Gatersleben B. 2020. What is the best way of delivering virtual nature for improving mood? An experimental comparison of high definition TV, 360 degrees video, and computer generated virtual reality. J Environ Psychol. 72:101500. Dec. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar