Eriko Kitamoto, Satoshi Yamada
Abstract: Virtual environments immerse users in experiences that closely resemble those in physical spaces. In the process of creating a virtual environment that replicates a real-world setting, components are frequently modeled to match the actual dimensions. However, users may perceive the virtual environment differently when utilizing a head-mounted display (HMD). Consequently, this study explored the differences in spatial experience between physical space and HMD space to identify any perceptual discrepancies. Additionally, we examined flat-panel displays (DPs), which are more prevalent than HMDs for visualizing 3D models. The experiment was conducted under a personal space scenario, focusing on “perception of distance” and “evaluation of impression.” Participants reported perceived distance in meters (distance perception), and rated spatial openness and object presence on a 5-point scale (impression evaluation). The results were analyzed using mean and standard deviation, along with a Holm-corrected Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The findings suggest that, irrespective of the object’s position, the HMD space resulted in the shortest perceived distances and a more oppressive sensation among the three spaces. Correlation analysis revealed that perceived distance and spatial openness were evaluated independently, suggesting that the sense of oppression in VR is not solely determined by distance underestimation. However, the impression of the space did not exhibit significant differences due to the presence of the object. These results underscore the importance of considering spatial perception differences when evaluating or designing immersive virtual environments, and they may serve as useful metrics for interior arrangements, residential design, signage planning, and other applications. These findings inform the design of HMD‑based visualization pipelines for immersive VR.
Keywords: Immersive virtual reality, Head-mounted display, Distance perception, Impression evaluation, View direction.
Date Published: January 15, 2026 DOI: 10.11159/jbeb.2026.002
View Article