Mobile‐powered head‐mounted displays versus cave automatic virtual environment experiments for evacuation research

Abstract

AbstractDifferent virtual reality (VR) experimental tools and equipment are available for evacuation research, ranging from highly immersive systems such as cave automatic virtual environments (CAVEs) to head‐mounted displays (HMDs). In particular, mobile‐powered HMDs are an extremely cost‐efficient solution, for which the research potential for evacuation studies needs to be assessed. This study compares the results of tunnel evacuation experiments aimed at investigating the design of flashing lights on emergency exit portals using two different VR methods (CAVE vs. mobile‐powered HMD). The experiments were performed by repeating the same case study in a CAVE laboratory and a low‐cost mobile‐powered HMD. The CAVE experiment involved 96 participants, whereas the HMD experiment involved 55 participants. An affordance‐based questionnaire was used to interview participants immersed in a VR road tunnel emergency evacuation scenario and rank different emergency portal designs. Questionnaire results show consistency between the two experimental methods for the variables investigated, thus leading to be in favor of the use of low‐cost mobile‐powered HMD tools in evacuation scenarios with a relatively limited level of complexity.