ISSN : 1226-9654
움직임 감지 입력 기기인 키넥트(Kinect)의 시공간 해상력을 알아보고자 사이먼 효과 검증과 뮐러-라이어 착시 판단과제에서 정량적 행동측정을 하였다. 실험 1에서는 사이먼 효과를 통하여 키넥트의 시간해상력을 알아보고자 하였다. 실험 2에서는 뮐러-라이어 착시 판단에서 실험 참가자의 착시선분 측정행동을 깊이 센서로 촬영하고 실시간으로 골격을 구성하여 정량적 행동측정 자료를 얻고, 측정된 자료를 통해 키넥트의 공간해상도를 알아보고자 하였고, 착시의 지각된 반응과 비교하였다. 실험 1의 결과는 사이먼 효과에서 키넥트를 이용하여 실험 참가자의 행동을 반응키로 하였을 때도 키보드 반응을 사용한 기존 사이먼 효과와 같은 결과를 얻을 수 있었다. 실험 2의 결과, 착시 선분의 길이에 따라 비교적 안정적으로 변화하는 운동 반응이 얻어져서 키넥트 공간해상도가 비교적 안정적이었다. 보다 중요하게, 지각반응에서 유의한 착시량이 얻어진 반면, 키넥트 반응에서는 유의한 착시량이 관찰되지 않았다. 이는 지각반응과 행동반응의 괴리를 드러내는 결과로서, 특정 실험상황에서 키넥트의 사용이 중요한 방법적 도구가 될 수 있음을 시사한다. 마지막으로 기존 실험 참가자의 행동측정 방법의 문제점을 키넥트와 비교해 보고 향후 발전 방향에 대해 논의하였다.
We examined the temporal and spatial resolution of Kinect which is a motion sensing input device manufactured by Microsoft. Specifically, two experiments were conducted to verify Simon effect and Muller-Lyer illusion by measuring quantitative behavior using Kinect. The purpose of experimental 1 was to evaluate the temporal resolution of Kinect in a Simon effect task. Simon effects were observed in both of the keyboard condition and the Kinect condition. In experimental 2, participants were asked to judge the length of the Mueller-Lyer test line compared to the comparison line either by perception or hand action. In the Kinect condition, hand-action judgement of the line increased with the line length linearly. More importantly, the hand-action condition did not show significant illusions while the perception condition showed significant illusions. This result suggests that Kinect could be a useful tool to explore a possible gap between perception and action. Finally, several methodological problems and future developments of the Kinect system were discussed.
김지원, 박병규, 홍정화, 엄광문 (2008). 실버/재활 공학의 연구 동향 및 전망. 공업화학전망, 11(2), 11-23.
이정희, 이영희, 차의영 (2011). 영상처리를 이용한 ADHD 측정도구. 한국컴퓨터교육학회 논문지, 14(2), 95-102.
홍성규, 고승범, 조승철, 윤준식, 이승화, 박건우, 이대희 (2005). 3차원 보행분석시스템을 이용한 파킨슨병 환자의 보행 분석. 대한신경과학회지, 23(5), 635-641.
Abrahamse, E., & Lubbe, R. (2008). Endogenous orienting modulates the Simon effect: critical factors in experimental design. Psychological Research, 72(3), 261-272.
Aglioti, S., DeSouza, J. F. X., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology, 5(6), 679- 685.
Day, R. H. (1989). Natural and artificial cues, perceptual compromise and the basis of veridical and illusory perception. In D. Vickers & P, L, Smith (Eds.), Human information processing: Measures and mechanisms (pp.107-129). North Holland, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
Day, R. H. (1990). The Bourdon illusion in haptic space. Perception and Psychophysics, 47, 400-404.
DeLucia, P., & Hochberg, J. (1985). Illusions in the real world and in the mind’s eye. Proceeding of the Eastern Psychological Association, 56, 38.
DeLucia, P., & Hochberg, J. (1986). Real-world geometrical illusions: Theoretical and practical implications. Proceeding of the Eastern Psychological Association, 57, 62.
DeLucia, P., & Hochberg, J. (1991). Geometrical illusions in solid objects under ordinary viewing conditions. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 547-554.
Forster, K., & Forster, J. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, 35(1), 116-124.
Gregory, R. L. (1966). Eye and brain. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gregory, R. L. (1997). Knowledge in perception and illusion. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 352(1358), 1121-1127.
Hommel, B. (2011). The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychologica, 136(2), 189-202.
Howe, C. Q., & Purves, D. (2005). The Müller- Lyer illusion explained by the statistics of image-source relationships. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(4), 1234-1239.
Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 14(2), 201- 211.
Kaufman, L., & Kaufman, J. H. (2000). Explaining the moon illusion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(1), 500-505.
Lecklider, T. (2011). Your Scope Needs a Natural User Interface. EE: Evaluation Engineering, 50 (1), 12-22.
Lee, D., & Aronson, E. (1974). Visual proprioceptive control of standing in human infants. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 15 (3), 529-532.
Leyvand, T., Meekhof, C., Yi-Chen Wei, Jian Sun, & Baining Guo. (2011). Kinect Identity: Technology and Experience. Computer, 44(4), 94-96.
Loomis, J., Blascovich, J., &Beall, A. (1999). Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology. Behavior Research Methods, 31(4), 557-564.
Schrater, P. R., Knill, D. C., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2000). Mechanisms of visual motion detection. Nature Neuroscience, 3(1), 64.
Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions towards the source of stimulation. Journal of experimental psychology, 81, 174-176.
Simon, J. R., & Wolf, J. D. (1963). Choice reaction times as a function of angular stimulus-response correspondence and age. Ergonomics, 6, 99-105.
Suma, E. A., Lange, B., Rizzo, A., Krum, D. M., & Bolas, M. (2011). FAAST: The Flexible Action and Articulated Skeleton Toolkit. Virtual Reality Conference (VR), 2011 IEEE (pp 247-248).