Full download ebook at ebookname.

com

Handbook of virtual environments design

implementation and applications 1st Edition Kay M.
Stanney

https://ebookname.com/product/handbook-of-virtual-
environments-design-implementation-and-applications-1st-
edition-kay-m-stanney/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD NOW

Download more ebook from https://ebookname.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Virtual Machine Design and Implementation C C 689th

Edition Bill Blunden

https://ebookname.com/product/virtual-machine-design-and-
implementation-c-c-689th-edition-bill-blunden/

Prototyping of Robotic Systems Applications of Design

and Implementation 1st Edition Tarek Sobh

https://ebookname.com/product/prototyping-of-robotic-systems-
applications-of-design-and-implementation-1st-edition-tarek-sobh/

The Description Logic Handbook Theory Implementation

and Applications 1st Edition Franz Baader

https://ebookname.com/product/the-description-logic-handbook-
theory-implementation-and-applications-1st-edition-franz-baader/

Experimental design unified concepts practical

applications and computer implementation First Edition
Bowerman

https://ebookname.com/product/experimental-design-unified-
concepts-practical-applications-and-computer-implementation-
first-edition-bowerman/
The Description Logic Handbook Theory Implementation
and Applications 2nd Edition Franz Baader

https://ebookname.com/product/the-description-logic-handbook-
theory-implementation-and-applications-2nd-edition-franz-baader/

Virtual Worlds Real Libraries Librarians and Educators

in Second Life and Other Multi User Virtual
Environments 1st Edition Lori Bell

https://ebookname.com/product/virtual-worlds-real-libraries-
librarians-and-educators-in-second-life-and-other-multi-user-
virtual-environments-1st-edition-lori-bell/

Being there together social interaction in virtual

environments 1st Edition Ralph Schroeder

https://ebookname.com/product/being-there-together-social-
interaction-in-virtual-environments-1st-edition-ralph-schroeder/

Active Hybrid and Semi active Structural Control A

Design and Implementation Handbook 1st Edition S. Y.
Chu

https://ebookname.com/product/active-hybrid-and-semi-active-
structural-control-a-design-and-implementation-handbook-1st-
edition-s-y-chu/

Database Systems A Practical Approach to Design

Implementation and Management 6th Edition Thomas M.
Connolly

https://ebookname.com/product/database-systems-a-practical-
approach-to-design-implementation-and-management-6th-edition-
thomas-m-connolly/
HANDBOOK OF VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS
Design, Implementation, and Applications
 HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS
Gavriel Salvendy, Series Editor

Bullinger, H.-J., and Ziegler, J. (Eds.): Human–Computer Interaction: Ergonomics

and User Interfaces

Bullinger, H.-J., and Ziegler, J. (Eds.): Human–Computer Interaction:

Communication, Cooperation, and Application Design

Stephanidis, C. (Ed.): User Interfaces for All: Concepts, Methods, and Tools

Smith, M. J., Salvendy, G., Harris, D., and Koubeck, R. J. (Eds.): Usability
Evaluation and Interface Design: Cognitive Engineering, Intelligent Agents and
Virtual Reality

Smith, M. J., and Salvendy, G. (Eds.): Systems, Social and Internationalization

Design Aspects of Human–Computer Interaction

Stephanidis, C. (Ed.): Universal Access in HCl: Towards an Information Society

for All

Meister, D., and Enderwick, T.: Human Factors in System Design, Development,
and Testing

Stanney, K. (Ed.): Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation, and

Applications

For more information on LEA titles, please contact Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers, at www.erlbaum.com.
HANDBOOK OF VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS
Design, Implementation, and Applications

Edited by

Kay M. Stanney
University of Central Florida

LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS

2002 Mahwah, New Jersey London
Senior Acquisitions Editor: Anne Duffy
Editorial Assistant: Karin Wittig Bates
Cover Art Design: Branka Wedell, Graphics Artist, Winter Park, FL
Cover Design: Kathryn Houghtaling Lacey
Textbook Production Manager: Paul Smolenski
Full-Service Compositor: TechBooks
Text and Cover Printer: Hamilton Printing Company

This book was typeset in 10/12 pt. Times, Italic, Bold, Bold Italic. The heads were
typeset in Helvetica Bold, and Helvetica Bold Italic.

Copyright  c 2002 by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc

All right reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in
any form, by photostat, microfilm, retrieval system, or any
other means, without prior written permission of the publisher.

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers

10 Industrial Avenue
Mahwah, New Jersey 07430

The editor, authors, and the publisher have made every effort to provide accurate and
complete information in this handbook but the handbook is not intended to serve as a
replacement for professional advice. Any use of this information is at the reader’s
discretion. The editor, authors, and the publisher specifically disclaim any and all
liability arising directly or indirectly from the use or application of any information
contained in this handbook. An appropriate professional should be consulted
regarding your specific situation.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Handbook of virtual environments : design, implementation, and applications / edited by

Kay M. Stanney ; cover art by Branka Wedell.
p. cm.
ISBN 0-8058-3270-X (alk. paper)
1. Computer simulation—Handbooks, manuals, etc. 2. Human-computer
interaction—Handbooks, manuals, etc. 3. Virtual reality—Handbooks, manuals, etc.
I. Stanney, Kay M.

QA76.9.C65 H349 2002

04 .01 9—dc21 2001040284

Books published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates are printed on

acid-free paper, and their bindings are chosen for strength and durability.

Printed in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
 To John—my everything
and
Sean, Ryan, and Michael—my sunshine
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 Contents

Series Foreword xi
Foreword xiii
Perspective xv
Preface xix
Acknowledgments xxiii
Advisory Board xxv
About the Editor xxix
Contributors xxxi

I: INTRODUCTION
1 Virtual Environments in the 21st Century 1
Kay M. Stanney and Michael Zyda
2 Virtual Environments Standards and Terminology 15
Richard A. Blade and Mary Lou Padgett

II: SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

Hardware Requirements
3 Vision and Virtual Environments 29
James G. May and David R. Badcock
4 Virtual Auditory Displays 65
Russell D. Shilling and Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
5 Haptic Interfaces 93
S. James Biggs and Mandayam A. Srinivasan
6 Haptic Rendering in Virtual Environments 117
Cagatay Basdogan and Mandayam A. Srinivasan
7 User Requirements for Perceiving Body Acceleration 135
Ben D. Lawson, Stephanie A. Sides, and K. Amy Hickinbotham
8 Motion Tracking Requirements and Technologies 163
Eric Foxlin

vii
viii CONTENTS

9 Eye Tracking in Virtual Environments 211

Joseph Wilder, George K. Hung, Marilyn Mantei Tremaine,
and Manpreet Kaur
10 Gesture Recognition 223
Matthew Turk
11 Locomotion Interfaces 239
John M. Hollerbach

Software Requirements
12 Virtual Environment Models 255
G. Drew Kessler
13 Principles for the Design of Performance-oriented Interaction Techniques 277
Doug A. Bowman
14 Technological Considerations in the Design of Multisensory Virtual
Environments: The Virtual Field of Dreams Will Have to Wait 301
W. Todd Nelson and Robert S. Bolia
15 Embodied Autonomous Agents 313
Jan M. Allbeck and Norman I. Badler
16 Internet-based Virtual Environments 333
Charles E. Hughes, J. Michael Moshell, and Dean Reed

Application Requirements
17 Structured Development of Virtual Environments 353
John R. Wilson, Richard M. Eastgate, and Mirabelle D’Cruz
18 Influence of Individual Differences on Application Design for Individual
and Collaborative Immersive Virtual Environments 379
David B. Kaber, John V. Draper, and John M. Usher
19 Using Virtual Environments as Training Simulators: Measuring Transfer 403
Corinna E. Lathan, Michael R. Tracey, Marc M. Sebrechts,
Deborah M. Clawson, and Gerald A. Higgins

III: DESIGN APPROACHES AND IMPLEMENTATIONS STRATEGIES

20 Cognitive Aspects of Virtual Environments Design 415
Allen Munro, Robert Breaux, Jim Patrey, and Beth Sheldon
21 Multimodal Interaction Modeling 435
George V. Popescu, Grigore C. Burdea, and Helmuth Trefftz
22 Auditory–Visual Cross-Modality Interaction and Illusions 455
Russell L. Storms
23 Illusory Self-motion in Virtual Environments 471
Lawrence J. Hettinger
24 Spatial Orientation, Wayfinding, and Representation 493
Rudolph P. Darken and Barry Peterson
25 Content Design for Virtual Environments 519
Jerry Isdale, Clive Fencott, Michael Heim, and Leonard Daly
26 Technology Management and User Acceptance
of Virtual Environment Technology 533
David Gross
 CONTENTS ix

27 Virtual Environments and Product Liability 543

Robert S. Kennedy, Kristyne E. Kennedy, and Kathleen M. Bartlett
28 Virtually a Market? Selling Practice and the Diffusion
of Virtual Reality 555
G. M. Peter Swann and Robert J. Stone

IV: HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES

29 Direct Effects of Virtual Environments on Users 581
Erik Viirre and David Bush
30 Signs and Symptoms of Human Syndromes Associated
with Synthetic Experiences 589
Ben D. Lawson, David A. Graeber, Andrew M. Mead, and Eric R. Muth
31 Adapting to Virtual Environments 619
Robert B. Welch
32 Motion Sickness Neurophysiology, Physiological Correlates, and Treatment 637
Deborah L. Harm
33 The Social Impact of Virtual Environment Technology 663
Sandra L. Calvert

V: EVALUATION
34 Usability Engineering of Virtual Environments 681
Deborah Hix and Joseph L. Gabbard
35 Human Performance Measurement in Virtual Environments 701
Donald Ralph Lampton, James P. Bliss, and Christina S. Morris
36 Virtual Environment Usage Protocols 721
Kay M. Stanney, Robert S. Kennedy, and Kelly Kingdon
37 Measurement of Visual Aftereffects Following Virtual Environment Exposure 731
John P. Wann and Mark Mon-Williams
38 Proprioceptive Adaptation and Aftereffects 751
Paul DiZio and James R. Lackner
39 Vestibular Adaptation and Aftereffects 773
Thomas A. Stoffregen, Mark H. Draper, Robert S. Kennedy,
and Daniel Compton
40 Presence in Virtual Environments 791
Wallace Sadowski and Kay Stanney
41 Ergonomics in Virtual Environments 807
Pamela R. McCauley Bell

VI: SELECTED APPLICATIONS OF VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

42 Applications of Virtual Environments: An Overview 827
Robert J. Stone
43 National Defense 857
Bruce W. Knerr, Robert Breaux, Stephen L. Goldberg,
and Richard A. Thurman
44 Team Training in Virtual Environments: An Event-based Approach 873
Eduardo Salas, Randall L. Oser, Janis A. Cannon-Bowers,
and Eleni Daskarolis
x CONTENTS

45 Virtual Environments As a Tool for Academic Learning 893

J. Michael Moshell and Charles E. Hughes
46 Development and Evaluation of Virtual Environments for Education 911
Sue Cobb, Helen Neale, Joanna Crosier, and John R. Wilson
47 Medical Applications of Virtual Environments 937
Richard M. Satava and Shaun B. Jones
48 Virtual Environment–Assisted Teleoperation 959
Abderrahmane Kheddar, Ryad Chellali, and Philippe Coiffet
49 Use of Virtual Environments in Motor Learning and Rehabilitation 999
Maureen K. Holden and Emanuel Todorov
50 Virtual Environment Applications in Clinical Neuropsychology 1027
Albert A. Rizzo, J. Galen Buckwalter, and Cheryl van der Zaag
51 Virtual Reality Therapy: An Effective Treatment for Psychological Disorders 1065
Max M. North, Sarah M. North, and Joseph R. Coble
52 Applications of Systems Design Using Virtual Environments 1079
Roy C. Davies
53 Information Visualization in Virtual Environments 1101
Steve Bryson
54 Virtual Environments in Manufacturing 1119
John P. Shewchuk, Kyung H. Chung, and Robert C. Williges
55 Entertainment Applications of Virtual Environments 1143
Eric Badiqué, Marc Cavazza, Gudrun Klinker, Gordon Mair, Tony Sweeney,
Daniel Thalmann, and Nadia M. Thalmann

VII: CONCLUSION
56 Virtual Environments: History and Profession 1167
Richard A. Blade and Mary Lou Padgett

Author Index 1179

Subject Index 1217
 Series Foreword

With the rapid evolution of highly sophisticated computers, communications, service, and
manufacturing systems, a major shift has occurred in the way people use and work with tech-
nology. The objective of this series on human factors and ergonomics is to provide researchers
and practitioners alike with a platform through which to address a succession of human factors
disciplines associated with advancing technologies, by reviewing seminal works in the field,
discussing the current status of major topics, and providing a starting point to focus future
research in these ever evolving disciplines. The guiding vision behind this series is that human
factors and ergonomics should play a preeminent role in ensuring that emerging technologies
provide increased productivity, quality, satisfaction, safety, and health in the context of the
“Information Society.”
The present volume is published at a very opportune time. Now more than ever technology
is becoming pervasive in every aspect of the Information Society, both in the workplace and
in everyday life activities. The field of virtual environments (VEs) emerged some 40 years
ago as a very exotic, extremely expensive technology whose use was difficult to justify. The
discipline has matured, and the cost of VE technology has decreased by over 100-fold, while
computer speed has increased by over 1,000 fold, which makes it a very effective and viable
technology to use in a broad spectrum of applications, from personnel training to task design.
With this viability and broad potential application come numerous issues and opportunities, and
a responsibility on the part of researchers, practitioners, designers, and users of this powerful
technology to ensure that it is deployed appropriately.
The Handbook of Virtual Environments was guided by a distinguished advisory board of
scholars and practitioners, who assisted the editor in ensuring a balanced coverage of the
entire spectrum of issues related to VE technology, from fundamental science and technology
to VE applications. This was achieved in a thorough and stimulating presentation, covered in
56 chapters, authored by 121 individuals from academia, industry, and government laboratories
from Europe, Asia and the United States on topics of system requirements (including hardware
and software), design and evaluation methods, and an extensive discussion of applications. All
this was presented, after careful peer reviews, to the publisher in 1,911 manuscript pages,
including 3,012 references for further in-depth reading, 255 figures, and 76 tables to illustrate
concepts, methods, and applications. Thus, this handbook provides a most comprehensive
account of the state of the art in virtual environments, which will serve as an invaluable source
of reference for practitioners, researchers, and students in this rapidly evolving discipline.

xi
xii SERIES FOREWORD

This could not have been achieved without the diligence and insightful work of the editor and
cooperative efforts of the chapter authors who have made it all possible. For this, my sincere
thanks and appreciation go to all of you.

—Gavriel Salvendy
Series Editor
 Foreword

An explosion has occurred in recent years in our understanding of virtual environments (VEs)
and in the technologies required to produce them. Virtual environments, as a way for humans
to interact with machines and with complex information sets, will become commonplace in
our increasingly technological world. In order for this to be practical, multimodal system
requirements must be developed and design approaches must be addressed. Potential health
and safety risks associated with VE systems must be fully understood and taken into account.
Finally, ergonomic and psychological concerns must be investigated so people will enjoy using
VE technology, be comfortable using it, and seek out its application.
This book provides an up-do-date discussion of the current research on virtual environments.
It describes the current VE state of the art and points out the many areas where there is still
work to be done. The Handbook of Virtual Environments provides an invaluable comprehen-
sive reference for experts in the field, as well as for students and VE researchers. Both the
theoretical and the practical side of VE technologies are explored.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has long been interested in
virtual environments. This interest arises from the need for humans to efficiently interact with
complex spacecraft systems and to work with very large data sets generated by satellites. In
the future, when humans travel beyond low Earth orbit to explore the universe, the relationship
between the space-faring crew and the technologies they bring with them must be extremely
intimate. The need for a small number of people to be able to work with a huge number of
different technologies will be unprecedented. Virtual environment trainers, for example, are
particularly attractive as a means of conducting just-in-time training before a crew member
conducts a maintenance procedure not practiced for many months. In terrestrial applications,
the complete life cycle for the design of complex systems such as aerospace vehicles will be
completed virtually, before a single piece of metal is cut.
NASA’s needs are unique in some respects but share much in common with other endeav-
ors in today’s world. Virtual environment technologies will also find military, medical, and
commercial (e.g., in manufacturing and in entertainment) applications. As the science and tech-
nology of VEs progress, full-immersion technologies will likely become a standard interface
between humans and machines. This book will help to make that vision a “real” reality.

—Guy Fogleman
Acting Director, Bioastronautics Research Division
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC

xiii
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 Perspective

We read that we are in a new economy and that the pace of technological change is accelerating.
This seems true because there are so many revolutionary innovations popping up. However,
from the vantage of a given field, the picture can seem very different. It is over 35 years
since Ivan Sutherland gave his address, “The Ultimate Display,” at the National Computer
Conference. Part of the delay is explained by the observation that problems that are not worked
on do not get solved. Only a few years ago, I could argue that progress in the field was being held
back because the enabling devices being used—the Polhemus magnetic tracker, the DataGlove,
and the screens from handheld consumer television sets—were invented decades earlier. No
one ever disagreed with those assertions. Today, it is different. In the best “divide and conquer”
tradition, researchers have deployed themselves around every possible research problem. All
of the easy problems have been run over and very smart people are working on most of the
hard problems. In this book, those same people are reporting where things stand.
In fact, at least one hard problem has been solved, at least in preliminary form. Thirty
years ago, I considered head-mounted displays (HMDs), but reasoned that they would be
unacceptable unless they were wireless and permitted natural ambulation around a large area.
I rejected the approach—not because I thought it was too hard but because I felt that the
encumbering paraphernalia would be too awkward. I did not then appreciate how fast and
how accurate the tracking would have to be and understood little about multipath transmission
problems and diversity receivers. After 20 years of effort, the University of North Carolina
recently demonstrated a wide-area tracking system with the needed performance and reported
that its impact on the user’s experience was every bit as powerful as one would hope it would
be. Finally, it is possible to show what an HMD can do that no other display can.
A host of applications have been attempted in visualization, training, and entertainment.
Even once unlikely opportunities have been gaining traction. In 1970, I received what I suspect
was the first job offer in virtual reality. Dr. Arnold Ludwig came into my interactive installation
and was so impressed with its impact on people’s behavior that he wanted me to join him in
the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Kentucky and to focus my interactions on
psychotherapy. Today, virtual therapy is a thriving field with nothing to fear but the running
out of phobias.
However, many of these “applications” have been motivated by the desire to do research
rather than the expectation that the results would be immediately practical. Some of these
systems are being used to do real work within the organizations that created them. An even
smaller number have been sold to early adopters. But virtual environment (VE) applications are

xv
xvi PERSPECTIVE

not yet being sucked into the marketplace by irresistible demand. Thus, while VE technology
may be able to do a job, it is not yet recognized as the best or most cost effective way to do
any job.
On the other hand, virtual environments have been unusually successful at spinning off
its technology into adjacent fields even before it has gotten under way itself. Techniques for
tracking human motion developed for VEs are now standard procedure in the film industry.
Haptic devices are working their way into desktop and automotive systems. Virtual surgery,
once a wild speculation, then a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) pro-
gram managed by Richard Satava, and now a nascent industry with publicly traded companies,
is selling robotic surgical systems and surgical simulations to hospitals. Finally, the HMD has
been incorporated into eyeglasses and has to be considered a competitor for the mobile display
of the future.
In the background, Moore’s law has continued to operate, assuring the increase in computer
power and the advance of computer graphics. However, it is important to note that while the
film industry routinely spends an hour computing a single frame of graphic animation, a VE
1 1
system has only 30 or 60 of a second to create its necessarily simpler image. This is a 100,000:1
difference in time, or 16 doublings, or a 24-year lag between the time a state-of-the-art image
appears in film and when a similarly complex image can be used in virtual environments. Mere
doublings do not guarantee subjective improvement; only orders of magnitude are discernible.
Nevertheless, we can be confident that ultimately the needed processing and graphics capacity
will be readily affordable.
At that point, all that remains to be developed is the VE technology itself: the tracking, the
displays, and an answer to the question that I posed well over a decade ago: Would you use
it if it was free? Whatever you are willing to pay for a technology, once you own it, it is free.
How much you choose to use it at this point determines its future as much as the economics
of its purchase or the efficacy of its performance. If it is a pleasure to use, you will try to use
it for everything you can think of. If it is awkward and uncomfortable, you will not use it for
any task where it is not absolutely required. In fact, you will be looking for an alternative way
to perform the tasks for which it is suited.
The question is: How good does it have to be? Not so long ago, I attended a conference at
which the keynote speaker declared computer graphics to be the key to VE technology and
that more realistic images would assure its success. I asked him, “If we turned out the lights,
would we still be here?” The point was that graphic realism does not appear to be necessary
or sufficient. It would seem simple to depict a dark, cloudy night—or just a dark room—with
current graphic technology, but instinct suggests that the experience would not be convincing.
There is still a long distance between depiction and illusion.
In visualization applications, believability is not so important. Training can be useful even
if the experience is not totally persuasive. A game or a story can be entertaining even if
the participant never suspends disbelief, but in each case, there is a threshold at which a
technology goes beyond serviceable and becomes compelling. When this threshold is crossed,
the technology is poised to go from being a niche solution to becoming a way of life.
It is not clear where critical mass will be reached first. Will one of the immersion applications
take hold? Will a VE entertainment system supplant traditional video games? Or will the desire
for portable wearable devices lead to the routine wearing of HMDs unobtrusively integrated
with eyeglasses? At the moment, I would bet on the latter because the standards for success
are so low. Text is easy to display. The screens on cell phones and handheld computers are too
small. And while speech may be ideal for answering questions, it is too slow for presenting
options. Only an eyeglass-mounted display can provide the full screen of information that we
take for granted at the desktop. If popular, such limited devices would inevitably be used for
gaming, just as cell phones are today. Head tracking would make those games more interactive,
 PERSPECTIVE xvii

if not more convincing, and augmented reality applications could be implemented in specific
locations like grocery stores. More immersive displays could then evolve over a period of time,
always assured of this installed base.
Starting from the other direction, real breakthroughs are needed in HMD design to provide
immersive experiences that are guaranteed to work. A wide field of view and minimal weight
are required before we can be confident that the HMD wearer will forget the apparatus and
embrace the virtual world.
Whatever the path or pace of the technology and its deployment, virtual reality will maintain
its proper role as the best metaphor for the world that is evolving around us. It will continue to
be depicted in films and incorporated into everyday thought to the point that it is so familiar
as a concept that by the time the real thing seeps into our daily lives, we may barely notice.

—Myron Krueger
President
Artificial Reality Corporation
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 Preface

When computers first permeated the public domain, thoughts of the Turing Test arose yet
were quickly extinguished, as users labored over perplexing interfaces, which often left them
bewildered and thoroughly frustrated. There had to be a better way, and so began the field
of human–computer interaction (HCI). HCI efforts have substantially improved computer
interaction, yet barriers to user friendliness still exist due to the abstract concepts that must
be conquered to successfully use a computer. A user must work through an interface (e.g.,
window, menu, icon, or some other mechanism) to achieve desired goals. They cannot access
these goals directly, but only through their interface surrogates. Until now.
Virtual environments (VEs) allow users to be immersed into three-dimensional digital
worlds, surrounding them with tangible objects to be manipulated and venues to be traversed,
which they experience from an egocentric perspective. Through the concrete and familiar, users
can enact known perceptual and cognitive skills to interact with a virtual world; there is no
need to learn contrived conventions. Virtual environments also extend the realm of computer
interaction, from the purely visual to multimodal communication that more closely parallels
human–human exchanges. VE users not only see visual representations, they can also reach
out and grab objects, “feel” their size, rotate them in any given axis, hear their movement, and
even smell associated aromas. Such experiences do not have to be in solitude, as VE users
can take along artificial autonomous agents or collaborate with other users who also have
representations within the virtual world. Taken together, this multisensory experience affords
natural and intuitive interaction.
The paragraph above describes an ideal, but not, unfortunately, the current state of the
art. In today’s virtual environments, users are immersed into an experience with suboptimal
visual resolution, inadequate spatialization of sound, encumbering interactive devices, and
misregistration of tracking information. These issues are among the scientific and technological
challenges that must be resolved to realize the full potential of VE technology, which were
well defined by Nathaniel Durlach and Anne Mavor in their seminal work, Virtual Reality:
Scientific and Technological Challenges. Chapter 1 of this handbook furthers this definitional
effort by reviewing the recommendations set forth by Durlach and Mavor and identifying the
current status of those objectives, the sine qua non being that VE technology, both hardware
and software, has realized substantial gains in the past decade and is posed to support the
next generation of highly sophisticated VE systems. However, psychological considerations
and VE usability evaluation require additional study to identify how best to design and use
VE technology. In addition, Durlach and Mavor (1995, p. 2) mentioned in their work the

xix
xx PREFACE

“inadequate terminology being used” to describe and communicate progress in VE technology.

Chapter 2 thus presents definitions for many of the key terms used throughout this handbook,
thereby providing users with a common understanding of concepts discussed.
After providing an introduction to VE technology, the handbook organizes the body of
knowledge into five main sections and three subsections. In the first of these sections, “System
Requirements,” multimodal system requirements are addressed, including physiological char-
acteristics that affect VE system design. This section is subdivided into hardware, software, and
application requirements. The hardware subsection addresses visual, auditory, haptic, vestibu-
lar, motion and eye tracking, gesture, and locomotion interface design, specifying the state of
the art and how it compares to user and application requirements. The software requirements
subsection discusses virtual world modeling, design of interaction techniques, multimodal de-
sign considerations, autonomous agents design, and Internet-based VE design. The application
requirements subsection covers structured development approaches and transfer-of-training
issues.
“Design Approaches and Implementation Strategies” is the next main section. While con-
ventional HCI design approaches can be used to some extent to develop VE system designs,
their multimodal nature mandates that new approaches be developed that augment existing
techniques. This section addresses cognitive design strategies, identifies perceptual illusions
that can be leveraged in VE design, discusses navigational issues such as becoming lost within
a virtual world, and provides insights into structured approaches to content design. This sec-
tion also reviews technology management techniques and user acceptance concerns, uncovers
means of addressing potential products liability issues related to the risks associated with VE
exposure, and provides sales and market modeling strategies.
“Health and Safety Issues” is the next section. While repetitive use of conventional com-
puter systems has led to a number of associated afflictions (e.g., carpal tunnel syndrome), VE
technology brings its own set of additional physiological and psychological risks. This section
covers the direct physiological effects of VE exposure, such as biological effects, trauma, and
injury. It tackles issues associated with motion sickness, including signs and symptoms, as
well as neurophysiology and physiological correlates, and provides potential approaches to
treatment. The advantages and risks of perceptual and perceptual–motor adaptation are also
discussed, including the ability of humans to overcome the deleterious effects and aftereffects
frequently associated with current VE devices. This section also addresses social concerns,
which have received far too little attention in the field, discussing both the antisocial and
prosocial impact of VE exposure.
Evaluation approaches are presented in the next section. While VE system design can
leverage existing usability engineering techniques, the novel aspects of human–VE interaction
require these techniques to be modified and extended to better address VE evaluation. This
section provides the state of the art in VE usability engineering, addresses human performance
measurement in VEs, identifies usage protocols that can be used to manage the use of VE tech-
nology, and provides means of measuring and managing visual, proprioceptive, and vestibular
aftereffects associated with VE exposure. Approaches to measuring and engendering sense of
presence, which is often considered to be essential to VE usability, are discussed. Ergonomic
concerns of fit and comfort are also addressed in this section.
The final main section, “Selected Applications of Virtual Environments,” provides a com-
pendium of VE applications. Virtual environment applications pioneers have set the stage for
an exciting future. From its military roots, VE technology has branched out into numerous
domains. Developments in the area of military defense have led to substantial gains in hardware
and networking. Academic efforts are leading to new approaches to experiential learning. Med-
ical VE applications are pushing the envelope in diagnosis, therapy, and rehabilitation, resulting
in truly revolutionary advances. System design efforts are allowing models to be created in a
 PREFACE xxi

more intuitive and natural manner, with multidisciplinary design teams communicating their
ideas via the VE medium. Advances in information visualization are enabling dynamic inves-
tigation of multidimensional, highly complex data domains. Manufacturing VE applications
have led to advances in the design of manufacturing activities and manufacturing facilities,
execution of planning, control, and monitoring activities, and execution of physical processing
activities. Likely the most popular of all VE applications, the entertainment industry is leading
the way to truly innovative uses of the technology. From interactive arcades to cyber cafes,
the entertainment industry has leveraged the unique characteristics of this communications
medium, providing dynamic experiences to those who come along for the ride.
This handbook closes with a brief review of the history of VE technology, as we must ac-
knowledge the pioneers whose innovativeness and courage provided the keystones for contem-
porary successes. The final chapter also provides information on the VE profession, providing
those interested with a number of sources to further their quest for the keys to developing the
ultimate virtual world.
The main objective of this handbook is to provide practitioners with a reference source
to guide their development efforts. We have endeavored to provide a resource that not only
addresses technology concerns but also tackles the social and business implications with which
those associated with the technology are likely to grapple. While each chapter has a strong
theoretical foundation, practical implications are derived and illustrated via the many tables
and figures presented.
Taken together, the chapters present systematic and extensive coverage of the primary areas
of research and development within VE technology. The handbook brings together a com-
prehensive set of contributed articles that address the principles required to define system
requirements and design, build, evaluate, implement, and manage the effective use of VE
applications. The scope and detail of the handbook are extensive, and no one person could
possibly do justice to the breadth of coverage provided. Thus, the handbook leveraged author-
itative specialists that were able to provide critical insights and principles associated with their
given area of expertise. It is through the collective effort of the many contributing authors that
such a broad body of knowledge was assembled.

—Kay M. Stanney, Ph.D.

Orlando, Florida
February 2001
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 Acknowledgments

If men will not act for themselves, what will they do when the benefit of their effort is for all?
—Elbert Hubbard, A Message to Garcia (p. 23)

In the case of the many contributors to this handbook, the answer to this question is that they will
selflessly endeavor to provide the insights and assistance required to realize this tremendous
effort. In many ways I feel the creation of this handbook is “our Message to Garcia,” one
developed through altruistic dedication, the only impetus being that such a source is direly
needed in the field. Many individuals openly gave of their time, energy, and knowledge in order
to develop this handbook, often when they were fully loaded with their own responsibilities.
The efforts of the many contributing authors and to the advisory board, which helped formulate
the content coverage, are most sincerely appreciated.
To Gavriel Salvendy, who has provided me with many opportunities, including the invitation
to edit this handbook, which have shaped and molded my career I am forever grateful. I have also
been blessed with the finest of mentors, Robert S. Kennedy, who gives tirelessly of himself—
thank you. I am greatly appreciative of the support of the National Science Foundation, Office
of Naval Research, and Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division, in particular Gary
W. Strong, Helen M. Gigley, and Robert Breaux. The National Science Foundation CAREER
Award and ONR Young Investigator Award have provided me with the opportunity to develop
technical depth in human-computer interaction and virtual environment technology and fos-
tered interchange with experts in the field, many of whom contributed chapters to this handbook.
Each chapter in the handbook was peer reviewed. I would like to thank the many advisory
board members and chapter contributors who assisted with this process, as well as the fol-
lowing individuals who kindly gave of their time to the review process: Andi Cowell, Chuck
Daniels, Nathaniel Durlach, Jason Fox, Thomas Furness, Phillip Hash, Susan Lanham, Dennis
McBride, Dean Owen, Randy Pausch, Leah Reeves, Mario Rodriguez, Randy Stiles, and
Mark Wiederhold.
For the persistent efforts and encouragement of Anne Duffy, our Lawrence Erlbaum senior
editor, who stuck with me even as I missed deadlines and acted out of frustration, I am deeply
grateful.
Much appreciation goes to Branka Wedell, who took my amorphous ideas and, through her
inspired creativity, designed the striking cover art for this handbook.

xxiii
xxiv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The efforts of David Bush are greatly appreciated, as he assisted with many of the activities
associated with the handbook and always with a smile on his face. I am also indebted to Kelly
Kingdon, who assisted me with many of my personal responsibilities so that I had more time
to dedicate to this effort.
To those individuals who constitute the fabric of my life, my parents who instilled the work
ethic that allowed me to persevere and see this effort through to completion, my sisters and
brother, my very best friends, my brother-in-law who introduced me to A Message to Garcia
at an opportune moment, and my three sons, Sean, Ryan, and Michael, who fill my world with
sunshine, I have been blessed by your encouragement and confidence.
Above all, I am deeply indebted to my husband, who not only encouraged me as I fretted
that this handbook would remain a virtual reality, but also rolled up his sleeves and assisted
with editing and proofreading. His love is my pillar and his steadfast support of my career is
my forte.

—Kay M. Stanney
 Advisory Board

Terry Allard Grigore C. Burdea

Chief, Human Factors Division Associate Professor
Information Sciences and Technology Department of Electrical and
Directorate Computer Engineering
NASA Ames Research Center School of Engineering, Rutgers University
Moffett Field, CA Piscataway, NJ

Durand R. Begault Malcolm M. Cohen

Researcher Chief
Spatial Auditory Display Laboratory Human Information Processing
Human Factors Division Research Branch
NASA Ames Research Center Human Factors Division
Moffett Field, CA NASA Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, CA
Robert Breaux
Program Manager, Virtual Reality Carolina Cruz-Neira
Naval Air Warfare Center Litton Associate Professor
Training Systems Division Department of Electrical and Computer
Orlando, FL Engineering
Associate Director, Virtual Reality
Frederick Brooks Applications Center
Kenan Professor of Computer Science Iowa State University
University of North Carolina Ames, IA
Chapel Hill, NC
Rudy Darken
Steve Bryson Assistant Professor
Research Scientist Department of Computer Science
Numerical Aerospace Simulation Division The Moves Institute
NASA Ames Research Center Naval Postgraduate School
Moffett Field, CA Monterey, CA

xxv
xxvi ADVISORY BOARD

Paul DiZio Bruce W. Knerr

Associate Professor Research Psychologist
Volen Center for Complex Systems US Army Research Institute
Ashton Graybiel Spatial Orientation Orlando, FL
Laboratory
Brandeis University
Myron W. Krueger
Waltham, MA
President, Artificial Reality Corporation
Vernon, CT
Nathaniel I. Durlach
Senior Scientist
Department of Electrical Engineering and Ben Lawson
Computer Science Research Scientist
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Spatial Orientation Systems
Cambridge, MA Naval Aerospace Medical Research
Laboratory
Helen M. Gigley Pensacola, FL
Program Officer
Cognitive, Neural and Biomolecular Science
R. Bowen Loftin
and Technology Division
Professor of Electrical and Computer
Office of Naval Research
Engineering
Arlington, VA
Professor of Computer Science
Director of Simulation Programs
Lawrence J. Hettinger
Old Dominion University
Senior Human Factors Engineer
Norfolk, VA
Northrop Grumman Information
Technologies
Harvard, MA Mark Mon-Williams
Lecturer
Deborah Hix School of Psychology
Research Computer Scientist University of St. Andrews
Department of Computer Science St. Andrews, Scotland, United Kingdom
Systems Research Center
Virginia Tech
J. Michael Moshell
Blacksburg, VA
Director
CREAT Digital Media Program and
Robert S. Kennedy
Professor of Computer Science
President
University of Central Florida
RSK Assessments, Inc.
Orlando, FL
Orlando, FL

G. Drew Kessler Ronald R. Mourant

Assistant Professor Professor, Department of Mechanical,
Computer Science and Engineering Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
Department Virtual Environments Laboratory
Lehigh University Northeastern University
Bethlehem, PA Boston, MA
 ADVISORY BOARD xxvii

Max M. North Gary W. Strong

Associate Professor Program Manager
Computer Science and Information Bio-Info Programs
Systems National Science Foundation
Kennesaw State University Arlington, VA
Kennesaw, GA
Hiroshi Tamura
Oliver H. Riedel Professor
Director Faculty of Human Environment
Virtual Reality Hiroshima International University
CENIT AG Systemhaus Gakuendai, Kurose Town
Fraunhofer Institute for Industrial Hiroshima, Japan
Engineering (IAO)
University of Stuttgart
John Wann
Stuttgart, Germany
Professor
Action Research Laboratory
Gavriel Salvendy
Department of Psychology
NEC Professor
University of Reading
Industrial Engineering
Reading, United Kingdom
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN
Robert B. Welch
Michael J. Singer Research Scientist
Research Psychologist Human Factors Research and Technology
US Army Research Institute Division
Simulator Systems Unit NASA Ames Research Center
Orlando, FL Moffett Field, CA

Thomas Stoffregen John R. Wilson

Associate Professor Professor of Occupational Ergonomics
Director, Human Factors Research Director of VIRART
Laboratory Management and Human Factors Group
Division of Kinesiology School of 4M
University of Minnesota University of Nottingham
Minneapolis, MN Nottingham, United Kingdom
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 About the Editor

Kay Stanney is an associate professor with the University of Central Florida’s Industrial Engi-
neering and Management Systems Department, which she joined in 1992. She is an editor of
the International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. She is a cofounder of the Virtual
Environments Technical Group of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Dr. Stanney has
more than 100 scientific publications and has given numerous invited lectures and presen-
tations. Her research into the after-effects associated with virtual environment exposure,
which is funded by the National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research, and National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, has appeared on MTV Network’s health show Mega-
Dose, NBC Nightly News, the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s Undercurrents, and NBC’s
local Orlando news, as well as receiving front-page coverage in various newspapers. Dr. Stanney
received a bachelor of science in industrial engineering from the State University of New York
at Buffalo in 1986, after which time she spent three years working as a manufacturing/quality
engineer for Intel Corporation in Santa Clara, California. She received her master’s degree
and Ph.D. in industrial engineering, with a focus on human factors engineering, from Purdue
University in 1990 and 1992, respectively.

xxix
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 Contributors

Jan M. Allbeck Cagatay Basdogan

Research Assistant Senior Member of Technical Staff
Center for Human Modeling and Simulation JPL–Virtual Environments Laboratory
University of Pennsylvania. California Institute of Technology
Philadelphia, PA Pasadena, CA

David R. Badcock S. James Biggs

Professor Postdoctoral Associate
Department of Psychology MIT Touch Lab
University of Western Australia Research Laboratory of Electronics
Nedlands, Western Australia Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, MA
Eric Badiqué
Project Officer
Richard Blade
European Commission
Professor
IST Programme
Department of Physics and Energy Science
Brussels, Belgium
University of Colorado, Colorado Springs
Colorado Springs, CO
Norman I. Badler
Director
Center for Human Modeling and Simulation James P. Bliss
Professor, Computer and Information Associate Professor
Science Dept Department of Psychology
University of Pennsylvania Old Dominion University
Philadelphia, PA Norfolk, VA 23529

Kathleen M. Bartlett Robert S. Bolia

Research Assistant Computer Scientist
RSK Assessments, Inc. Air Force Research Laboratory
Orlando, FL Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH

xxxi
xxxii CONTRIBUTORS

Doug A. Bowman Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

Assistant Professor Senior Research Psychologist
Department of Computer Science Naval Air Warfare Center
Virginia Tech Training Systems Division
Blacksburg, VA Orlando, FL

Robert Breaux Marc Cavazza

Program Manager, Virtual Reality Professor
Naval Air Warfare Center School of Computing and Mathematics
Training Systems Division University of Teesside
Orlando, FL Middlesbrough, United Kingdom

Steve Bryson Ryad Chellali

Research Scientist Technical Head
Numerical Aerospace Simulation Division TridimAge, Inc.
NASA Ames Research Center Assistant Professor of Robotics
Moffett Field, CA Ecole des Mines de Nantes
Nantes Cedex, France
J. Galen Buckwalter
Senior Investigator Kyung H. Chung
Department of Research and Evaluation Research Assistant
Southern California Kaiser Permanente Department of Industrial and Systems
Medical Group Engineering
Pasadena, CA Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
Grigore C. Burdea
Associate Professor Deborah M. Clawson
Department of Electrical and Computer Associate Professor
Engineering Department of Psychology
School of Engineering, Rutgers University The Catholic University of America
Piscataway, NJ Washington, DC

David R. Bush Sue V. G. Cobb

Doctoral Student Research Manager
Industrial Engineering and Management Virtual Reality Applications Research Team
Systems (VIRART)
University of Central Florida University of Nottingham
Orlando, FL Nottingham United Kingdom

Sandra L. Calvert Joseph R. Coble

Professor Chair and Professor
Department of Psychology Psychology Department
Georgetown University Clark Atlanta University
Washington, DC Atlanta, Georgia
 CONTRIBUTORS xxxiii

Philippe Coiffet Roy C. Davies

Director of Research, CNRS Research Associate
Member of the French Academy of Department of Design Sciences
Technologies Division of Ergonomics and Aerosol
Laboratoire de Robotique de Paris Technology
Vélizy, France Lund Institute of Technology
Lund University
Daniel Compton Lund, Sweden
Research Assistant
RSK Assessments, Inc. Paul DiZio
Orlando, FL Associate Professor
Volen Center for Complex Sysytems and
Ashton Graybiel Spatial Orientation
Joanna K. Crosier Laboratory
Research Scientist Brandeis University
Education Applications, Virtual Reality Waltham, MA
Applications Research Team (VIRART)
University of Nottingham John V. Draper
Nottingham, United Kingdom Research Scientist
Robotics and Process Systems Division
Mirabelle D’Cruz Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Research Scientist Oak Ridge, TN
Industrial Applications, Virtual Reality
Applications Research Team (VIRART) Mark H. Draper
Institute for Occupational Ergonomics Major, United States Air Force
University of Nottingham Air Force Research Laboratory
Nottingham, United Kingdom Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH

Leonard Daly Richard Eastgate

President Technical Manager
Daly Realism.com Virtual Reality Applications Research
Van Nuys, CA Team (VIRART)
Institute for Occupational Ergonomics
University of Nottingham
Rudy Darken Nottingham, United Kingdom
Assistant Professor
Department of Computer Science Clive Fencott
The MOVES Institute Senior Lecturer
Naval Postgraduate School School of Computing and Mathematics
Monterey, CA University of Teesside
Middlesbrough, United Kingdom
Eleni M. Daskarolis
Research Assistant Eric Foxlin
Department of Psychology Chief Technology Officer
University of Central Florida InterSense, Inc.
Orlando, FL Burlington, MA
xxxiv CONTRIBUTORS

Joe Gabbard Gerald A. Higgins

Senior Research Associate Vice President
Systems Research Center Image Medical, Inc.
Virginia Tech Silver Spring, MD
Blacksburg, VA

Stephen L. Goldberg Deborah Hix

Chief, Simulator Systems Research Unit Research Computer Scientist
US Army Research Institute Department of Computer Science
Orlando, FL Systems Research Center
Virginia Tech
David A. Graeber Blacksburg, VA
ONR/NAWC Fellow
Industrial Engineering and Management
Systems Maureen K. Holden
University of Central Florida Research Scientist
Orlando, FL Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
David Gross Cambridge, MA
Associate Technical Fellow of the Boeing
Company
John M. Hollerbach
Boeing Company
Professor
Huntsville, AL
University of Utah
School of Computing
Deborah L. Harm
Salt Lake City, UT
Research Scientist
NASA Johnson Space Center
Houston, TX Charles E. Hughes
Professor
Michael Heim School of Electrical Engineering and
Virtual Worlds Director Computer Science
Art Center College of Design University of Central Florida
Pasadena, CA Orlando, FL
Lawrence J. Hettinger
Senior Human Factors Engineer George K. Hung
Northrop Grumman Information Professor
Technologies Department of Biomedical Engineering
Harvard, MA Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ
Katherine A. Hickinbotham
Research Associate
Spatial Orientation Systems Jerry Isdale
Naval Aerospace Medical Research Research Staff Scientist
Laboratory HRL Laboratories, LLC
Pensacola, FL Malibu, CA
 CONTRIBUTORS xxxv

Shaun B. Jones Gudrun Klinker

Associate Professor of Surgery Assistant Professor
Uniformed Services University of Health Technische Universitaet Muenchen
Sciences Fachbereich Informatik
Program Manager, Pathogen Munich, Germany
Countermeasures
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Bruce W. Knerr
Washington, DC Research Psychologist
US Army Research Institute
David B. Kaber Orlando, FL
Assistant Professor
Department of Industrial Engineering James Lackner
North Carolina State University Professor
Raleigh, NC Volen Center for Complex Systems
Ashton Graybiel Spatial Orientation
Manpreet Kaur Laboratory
Usability Specialist Brandeis University
Idea Integration Waltham, MA
Houston, TX
Donald Ralph Lampton
Kristyne E. Kennedy
Research Psychologist
Attorney at Law
U.S. Army Research Institute
RSK Assessments, Inc.,
Simulator Systems Research Unit
Orlando, FL
Orlando, FL
Robert S. Kennedy
Corinna E. Lathan
President
President and CEO
RSK Assessments, Inc.
AnthroTronix, Inc.
Orlando, FL
College Park, MD
G. Drew Kessler
Assistant Professor Ben Lawson
Computer Science and Engineering Research Scientist
Department Spatial Orientation Systems
Lehigh University Naval Aerospace Medical Research
Bethlehem, PA Laboratory
Pensacola, FL
Abderrahmane Kheddar
Assistant Professor Gordon Mair
CEMIF–Complex Systems Laboratory Director
University of Evry Val-d’Essonne Transparent Telepresence Research Group
Evry, France University of Strathclyde
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Kelly Kingdon
Research Assistant James G. May
Industrial Engineering and Management Professor
Systems Department of Psychology
University of Central Florida University of New Orleans
Orlando, FL New Orleans, LA
xxxvi CONTRIBUTORS

Pamela R. McCauley-Bell Helen R. Neale

Associate Professor Research Scientist
Department of Industrial Engineering and Special Needs Applications, Virtual Reality
Management Systems Applications Research Team (VIRART)
University of Central Florida University of Nottingham
Orlando, FL Nottingham, United Kingdom

W. Todd Nelson
Andrew M. Mead Senior Usability Engineer
Research Scientist divine/Whitman-Hart
Naval Air Warfare Center Cincinnati, Ohio
Training Systems Division
Orlando, FL Max M. North
Associate Professor
Computer Science and Information Systems
Mark Mon-Williams Kennesaw State University
Lecturer Kennesaw, GA
School of Psychology
University of St. Andrews Sarah M. North
St. Andrews, Scotland, United Kingdom Director
Human–Computer Interaction Group
Associate Professor
Christina S. Morris Computer and Information Sciences
Research Administrator Clark Atlanta University
Advanced Learning Technologies Atlanta, Georgia
Institute for Simulation and Training
Orlando, FL Randy L. Oser
Senior Research Psychologist
Naval Air Warfare Center
J. Michael Moshell Training Systems Division
Director Orlando, FL
CREAT Digital Media Program and
Professor of Computer Science Mary Lou Padgett
University of Central Florida President
Orlando, FL Padgett Computer Innovations, Inc.
Auburn, AL

Allen Munro James Patrey

Director Research Scientist
Behavioral Technology Laboratories Naval Air Warfare Center
University of Southern California Training Systems Division
Redondo Beach, CA Orlando, FL

Barry Peterson
Eric Muth Research Associate
Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science
Department of Psychology The MOVES Institute
Clemson University Naval Postgraduate School
Clemson, SC Monterey, CA
 CONTRIBUTORS xxxvii

George V. Popescu Elizabeth Sheldon

Research Staff Member ONR/NAWC Fellow
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Industrial Engineering and Management
Hawthorne, NY Systems
University of Central Florida
Orlando, FL
Dean Reed
Systems Programmer John P. Shewchuk
Visual Systems Laboratory Associate Professor
Institute for Simulation and Training Department of Industrial and Systems
University of Central Florida Engineering
Orlando, FL Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
Albert A. Rizzo Russell D. Shilling
Research Assistant Professor Associate Professor
Integrated Media Systems Center and Operations Research
School of Gerontology The MOVES Institute
University of Southern California Naval Postgraduate School
Los Angeles, CA Monterey, CA

Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Wallace Sadowski
Assistant Professor
Advisory Human Factors Engineer
Departments of Cognitive and Neural
IBM Voice Systems
Systems and Biomedical Engineering
Boca Raton, FL
Hearing Research Center
Boston University
Eduardo Salas Boston, MA
Professor
Department of Psychology Stephanie Sides
Institute for Simulation & Training Research Associate
University of Central Florida Spatial Orientation Systems
Orlando, FL Naval Aerospace Medical Research
Laboratory
Pensacola, FL
Richard M. Satava
Professor of Surgery Mandayam A. Srinivasan
Yale University School of Medicine Director, Touch Lab
Program Manager, Advanced Biomedical Department of Mechanical Engineering and
Technologies Research Laboratory of Electronics
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Massachusetts Institute of Technology
New Haven, CT Cambridge, MA

Kay M. Stanney
Marc M. Sebrechts Associate Professor
Professor and Chair Department of Industrial Engineering and
Department of Psychology Management Systems
The Catholic University of America University of Central Florida
Washington, DC Orlando, FL
xxxviii CONTRIBUTORS

Thomas A. Stoffregen Emanuel Todorov

Associate Professor Senior Research Fellow
Director, Human Factors Research Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit
Laboratory University College London
Division of Kinesiology London, United Kingdom
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN Michael R. Tracey
Research Assistant
Robert J. Stone Department of Biomedical Engineering
Scientific Director The Catholic University of America
Virtual Presence Washington, DC
Manchester, United Kingdom
Helmuth Trefftz
Russell L. Storms Graduate Assistant
Research Scientist Department of Electrical and Computer
Army Research Laboratory Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology School of Engineering
Atlanta, GA Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ
G. M. Peter Swann
Marilyn Mantei Tremaine
Professor of Economics
Research Professor
Manchester Business School
Center for Advanced Information Processing
University of Manchester
(CAIP)
Manchester, United Kingdom
Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ
Tony Sweeney
Deputy Director
Matthew Turk
National Museum of Photography,
Associate Professor
Film and Television
Computer Science Department
Bradford, United Kingdom
University of California
Santa Barbara, CA
Daniel Thalmann
Professor John M. Usher
Computer Graphics Lab Professor
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Department of Industrial Engineering
Lausanne, Switzerland Mississippi State University
Mississippi State, MS
Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann
Professor Cheryl van der Zaag
Miralab NIA Fellow
University of Geneva School of Gerontology
Geneva, Switzerland University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA
Richard A. Thurman
Assistant Professor Erik Viirre
Western Illinois University Senior Research Scientist
Instructional Technology and Human Interface Technology Laboratory
Telecommunications University of Washington
Macomb, IL Seattle, WA
 CONTRIBUTORS xxxix

John Wann Robert C. Williges

Professor Ralph H. Bogle Professor of Industrial and
Action Research Laboratory Systems Engineering
Department of Psychology Virginia Tech
University of Reading Blacksburg, VA
Reading, United Kingdom
John R. Wilson
Robert B. Welch
Professor of Occupational Ergonomics
Research Scientist
Director of VIRART
Human Factors Research and Technology
Management and Human Factors Group
Division
School of 4M
NASA Ames Research Center
University of Nottingham
Moffett Field, CA
Nottingham, United Kingdom
Joseph Wilder
Research Professor Michael Zyda
Center for Advanced Information Processing Director
(CAIP) The MOVES Institute
Rutgers University Naval Postgraduate School
Piscataway, NJ Monterey, CA
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 PART I: Introduction

1
Virtual Environments
in the 21st Century

Kay M. Stanney1 and Michael Zyda2

1
University of Central Florida
Industrial Engineering and Management Systems
4000 Central Florida Blvd.
Orlando, FL 32816-2450
[email protected]
2
Naval Postgraduate School
Modeling, Virtual Environments
and Simulation (MOVES) Academic Group
Spanagel Hall 252, Code MOVES/mjz
Monterey, California 93943-5118
[email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION

You see, then, that a doubt about the reality of sense is easily raised, since there may even be a doubt
whether we are awake or in a dream. And as our time is equally divided between sleeping and waking,
in either sphere of existence the soul contends that the thoughts which are present to our minds at the
time are true; and during one half of our lives we affirm the truth of the one, and, during the other half,
of the other; and are equally confident of both.
—Theaetetus, Plato

As Plato so eloquently stated, that which is reality emanates from that which is present to our
minds. In Theaetetus, Plato examines perception, knowledge, truth, and subjectivity. This work
suggests that Forms (i.e., circularity, squareness, and triangularity) have greater reality than
objects in the physical world. This reality is derived because Forms serve as models for our
perceptions. So it is that a virtual environment (i.e., a modeled world) can represent a “truth”
that can educate, train, entertain, and inspire. In their ultimate form, virtual environments (VEs)
immerse users in a fantastic world, one that stimulates multiple senses and provides vibrant

1
2 STANNEY AND ZYDA

experiences that somehow transform those exposed (e.g., via training, educating, marketing,
or entertaining).
Visions such as The Matrix, written and directed by Andy and Larry Wachowski, have
elevated the status of VE to the level of pop iconography, and some of those associated
with the technology have arguably risen to star status (e.g., Jaron Lanier). Yet, while one
may speak of VE as contemporary, even in vogue, how far has the technology really come
since the pioneering work of Ivan Sutherland, with his 1963 Sketchpad that provided the
first interactive computer graphics, or Morton Heilig’s 1956 engineering marvel Sensorama
rambled through Brooklyn’s streets and California’s sand dunes (Rheingold, 1991; Sutherland,
1963)? Sensorama provided a multisensory experience of riding a motorcycle by combining
three-dimensional (3-D) movies seen through a binocularlike viewer, stereo sound, wind, and
enticing aromas (see chap. 56, this volume). Some aspects of the technology have improved
substantially since Sketchpad and Sensorama, such as greater visual resolution (see chap. 3,
this volume), spatialized audio (see chap. 4), and haptic interaction (e.g., the net force and
torque feedback used in tool usage; see chaps. 5 and 6), while others have yet to make any
significant strides. In particular, the small grills placed near the nose of Sensorama’s passenger
that emitted authentic aromas are arguably as sophisticated as today’s olfactory technology
(see chaps. 14, 21, and 40), although digiScents·com now promises to bring the sense of smell
to our computer. In addition, the generation of tactile sensations (i.e., distribution of force
fields on the skin during contact with objects) remains elusive (see chaps. 5 and 6).
Perhaps a more appropriate yardstick by which to judge the current state of the art in VE
technology would be the agenda set by Durlach and Mavor (1995) a half decade ago in the
seminal National Research Council (NRC) report Virtual Reality: Scientific and Technological
Challenges. That report developed a set of recommendations that, if heeded, should assist
in realizing the full potential of VE technology (see Table 1.1). While this work provided
many suggestions, the importance of improved computer generation of multimodal images and
advancements in hardware technologies that support interface devices were stressed, as was
improvement in the general comfort associated with donning these devices. As the following
sections will discuss, the former objectives have largely been met by astounding technological
advances, yet the latter has yet to be fully realized, as VE users are still impeded by cumbersome
devices and binding tethers (but that will soon change with technologies such as Bluetooth).
This chapter focuses on a number of key recommendations put forth by Durlach and Mavor
(1995), while many others are described in detail in other chapters in this handbook (see status
notes in Table 1.1).

2. TECHNOLOGY

Virtual environments are driven by the technology that is used to design and build these systems.
This technology consists of the human–machine interface devices that are used to present
multimodal information and sense the virtual world, as well as the hardware and software
used to generate the virtual environment. It also includes the techniques and electromechanical
systems used in telerobotics, which can be transferred to the design of VE systems, as well as the
communication networks that can be used to transform VE systems into shared virtual worlds.

2.1 Human–Machine Interface

Human–machine interfaces consist of the multimodal devices used to present information to
VE users. For multimodal VE applications, advances in peripheral connections to the computer
are the single largest issue. When an input device is connected, such as a body or limb tracker, a
serial port is generally utilized, a port typically designed for character input and not high-speed
 1. VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS IN THE 21st CENTURY 3

data transfer. A solution to the input device connectivity issue that is available on commodity
computing is the great unsolved problem. At some point, this input-port speed problem needs
to be solved, and that resolution must be included on mass-marketed PCs or their descendents.
Visual displays, especially head-mounted displays (HMDs), have come down substantially
in weight but are still hindered by cumbersome designs, obstructive tethers, suboptimal reso-
lution, and insufficient field of view (see chap. 3). (Note: For an excellent comparative source
on HMDs, see the “HMD/VR–Helmet Comparison Chart,” Bungert, 2001.) Recent advances in
wearable computer displays (e.g., Microvision, MicroOptical), which can incorporate minia-
ture LCDs directly into conventional eyeglasses or helmets, should ease cumbersome design
and further reduce weight (Lieberman, 1999). There are several low- to mid-cost HMDs
(InterSense’s InterTrax i-glasses, Olympus Eye-Trek FMD, Interactive Imaging Systems’
VFX3D, Sony Cybermind, Sony Glasstron, and Kaiser ProViewXL) that are lightweight (ap-
proximately 39 g to 1,000 g) and provide a horizontal field of view (30 to 35 degrees per eye)
and resolution (180 K to 2.4 M pixels/LCD) exceeding predecessor systems. While the reso-
lution range looks impressive, most consumer-grade HMDs (those around 180 K pixels/LCD)
use three pixels (red, green, and blue) to produce one colored pixel, providing a true resolution
of only about 60 K pixels per LCD (Bungert, 2001).
Virtual Retinal Displays (VRDs) may bring truly revolutionary advances in display tech-
nology. VRD technology, which was invented in 1991 at the University of Washington’s HIT
(Human Interface Technology) Lab, holds the promise for greatly enhanced optics (Kleweno
et al., 1998). With this technology, an image is scanned directly onto a viewer’s retina using
low-power red, green, and blue light sources, such as lasers or LEDs (Urey, Wine, & Lewis,
online). The VRD system has superior color fidelity, brightness, resolution, and contrast com-
pared to LCDs and CRTs, as it typically uses spectrally pure lasers as the light source.
With advances in wireless and laser technologies and miniaturization of LCDs, during the
next decade visual display technology should realize the substantial gains necessary to provide
high-fidelity virtual imagery in a lightweight noncumbersome manner.
In the area of virtual auditory displays there have also been tremendous gains (see chap. 4).
For example, while early spatialized audio solutions (Blauert, 1997) were expensive to imple-
ment, it is currently feasible to include spatialized audio in most VE systems. (For an excellent
source on spatialized audio, see “The Ultimate Spatial Audio Index,” http://www.speakeasy.org/
∼draught/spataudio.html.) On the hardware side, systems are available that present multiple
sound sources to multiple listeners using positional tracking. Technology for designing com-
plex spatial audio scenarios, including numerous reflections, real-time convolution, and head
tracking is currently under way. Software solutions are also under development, which pro-
vide low-level control of a variety of signal processing functions, including the number and
position of reflections, as well as allowing for normal head-related transfer function (HRTF)
processing (see chap. 4), manipulation of acoustic radiation patterns, spherical spreading loss,
and atmospheric absorption. HRTFs have yet, however, to effectively include reverberation
or echoes. Adding reverberation to a VE causes auditory sources to seem more realistic and
provides robust information about relative source distance; thus, further research is needed
in the development of tractable reverberation algorithms for real-time systems. Advances in
HRTF individualization (i.e., to the physiological makeup of a listener’s ear) are also of great
importance for localizing sounds, especially for distinguishing front from back and up from
down. In particular, means to tailor HRTFs to an individual listener without explicitly measur-
ing HRTFs for that individual are needed. This may be possible, since the transfer functions
of the external ear have been found to be similar across different individuals (Middlebrooks,
Makous, & Green, 1989).
Current haptic technology provides net force and torque feedback (i.e., simulating tool
usage) but has yet to develop effective tactile feedback (e.g., simulating skin contact or dynamic
flexibility, such as the sensation of bumps, scratches, and deformations due to flexion of body
4

TABLE 1.1
Status of Durlach and Mavor’s (1995) Recommendations for Advancing VE Technology

Area Recommendation Status1

Technology: human–machine • Address issues of information loss due to technology shortcomings (e.g., poor resolution, limited field of view, deficiencies in S
interface tracker technology)
• Improvements in spatialization of sounds, especially sounds to the front of a listener and outside of the “sweet spot” M (see chap. 4)
surrounding a listener’s head
• Improvements in sound synthesis for environmental sounds M
• Improvements in real-time sound generation M
• Better understanding of scene analysis (e.g., temporal sequencing) in the auditory system M
• Improvements in tactile displays that convey information through the skin L (see chaps. 5–6)
• Better understanding of the mechanical properties of soft tissues that come in contact with haptic devices, limits on human L
kinesthetic sensing and control, and stimulus cues involved in the sensing of contact and object features
• Improvements in locomotion devices beyond treadmills and exercise machines M (see chap. 11)
• Address fit issues associated with body-based linkage tracking devices; workspace limitations associated with ground-based M (see chap. 8)
linkage tracking devices; accuracy, range, latency, and interference issues associated with magnetic trackers; and sensor size
and cost associated with inertial trackers
• Improvements in sensory, actuator, and transmission technologies for sensing object proximity, object surface properties, and M (see chaps. 5–6)
applying force
• Improvements in the vocabulary size, speaker independence, speech continuity, interference handling, and quality of speech S
production for speech communication interfaces
• Improvements in olfactory stimulation devices L
• Improvements in physiological interfaces (e.g., direct stimulation and sensing of neural systems) M (see chap. 7)
• Address ergonomic issues associated with interaction devices (e.g., excessive weight, poor fit both mechanically and optically) M (see chap. 41)
• Better understanding of perceptual effects of misregistration of visual images in augmented reality M (see chap. 37)
• Better understanding of how multimodal displays influence human performance on diverse types of tasks M (see chaps. 14, 21)
Technology: computer • Improvements in techniques to minimize the load (i.e., polygon flow) on graphics processors S (see chap. 12)
generation of virtual • Improvements in data access speeds S
environments • Development of operating systems that ensure high-priority processes (e.g., user tracking) receive priority at regular intervals L
and provide time-critical computing and rendering with graceful degradation
 • Improvements in rendering photorealistic time-varying visual scenes at high frame rates (i.e., resolving the trade-off between M
realistic images and realistic interactivity)
• Development of navigation aids to prevent users from becoming lost M (see chap. 24)
• Improvements in ability to model psychological and physical models that “drive” autonomous agents M (see chap. 15)
• Improved means of mapping how user’s control actions update the visual scene M (see chaps. 12, 13)
• Improvements in active mapping techniques (e.g., scanning-laser range finders, light stripes) M (see chap. 8)
Technology: telerobotics • Improvements in the ability to create and maintain accurate registration between the real and virtual worlds in augmented M (see chap. 48)
reality applications
• Development of display and control systems that support distributed telerobotics M (see chap. 48)
• Improvements in supervisory control and predictive modeling for addressing transport delay issues M (see chap. 48)
Technology: networks • Development of network standards that support large-scale distributed VEs M (see chap. 16)
• Development of an open VE network M (see chap. 16)
• Improvements in ability to embed hypermedia nodes into VE systems M (see chap. 16)
• Development of wide-area and local-area networks with the capability (e.g., increased bandwidth, speed, and reliability, L (see chap. 16)
reduced cost) to support the high-performance demands of multimodal VE applications
• Development of VE-specific applications-level network protocols L (see chap. 16)
Psychological consideration • Better understanding of sensorimotor resolution, perceptual illusions, human-information-processing transfer rates, and M (see chaps. 20, 22, 23)
manual tracking ability
• Better understanding of the optimal form of multimodal information presentation for diverse types of tasks M (see chap. 21)
• Better understanding of the effect of fixed sensory transformations and distortions on human performance M (see chap. 31)
• Better understanding of how VE drives alterations and adaptation in sensorimotor loops and how these processes are affected M (see chaps. 31, 37–39)
by magnitude of exposure
• Better understanding of the cognitive and social side effects of VE interaction M (see chaps. 19, 20, 33)
Evaluation • Establish set of VE testing and evaluation standards M (see chap. 34)
• Determine how VE hardware and software can be developed in cost-effective manner, taking into consideration engineering M (see chap. 28)
reliability and efficiency, as well as human perceptual and cognitive features
• Identify capabilities and limitations of humans to undergo VE exposure M (see chaps. 29–41)
• Examine medical and psychological side effects of VE exposure, taking into consideration effects on human visual, auditory, M (see chaps. 29–33, 37–39)
and haptic systems, as well as motion sickness and physiological/psychological aftereffects
• Determine if novel aspects of human–VE interaction require new evaluation tools M (see chap. 34)
• Conduct studies that can lead to generalizations concerning relationships between types of tasks, task presentation modes, L (see chap. 35)
and human performance
• Determine areas in which VE applications can lead to significant gains in experience or performance M (see chaps. 42–55)

1 L = limited to no advancement; M = modest advancement; S = substantial advancement.

5
6 STANNEY AND ZYDA

segments, see chaps. 5 and 6). Srinvasan (see chap. 5) suggests that for the foreseeable future
advances in haptic technology will be limited by the development of new actuator hardware.
In addition, hardware required to simulate distributed forces on the skin may require sub-
stantial gains in miniature rotary and linear actuators or advances in alternative technologies,
such as shape memory alloys, piezoelectrics, microfluidics, and other microelectromechanical
systems.
Advances in tracking technology have been realized in terms of drift-corrected gyroscopic
orientation trackers, outside-in optical tracking for motion capture, and laser scanners (see
chap. 8). The future of tracking technology is likely hybrid tracking systems, with an acoustic-
inertial hybrid on the market (see http://www.isense.com/products/) and several others in re-
search labs (e.g., magnetic-inertial, optical-inertial, and optical-magnetic). In addition, ul-
trawideband radio technology holds promise for an improved method of omni-directional
point-to-point ranging.
Led largely by the Information Society Directorate General of the European Union and
the Information Science and Engineering Directorate of the National Science Foundation, the
quality of speech recognition and synthesis systems have made substantial gains in the past
half decade. Speaker-independent continuous speech recognition systems are currently com-
mercially available (Germain, 1999; Huang, 1998); however, additional advances are needed
in acoustic and language modeling algorithms to improve the accuracy, usability, and effi-
ciency of spoken language understanding. Synthetic speech can now be produced that rea-
sonably resembles the acoustic and prosodic characteristics of the original speaker; however,
improvements are required in the areas of naturalness, flexibility, and intelligibility of syn-
thesized speech (Institution of Electrical Engineers, 2000). Speech recognition and synthe-
sis are not addressed in detail in this handbook, not due to any implied lack of importance
but rather because there are many significant works whose sole focus is speech technology
(see Gibbon, Mertins, Moore, 2000; Varile & Zampolli, 1998). (For an excellent information
source on commercial speech recognition, see http://www.tiac.net/users/rwilcox/speech.html;
see http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/∼jpi/museum.html for resources on speech synthesis systems;
see http://research.microsoft.com/research/srg/ for the latest in Microsoft’s speech technology
efforts).
Taken together, these technological advancements, along with those poised for the near
future, provide the infrastructure on which to build complex, immersive multimodal VE
applications.

2.2 Computer Generation of Virtual Environments

Computer generation of VEs requires very large physical memories, high-speed processors,
high-bandwidth mass storage capacity, and high-speed interface ports for input/output devices
(Durlach & Mavor, 1995). Remarkable advances in hardware technologies have been realized
in the past half decade that will better meet these VE demands. Moore’s law (see chap. 28) is
being surpassed, with processor speeds doubling in less than 12 months (Nicholls, 2000a). In
addition, technological advances (e.g., tantalum oxide chip gates, extreme ultraviolet [EUV]
lithography, new microarchitecture, and better insulation) may help microprocessor speeds
reach 20 gigahertz within the next decade (Kanellos, 2000). The memory bandwidth problem
is being assuaged by 100-(peak bandwidth 800 Mbyte/sec) and 133-MHz (peak bandwidth
1.1 Gbyte/sec) SDRAM, with promises of 400 MHz and higher-speed memory in the near
term. The gigahertz barrier has been surpassed by both Advanced Micro Devices’ Athlon’s
and Intel’s Pentium III and Willamette, and more advances will soon be realized with Intel’s
Itanium and McKinley, Sun’s Ultrasparc III, Hewlett-Packard’s 8700, and IBM’s Power4, the
latter of which can build an eight-processor system in a hand-size module. Yet this is just the
 1. VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS IN THE 21st CENTURY 7

start. The future promises massive parallelism in computing as we approach the molecular-
feature-size limits in integrated circuits (Appenzeller, 2000).
Software development of VE systems has progressed tremendously, from proprietary and
arcane systems, to development kits that run on general-purpose operating systems, such as
Windows in most of its flavors, while still allowing high-end development on Silicon Graphics
workstations (Pountain, 1996). Virtual environment system components are becoming mod-
ular and distributed, thereby allowing VE databases (i.e., editors used to design, build, and
maintain virtual worlds) to run independently of visualizer and other multimodal interfaces
via network links. Standard application program interfaces (APIs; e.g., OpenGL, Direct-3D,
Mesa) allow multimodal components to be hardware-independent. Virtual environment pro-
gramming languages are advancing, with APIs, libraries, and particularly scripting languages
allowing nonprogrammers to develop virtual worlds. Using these tools, commercial applica-
tions developers can build a range of VEs, from the most basic mazes to complex medical
simulators, from low-end single-user PC platform applications to collaborative applications
supported by client–server environments.
A number of 3-D modeling languages and tool kits are available which provide intuitive
interfaces and run on multiple platforms and renderers (e.g., AC3D Modeler, Clayworks,
MR Toolkit, MultiGen Creator and Vega, RealiMation, Renderware, VRML, WorldToolKit).
Beyond these languages, which deal with display devices that paint pixels on the screen
and define higher-level inputs via triangles and polygons, a new approach to the computer
generation of VEs is to use a scene management engine (RealiMation, 2000). This approach
allows programmers to work at a higher level, defining characteristics and behaviors for more
holistic concepts (e.g., attacker, enemy), thereby enabling developers to concentrate on content
design (see chap. 25) without being concerned about how that content is delivered to users.
Photorealistic rendering tools are evolving toward full-featured physics-based global
illumination rendering systems (e.g., Raster3D—http://www.bmsc.washington.edu/
raster3d/raster3d.html; RenderPark—http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/cwis/research/graphics/
RENDERPARK/; Heirich & Arvo, 1997; Merritt & Bacon, 1997). Such physically based
rendering techniques allow quantitative prediction of the illumination in a virtual scene and
generation of photorealistic computer images, in which illumination effects such as soft shad-
ows and glossy reflections are reproduced with high fidelity (Suykens, 1999).
Computer generation of autonomous agents is a key component of many VE applications
involving interaction with other entities, such as adversaries, instructors, or partners. There
has been significant research and development in modeling embodied autonomous agents (see
chap. 15). Notable in this area is a spin-off from the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory,
Boston Dynamics, Inc. (BDI, http://www.bdi.com/). BDI has adapted advances in robotics
systems, such as motion caching, variable motion interpolation, and task-level control opti-
mization techniques to display dozens of lifelike articulated agents at one time. BDI’s products
allow system developers to work directly in a 3-D database, interactively specifying agent be-
haviors, such as paths to traverse and sensor regions. The resulting agents move realistically,
respond to simple commands, and travel about a VE as directed. Further integration of tele-
robotics techniques (see chap. 48) into autonomous agent design is certain to lead to even more
impressive advances. While the aforementioned gains are noteworthy, there are still a number
of unsolved problems in agent design and development (see Table 15.3 of chap. 15).
Research in VE navigation has led to the development of design guidelines and aids that
enable wayfinding in virtual worlds. These aids include maps, landmarks, trails, and direction
finding (see chap. 24). In addition, for closed VEs (e.g., buildings), tools that demonstrate
the surrounding area (maps, exocentric 3-D views) are recommended if training or exposure
time is short, while internal landmarks (i.e., along a route) are recommended for longer expo-
sure durations (Stanney, Chen, & Wedell, 2000). For semiopen (e.g., urban areas) and open
8 STANNEY AND ZYDA

Yellow halo
in surround

FIG. 1.1. Sea scene with window of normative color encircled by yellow halo indicating going
off-course.

environments (e.g., sea, sky), demonstrating the surround is appropriate for short exposures,
while use of external landmarks (i.e., outside a route) is recommended for long exposure times.
Based on these and other guidelines, aids need to be developed to guide navigation in virtual
environments. One such aid was designed by Stanney, Chen, and Wedell (2000), which pro-
vides wayfinders with a “window” of normative color shaded on the edges in a symbolic
color (e.g., yellow or red), which appears when off-course (see Fig. 1.1). The scene appears
in normative color when wayfinders are on-course, gradually changing to yellow and then to
red as a wayfinder moves further off-course. While this is just an example, and one whose
effectiveness has yet to be validated, it is shared here because it is an example of a collabo-
rative effort between engineers and a graphic artist. Such multidisciplinary collaborations are
likely to serve as the crux for truly innovative advances in VE design. More work is needed
in the area of navigational aiding, as making one’s way through a VE has been found to be
one of the most significant usability issues influencing VE task performance (Ellis, 1993;
Jul & Furnas, 1997).
The NRC report (Durlach & Mavor, 1995) indicated the need for a real-time operating
system for virtual environments, but the expectation from that committee that such an effort
would be funded was low. That proved to be an accurate assessment, as current operating
systems (OSs) are perhaps less-supportive of VEs than six years ago, at the time of the NRC
report’s debut. Certainly there are a variety of Windows derivatives (Nicholls, 2000b), yet no
one is convincingly arguing their appropriate use as OSs for VEs, with the exception that if one
wants wide acceptance, a Windows variant allows for broad usage. Linux is available, which is
a less-capable but open source derivative of Unix. At the same time, there is diminished use of
Silicon Graphics (SGI) Irix. SGI Irix, to many of those on the bleeding edge of VE technology,
was the operating system for developing VEs, and the many features of that system not found
elsewhere are direly missed. So the right OS for developing VEs is still an open issue.

2.3 Telerobotics
Beyond the advantages to autonomous agent design discussed above, there are many areas
(e.g., sensing, navigation, object manipulation) in which VE technology can prosper from
the application of robotics techniques. Yet, if these techniques are to be adopted, issues of
communication time delay (i.e., transport delay) and real-time control architecture design
must be resolved. Chapter 48 discusses a number of techniques for addressing these issues. In
that chapter, Kheddar, Chellali, and Coiffet note that

a cleverly conceived yet “simple” VE intermediary representation contributes to solving the time
delay problem, offers ingenious metaphors for both operator assistance and robot autonomy sharing
problems, enhances operator sensory feedback through multiple sensory modalities admixtures,
 1. VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS IN THE 21st CENTURY 9

enhances operator safety, offers a huge possible combination of strategies for remote control
and data feedback, shifts the well known antagonistic transparency/stability problem into an
operator/VE transparency one without compromising the slave stability, offers the possibility to
enhance—in terms of pure control theory—remote robot controllers, allows new human-centered
teleoperation schemes, permits the production of advanced user-friendly teleoperation interfaces,
makes possible the remote control of actual complex systems, such as mobile robots, nano and
micro robots, surgery robots, etc.

To achieve these gains, however, advances in VE modeling techniques and means of addressing
error detection and recovery inherent to VE–real environment discrepancies are needed (see
discussion in chap. 48).

2.4 Networks
The NRC report (Durlach & Mavor, 1995) suggested that with improvements in communica-
tions networks, virtual environments would become shared experiences, in which individuals,
objects, processes, and autonomous agents from diverse locations interactively collaborate.
Advances in the Internet have been substantial in the time since that report, due particularly to
the U.S. government’s Next Generation Internet (NGI) effort and the University Corporation
for Advanced Internet Development’s (UCAID’s) Internet2 (Langa, 2001). The NGI initiative
(http://www.ngi.gov/) is connecting a number of universities and national labs at speeds 100
times faster than the 1996 Internet, and a smaller number of institutions at speeds 1,000 times
faster in order to experiment with collaborative-networking technologies, such as high-quality
video conferencing and audio and video streams. Of particular interest to VE developers,
technologies have been developed to “mark” data streams as having specific characteristics
(e.g., time-critical, lockstep) so that differentiated services can enable different types of data
to be handled with different quality of service levels. Internet2 is using existing networks (e.g.,
the National Science Foundation’s VBNS—Very-High-Speed Backbone Network Service) to
determine the transport designs necessary to carry real-time multimedia data at high speed
(http://apps.internet2.edu/). Networked VE applications, which require the ability to recog-
nize and track the presence and movements of individuals as well as physical and virtual
objects, while projecting them in realistic, multiple, geographically distributed immersive en-
vironments on stereo-immersive surfaces, are ideal for Internet2, as they leverage its special
capabilities (i.e., high bandwidth, low latency, low jitter; Singhal & Zyda, 1999).

3. PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSIDERATION

There are a number of psychological considerations associated with the design and use of
VE systems. Some of these focus on techniques and concerns that can be used to augment
or enhance VE interaction and transfer-of-training (e.g., perceptual illusions, design based on
human-information-processing transfer rates), while others focus on adverse effects due to VE
exposure. In terms of the former, we know that perceptual illusions exist, such as auditory-
visual cross-modal perception phenomena (see chap. 22), yet little is known about how to
leverage these phenomena to reduce development costs while enhancing one’s experience in a
virtual environment. Perhaps the one exception is vection (i.e., the illusion of self-movement),
which is known to be related to a number of display factors (see Table 23.1 of chap. 23). By
manipulating these display factors, designers can provide VE users with a compelling illu-
sion of self-motion throughout a virtual world, thereby enhancing their sense of presence (see
chap. 40) often with the untoward effect of motion sickness, as well (see chap. 23). Other such
illusions exist (e.g., visual dominance—see chap. 22) and could likewise be leveraged. While
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 The Project Gutenberg eBook of The
magazine of history with notes and queries,
Vol. II, No. 5, November 1905
 This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

Title: The magazine of history with notes and queries, Vol. II,
No. 5, November 1905

Author: Various

Release date: July 26, 2024 [eBook #74134]

Language: English

Original publication: New York: William Abbatt, 1905

Credits: Richard Tonsing, hekula03, and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book
was produced from images made available by the
HathiTrust Digital Library.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MAGAZINE

OF HISTORY WITH NOTES AND QUERIES, VOL. II, NO. 5,
NOVEMBER 1905 ***
Transcriber’s Note:
New original cover art included with this eBook is
granted to the public domain.
 Vol. II No. 5

THE

MAGAZINE OF HISTORY
WITH

NOTES AND QUERIES

NOVEMBER, 1905

WILLIAM ABBATT
281 Fourth Avenue, New York

Published Monthly $5.00 a Year 50 Cents a Number

THE MAGAZINE OF HISTORY

WITH NOTES AND QUERIES

VOL. II NOVEMBER, 1905. No. 5

CONTENTS
 MONUMENT WHERE WAS CLINTON’S
COOPERSTOWN DAM Frontispiece
PAGE
SULLIVAN’S GREAT MARCH INTO THE Rev. W. E. Griffis,
INDIAN COUNTRY (First Paper) L.H.D. 295
THE BRITISH NAVY IN THE REVOLUTION Reginald Pelham
(Second Paper) Bolton 311
THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS (Seventh Rev. Livingston
Paper) Rowe Schuyler 315
REMINISCENCES OF ROBERT FULTON J. B. Calhoun 326
DOMINIE SOLOMON FROELIGH AND HIS Rev. J. R. Duryee,
GREAT SCHISM D.D. 330
A DAY IN THE GREAT DISMAL SWAMP Louise E. Catlin 339
MISCELLANEA OF AMERICAN HISTORY Eugene F. McPike 346
EDITORIAL 352
MINOR TOPICS: The Fate of the Pigeons 353
INDIAN LEGENDS: III. THE LONE (The Late) Charles
BUFFALO Lanman 356
ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS
Agreement Between Edmund Munro
and John Sellon 359
Letters (three) of Lieut. Edmund Munro
to His Wife 360
Original MS. of Abraham Lincoln’s
Speech, 1859 362
Letter of Major James McHenry to Gen.
Greene 362
Letter of Washington to the Citizens of
Savannah 364
Letter of Martha Washington to Mrs. F.
Washington 364

Entered as a second-class matter, March 1, 1905, at the Post Office

at New York, N. Y., under the Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.
Copyright, 1905, by William Abbatt
MONUMENT MARKING SITE OF GEN. CLINTON’S DAM

COOPERSTOWN, N. Y.
THE MAGAZINE OF HISTORY

WITH NOTES AND QUERIES

Vol. II NOVEMBER, 1905 No. 5

SULLIVAN’S GREAT MARCH INTO THE
INDIAN COUNTRY
 PREFACE
Two great flank attacks on the British forces were made by the
Americans during the war of the Revolution. One, in winter, against
Quebec, in 1775–76, failed nobly; the other, in summer, into the
Iroquois country, against Tories and Indians, in 1779, was superbly
successful. Yet while Montgomery and Arnold have had their meed
of fame, but scant and tardy justice has been done to Sullivan.
Twelve years’ residence in the lake country of the Empire State,
amid the scenes of the march that destroyed savagery and opened
the forests to civilization, has made its story a most fascinating study.
After repeated examination, on the ground, of the camps,
battlefields, scenes of bridge-building and road-making, of
topographical and engineering difficulties, of marchings and of rest,
and even of feasting, along nearly the whole of the routes of the main
army and right wing, I have learned to appreciate more the
magnitude of Sullivan’s task and the completeness of his successful
enterprise. One can more readily understand why Congress and
Washington first ordered the campaign, and then realized the
importance and value of its victories and happy issue.
Critical analysis and comparison of local legends, study of the
mythology—that grows around picturesque scenery and striking
names as naturally as moss on a damp stone—and, most of all, of the
original journals and documents of the men of 1779, have but added
to the pleasure of the narrator. A knowledge of the march of
Sullivan’s Continentals in 1779 makes the landscape between Easton
and the Genesee Valley glow, kindling at once memory, imagination
and patriotism.
May art glorify history and the tablet, boulder, and memorial line
the pathway of the Revolutionary patriots with beacon lights of
grateful remembrance.
W. E. G.
 CHAPTER I
CONGRESS VOTES TO CHASTISE

After the awful massacres at Wyoming and Cherry Valley in 1778,

Congress passed a vote on the 27th of February, 1779, authorizing
Washington to break the power of the Iroquois Indians by desolating
their country. Only thus could the American frontiers be protected
from Tories and Indians and the rear and flank attacks be stopped.
Until the Revolutionary War the Iroquois had been friends of our
fathers against the French in Canada, with whom the Algonquin
Indians had acted as allies. How did it come to pass that the Iroquois
turned to be our enemies? Lifting up the hatchet and scalping knife
against us, they left at Cherry Valley, and Wyoming, great blood
spots, and along the frontier a line of fire and death. To answer this
question, we must go back more than a century and a half. At that
time the North American continent was divided between two quite
different sorts of Indians, the Five Nations of the Iroquois, who were
united in a confederacy, and the much more numerous Algonquins,
who lived all around them.
In 1609, two men, each representing a different civilization,
penetrated the inland waters of America. Henry Hudson, an English
captain in a Dutch ship and with a Dutch crew, sailed up the river
that now bears his name and made the friendly acquaintance of the
tribes of Northern New York. Samuel Champlain, from France, came
down the lake that bears his name, acting not only as friend, but as
ally to the Algonquins, who were ever at war with the Iroquois. The
boundary line between these two kinds of Indians was drawn at Rock
Regio, in Lake Champlain, near Burlington, Vermont.
It happened at this time that hostile parties from the North and
South were out seeking each other. Dressed in bark armor, with bows
and arrows, and stone hatchets, they met in combat, not in ambush,
but in the open field. The Frenchmen, taking sides with the
Algonquins, killed several Iroquois with their firearms. Forthwith,
vowing vengeance against these white men who had interfered, the
Indians of the South resolved to seek Dutch aid. A few years later
they appeared at Fort Orange, near Albany, bringing their beaver and
other skins in exchange for arms and ammunition. Thus armed, they
were able to go forth on equal terms with the Algonquins to the
slaughter of the French and their allies. With them the age of stone
was over and the new era of iron and gunpowder had come.
Arendt Van Curler, whom the red men call “Corlaer,” a well-
educated Hollander, who lived in America from 1630 to 1667, was
superintendent of the Dutch settlement where Albany now stands
and later became the founder of the city of Schenectady. He saw at
once the value of a league of peace with the Iroquois. He traveled
among them, learned their language, won their friendship and held
them ever faithful, first to the Dutch, and then after 1664 to the
English. “The covenant of Corlaer” became with the Iroquois a holy
sacrament, and the policy of all English governors was to “brighten
the silver chain” of mutual friendship. Van Curler was drowned near
Rock Regio in Lake Champlain in 1667. Sir William Johnson from
1738 to 1774 continued, expanded and strengthened the work of Van
Curler. On the other hand the Five Nations became the Six Nations,
when in 1722 the Tuscaroras, driven from the Carolinas in 1713, were
formally admitted into the confederacy.
For a century and a half the Indian was a political factor in
determining the question whether the Anglo-Saxon or the Latin
civilization should dominate North America. This question was
settled on the heights of Quebec, in 1763, when England became
mistress of the Continent. During all this time the French were never
able, in war or in peace, by their money or other gifts, by threats or
smiles, by political envoys or religious emissaries, to break the “silver
chain” or to shake the loyalty of the Iroquois to English-speaking
men. To this day the Indians call the governor of New York “Corlaer,”
and Queen Victoria, their ruler, “Kora Kowa,” or the Great Corlaer.
When, under King George, the colonists in America and the
corrupt British parliament and court quarreled and began war,
Congress hoped to keep the friendship or neutrality of the red men.
In August, 1775, the first conference and treaty was made at Albany.
Later General Schuyler was sent into the Mohawk Valley to treat with
the Iroquois and met a council of chiefs at German Flats. “This is a
family quarrel,” he said, “and we want you to keep out of it,” and the
red men promised to do so. General Herkimer also met a great
gathering of warriors from the Six Nations at Unadilla.
On the other side, the British agents at Oswego tried to win over
the savages, and succeeded. The Tories and British were able to
present much more convincing arguments in the shape of abundance
of rum, hatchets, beads, mirrors and guns and powder. Moreover the
Indian is always a conservative. He holds fast to tradition. Hence he
was most deeply touched by the adroit appeal to “the covenant of
Corlaer,” and, being told that the Americans were “rebels,” he sided
with the British. The Iroquois expected, in making this new alliance,
that King George would govern all the whites, while they should
conquer and rule all the red men in North America. It was a great
day when General Burgoyne and his officers in their glittering
uniforms confirmed with splendid presents the decision of the
Iroquois to side with the King.
Active in the campaign of 1777, these confederate red men fought
with the Tories and British soldiers against the Americans, especially
at the battle of Oriskany. For a while they were broken and
demoralized by Burgoyne’s defeat at Saratoga, when the whole
British army surrendered.
When in 1778, the red men were rallied by Brant, Butler,
McDonald and Sir John Johnson, they made the head of Seneca
Lake, where Geneva now stands, their headquarters. Here they
planned to attack Wyoming, a settlement, chiefly of Connecticut
people, from which most of the able bodied men were absent in
Washington’s army, only old men, boys, women and children being
at home. After the battle and massacre of July 3 another skillfully
planned attack on Cherry Valley in New York was made, and on the
11th of October this settlement was reduced to ashes and the people
murdered or taken prisoners to Canada.
These atrocities decided Congress and Washington to chastise the
savages, desolate their country and paralyze the activity of the Tories.
It was especially necessary to do this, because the British were
encouraging their white and red allies to make the great maize lands
of Central and Western New York a granary from which they could
feed their very mixed army, made up of English, Irish, Scotch, Welsh,
Hessians, Canadians and Iroquois, besides keeping up a continual
fire in the rear upon the American forces.
 But they had Washington, Sullivan, and the American riflemen to
reckon with.
 CHAPTER II
ASSEMBLING FOR THE GREAT MARCH

Whom should Washington select for so difficult and doubtful a

task? The chosen leader must make an expedition, as into a foreign
country, through the unmapped and unsurveyed wilderness of
Western New York, against a foe ever ready by wiles and cunning to
ambuscade the invader. It might be, as in many a dismal case before,
that his men would be shot by invisible marksmen. Who would dare
to try to feed an army of regular troops with no base of supplies?
With the precedent of Braddock’s failure and bloody Oriskany before
him, who aspired to lead? It is no wonder that when Gates was
offered the command he declined it at once, much to Washington’s
vexation. The commander-in-chief then summoned General
Sullivan. This descendant of Irish heroes was born at Durham, in
New Hampshire, and grew up to be a stalwart American, a vigorous
and far-seeing patriot. Just as soon, in 1774, as Great Britain forbade
the importation of military stores to America, Sullivan knew there
would be war.
Collecting a body of eager young men, he drilled them in military
tactics. In December, 1774, he attacked Fort William and Mary, at
Newcastle, at the mouth of the Piscataqua river, and took the place in
daylight. In spite of the fire of the garrison, he entered without losing
a man, and pulled down the British flag. This was the first hostile act
of the kind in the war of the Revolution. He carried the cannon and
powder to Durham, where it was stored partly in a barn and partly in
the cellar of the Congregational church edifice, on the site of which
the monument reared to his honor now stands. The powder reached
Bunker Hill in time to fill the horns of the militia. Indeed, this was
about the only supply that our men behind the breastworks and rail
fence had. Sullivan commanded at Boston and on Long Island, and
fought at Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine, Germantown and in
Rhode Island.
Up to this time, 1779, the French Alliance had not amounted to
anything, and there were but fifteen thousand regular Continental
soldiers fit for duty. Yet so important did Washington consider this
expedition to destroy the Iroquois power that he detached one-third
of his whole force, or 5000 picked Continentals. In its organization
the army of chastisement consisted of four brigades, a regiment of
artillery and eight companies of riflemen, making about five
thousand men, with about two thousand pack horses and twenty-five
hundred cattle and two fleets of boats for river service, with stores
and ammunition. The New Hampshire brigade, then encamped at
Redding, Conn., and the New Jersey brigade at Elizabeth, N. J., with
the Pennsylvania regiments, were ordered to march to Easton, and
thence to move on to Wyoming, from which point the stores and
cannon were to follow the army until they should reach Tioga Point,
where is now Athens. Here they were to be joined by the New York
brigade from Schenectady.
The Chemung and the Susquehanna, flowing from the east and the
west out of the heart of the Indian country, approach very near to
each other at Tioga Point, enclosing a pretty peninsula shaped like an
arrow head. Further down they meet and unite in one stream, the
lordly Susquehanna, on which canoes could reach the cities on the
Chesapeake Bay or any of the rivers flowing into it. Tioga Point was
the Southern Door of the Long House of the Iroquois confederacy,
and here, as a base of supplies, a diamond-shaped fort with a block
house at each corner, with hospital and barracks, was to be built.
Upon this the army could fall back in case of defeat, and here be re-
victualed on their return march.
In the rivers, nature provided the only highways, though the
Iroquois during centuries of war, trade and travel had made many
trails. From Tioga Point the Continentals were to march up the
Chemung Valley and thence into the wonderfully fertile lake country
of Central New York. Along the ridge overlooking Seneca Lake they
would pass, in order to strike the Tory headquarters and center of
supplies at the lake’s northern end, where then stood a big Indian
village, and now not far away is the city of Geneva. Thence
westwardly they were to move to Canandaigua and along the great
trail at the southern end of the smaller lakes, Canadice, Hemlock and
Conesus, into the valley of the Genesee. Possibly they might be able
to reach the British fort at Niagara.
 Indeed, in the great virgin wilderness of Central and Western New
York there was no other way of advance, save through the river
valleys and along Indian trails. When leaving the former and
advancing through the forests, it would be necessary for the axemen
to chop their way. In miry places the pioneers must cut down trees,
lay the logs and make corduroy roads. Swamps must be filled and the
smaller streams bridged. In many parts of the country to be
traversed there were indeed large open spaces where the cornfields
of the Indians furnished stores of food, while their gardens yielded,
as our men discovered, twelve kinds of vegetables. Yet in the main,
the army would have to march through a country covered with
timber and brush wood.
A large force of axemen, pioneers, surveyors and road-makers
would be necessary, especially as the artillery must be carried along,
for Washington, being himself a backwoodsman and an Indian
fighter, knew the persuasive power of cannon with the Indians. Brave
as the painted warriors undoubtedly were, they preferred fighting
behind logs and trees under cover. They objected, most decidedly, to
stand up in ranks and coolly keep their places in the presence of
howitzers that could tear them to pieces, not only by a frontal attack,
but by sending shells to burst among and behind them. The Indian
had physical stamina, but he lacked moral courage. Washington
knowing this, ordered Colonel Proctor to take nine pieces of artillery
and his regiment of three hundred artillerists.
Of the guns, two were howitzers of five and a half inch caliber that
could throw bombs, two were six, and four were three pounders.
Then there was a Coehorn mortar, so light that it could be borne by
four men. This diminutive implement of war proved to be very
effective, being usually posted in the advance and easily carried over
hill and valley. Mounted on an iron frame, with hickory legs, it could
easily be “laid” or aimed at any angle. After a discharge it always
kicked itself over, and, because of its long spindle-like limbs, the
soldiers called it “the grasshopper.” Along with Proctor’s (now the
Second United States) Artillery went “a band of music,” that is, a fife
and drum corps. In all, there were about two hundred musicians with
their drum and fife majors. The lively tunes, such as “The White
Cockade,” “The Tall Grenadier,” and “Derry Down,” greatly inspirited
our men, while at the solemn burials in the forest, “Roslin Castle”
was the usual dirge.
Each regiment had its chaplain, and until the advance from Tioga
Point in battle array there were frequent services for worship and
preaching at the camps.
Washington’s plan was to have a right and a left wing to the main
body. While Sullivan advanced through the Susquehanna country,
Clinton’s New Yorkers, with part of the Sixth Massachusetts, were to
move up the Mohawk river and valley with two field pieces and a
fleet of two hundred boats. At Canajoharie he was to load his stores
and boats on wagons, each drawn by eight horses, and march over
the hills to Otsego Lake, thence to descend the outlet and enter the
Susquehanna at Chenango Point where Binghamton now stands.
Floating past Owego, he was to join Sullivan at Tioga Point, where
the Chemung and Susquehanna unite. This programme was very
successfully carried out.
The left wing, at Pittsburg, was led by Colonel Daniel Brodhead, a
Continental veteran, afterwards Surveyor-General of Pennsylvania.
He had assembled about six hundred men, including some friendly
Delawares and Cherokees, with one month’s provisions, and started
August 11, transporting his cattle and pack horses to Mahoning.
Entering the country of the Mingoes and the Muncey tribes in
Western Pennsylvania, and the Seneca towns in Southwestern New
York, he desolated their houses and corn fields.
“The parings of scalps and the hair of our countrymen at every
warrior’s camp on the path,” wrote Colonel Brodhead to Washington,
“are new inducements to revenge.” Although his men on their return,
September 14, were bare-footed and in rags, and had had no pay for
nine months, he offered to lead an expedition to Detroit. Of two
soldiers whom he sent to General Sullivan, he heard nothing. “I
apprehend,” he wrote, “they have fallen into the enemy’s hands.”
Dressing many of his men like Indians, he sent out various parties
that devastated the region, and made it for a time uninhabitable by
the savages. Very few men on our side were lost, and not a soldier
but these two fell into the enemy’s hands.
Although Brodhead’s “Allegheny expedition,” or “Diversion in
favor of General Sullivan’s expedition,” failed to make direct
communication with the main body of Continentals, yet his was a
vital part of the great expedition of 1779. It aided powerfully in that
series of blows which shattered the Iroquois confederacy. By keeping
probably five hundred Senecas from Sullivan’s front, Brodhead
helped to toll the death knell of savagery on the North American
continent.
 CHAPTER III
THE LONG HOUSE OF THE IROQUOIS

The Indian country to be invaded by Sullivan stretched from the

Hudson to Niagara Falls, and was called by the Iroquois “The Long
House.” To this long house there were four “doors,” the northern at
Oswego, the southern at Tioga Point, the eastern at Schenectady, and
the western at Niagara.
In 1779 there were only a few settlements of the white man outside
of a thin line in the Hudson and Mohawk Valleys. The Six Nations of
Iroquois, the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, Senecas and
Tuscaroras, were federated together and usually acted as a whole.
Many of the Mohawks living near the settlements were friendly to
the American cause, and almost the entire Oneida tribe had been
won over to loyalty to the Continental Congress through the efforts of
Dominie Kirkland, afterwards a chaplain in Sullivan’s army and the
founder of Hamilton College. He was one of the few white men who
had been as far west as the great “castle” of the Senecas, on Seneca
Lake.
The Tuscaroras lived east of Cayuga Lake, the Cayugas between the
largest two of the “finger lakes,” Cayuga and Seneca. The Onondagas
dwelt around the lake which takes their name, and the Senecas, in
the region between the lake named after them and the Genesee river.
Roughly speaking, we may think of Schenectady, Utica, Syracuse,
Elmira, Geneva and Ithaca as being the centers of the six tribes
mentioned in their order, the central council-fire being with the
Onondagas, near Syracuse.
The Senecas were, in 1779, the largest and most active of the tribes,
and “the Seneca country” was a general name for the great region
which Sullivan was to traverse. Our soldiers were to enter the Long
House through the southern door, at Tioga Point, near which, on the
fertile slope of the valley, was Esthertown, or the Indian Queen
Esther’s country and castle. One of their hardest marches would be
through the swampy valley stretching from the town of Chemung
west of Esthertown to the castle of Queen Catherine Montour, her
sister, at Montour Falls, N. Y.
The mention of Queen Esther’s name recalls the fact that the
savages were not entirely alone in their schemes of hostility, but that
the brain and hands of white men assisted them in their bloody
forays. Indeed, it was one of the counts in the Declaration of
Independence that the colonies were justified in their war of
independence, because George III. “has endeavored to bring on the
inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages whose
known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages,
sexes and conditions.” There were several hundred white men aiding
and abetting the Indians in the arts of war and in methods of
fortification. Besides the British regulars, Johnson’s Greens,
loyalists, Canadians and half-breeds, two of the most eminent
Iroquois women called “Queens” had white blood in their veins. Both
boasted descent from the French Count Frontenac, and were married
to powerful chiefs. Esther, at Sheshequin, near Tioga Point, and
Catherine, at Montour Falls, near the modern Watkins Glen, were
the owners of large and well-worked corn fields and of fenced
gardens, of horses, cattle, hogs, and other live stock and of houses
made of sawed and carved timber and spoken of as “palaces.”
It must not be forgotten that from the missionaries of France, who
had at various times lived among the Indians for over a hundred
years, and from the traders, gunsmiths, and friendly whites of
various disposition and ability, supported by the British government,
the Iroquois Indians had reached a comparatively high point of
progress. Even when the white men first met them these federated
warriors were the most advanced of all others within the limits of the
United States. They had their own myths and legends. They met in
council and had orators to argue both sides of a question or proposal.
They sent embassies from one tribe to another, and these envoys
were very ceremonious and careful in dress and etiquette. When they
made a treaty of peace they solemnly buried the hatchet and smoked
the calumet, or pipe of friendship. To dig up the same weapon meant
war. Instead of our letters, seals, and documents of paper and
parchment, they used wampum made of shells drilled and laced
together, which in belts or strings served as money, as messages, as
historical records. Some of the Indian orators, Logan, Red Jacket
and others, were very famous. To become such these men practiced
elocution and rhetoric very much the same as do our public speakers.
As the Iroquois raised and stored corn and other vegetable foods,
they were able to wage systematic war and go on long campaigns.
Thus they excelled and conquered the other savages. When they left
the stone age, by obtaining guns from Europeans, their lust of
conquest was fired more than ever. When the white men of
Pennsylvania and Virginia paid the Indians for lands, the avarice of
the Iroquois was still further excited. Many tribes, even as far as
Canada and the Mississippi Valley, were vassals of the confederacy.
In the Iroquois we see the highest type of pagan man.
Our debt to the Indian is very great. He taught our fathers the use
of tobacco, maple sugar, corn, succotash and various methods of
getting food, besides the use of the birch bark canoe, the moccasin,
and the snow shoe.
The Iroquois method of raising corn was very ingenious. On the
lands in river valleys this was easy enough, yet they could win crops
even in the forest. This they did by “girdling.” They cut round the
tree trunk near the ground, and again about ten feet higher, and then
stripped off the bark between the spaces girdled by the knife or
hatchet. This caused the tree to wither and the leaves to fall, quickly
letting in the sunshine on the ground. Thus, the Indian without the
trouble of chopping down the trees and clearing the land got at once
the benefit of the soil. In the autumn, by burning the underbrush and
trees, the ground was enriched and the space easily cleared for next
year’s crop. In almost every Iroquois village there were store houses
made of bark or timber, in which the grain was saved.
The dwellings or long houses were made of wooden framework
covered with bark and built in the form of a modern compartment
house. Each had a long hall or passageway through the middle, with
rooms on either side, one for each family, with a fireplace in the
center and the sleeping bunks against the wall. The walls of these
rooms were decorated with bows and arrows, guns and equipments,
and the prizes of the chase, which all hunters love, and of war, over
which warriors gloat. They had also more horrible ornaments in the
scalps of their enemies, both white and red. These, stretched and
dried on hoops, were often painted and decorated with feathers and
strings dyed in bright colors which had symbolic significance.
 Many of Sullivan’s soldiers, who enlisted hoping to rescue white
captives, often their own relatives, were able to recognize in the
Iroquois houses the hair and scalps of fathers, brothers, wives,
children, neighbors or friends. In the case of women, it was
especially easy to do this.
At several places where hill and ravine, or the situation of the
rivers and the inclosed land made natural fortresses, the Iroquois
had “castles.” These were made by driving three rows of young trees,
sharpened at the ends, into the ground to form a palisade which was
fastened at the top. Inside of these were platforms, on which warriors
could stand and shoot arrows or balls against besiegers. Besides
barring the gate tightly, they had heaps of stones ready to throw on
the heads of near assailants and tubs of water prepared to put out
fires. It was expected that the artillery would have to be used against
these. The orders were to burn all the Indian houses and utterly
destroy the crops so that the country would be left uninhabitable.
There was no mistake about the orders of Washington on this point.
While the army was assembling and the stores, boats and horses
were in preparation, other expeditions on a smaller scale had been
attempted. The State of New York, in the autumn of 1778, attempted
to send an expedition among the Mohawks and Onondagas, but on
account of the lateness of the season it was abandoned. In the
following year, however, on April 19, Colonel Van Schaick leading,
558 men of the First New York regiment made a forced march of 180
miles in six days against the Onondagas. He burned three of their
towns with their storehouses of food, slew twelve and took prisoners
thirty-three of the savages. With the Onondagas was the hearthstone
of the confederacy, and a terrible humbling done to the Iroquois
pride was the extinguishing of the council fire.
Pennsylvania was also active in clearing the path for Sullivan. In
September, 1778, Colonel Thomas Hartley with about two hundred
soldiers of the Eleventh Pennsylvania regiment, with seventeen
horses, advanced northward from Sunbury up the Lycoming river
and into a region of swamps, mountains, defiles and rocks. His
especial object was to destroy the power of Queen Esther. This squaw
had made herself very active in the massacre at Wyoming. She
compelled the prisoners of war to kneel in a circle around a boulder,
still called “Queen Esther’s Rock,” and tomahawked them one after
another. This was in revenge for her son killed in a skirmish. At
Sheshequin, near Tioga Point, Hartley destroyed, by the torch, her
castle and everything else that could be turned to ashes. Advancing
up the Chemung Valley, towards Newtown, the big Indian town on
the flats, near modern Elmira, he found the enemy in force and was
obliged to return. On his way he cleverly defeated the Indians and
Tories who had tried to surround him. He and his men waded or
swam the Lycoming river no fewer than twenty times. He reached
Sunbury again, October 5, having marched nearly three hundred
miles, capturing among other spoil fifty head of cattle and twenty-
eight canoes. In his various battles and skirmishes he lost four men,
but killed eleven of the enemy and took fifteen prisoners. His
regiment was reorganized and became “the new Eleventh regiment,”
under Colonel Adam Hubley, which formed part of Sullivan’s army
and ranked among his most effective troops.
One has but to study the map of Eastern Pennsylvania, a region
rich in swamps, rocks, hills and mountain ranges, to see what
difficulties awaited the general who was to move a large body of
troops, with artillery and wagon trains, from Easton to Wyoming. To
go up the Lehigh Valley was impossible, for between its headwaters
and the Susquehanna were hills insurmountable. On the steel tracks
of to-day a double force of engine power is required. So from Easton,
through the Blue Mountains and Wind Gap, a road was cut through
the forest, the stones taken out, the boulders stacked, the miry
hollows corduroyed and the swamps filled.
Marvelous to relate, this military road, about seventy miles long,
was built within ten days. It was indeed one of the wonders of the
Revolution. Several hundred road builders, mostly Continental
soldiers, under Colonels Spencer and Van Cortlandt, did the work in
parties, while guarded by outlying scouts and riflemen. To-day the
turnpike road and the iron rails and bridges of the great railway
companies traverse the region in which “The Sullivan Road” once
was, but the achievements of the modern engineers are in no way
more wonderful. In five days the three brigades of Poor’s New
Hampshire men, Hand’s Pennsylvania Light Corps and Maxwell’s
New Jerseymen, with Proctor’s artillery and the wagon trains, made
the march over the new road. Their camps were at Wind Gap,
Larner’s on the Pocono, “Chowder Camp,” near the Tobyhanna, on
the creek near the “Shades of Death,” and at “Great Meadows,” or
Bullock’s. Some of the relics of the road builders, including the
section of a tree carved with the camp name of “Hell’s Kitchen,” are
still preserved.
By the building of the military road from Easton to Wyoming, and
through Hartley’s and Van Schaick’s raids, the enemy was now fully
convinced that an invading army was being made ready for their
chastisement. Rousing the whole confederacy of the Six Nations,
Brant, the Mohawk, and Butler, the Tory, sent their warriors to make
a series of attacks on the American settlements, hoping thus to
distract and scatter the coming avengers. Sullivan, however,
understood these tactics. He refused to detach any pursuing parties,
and pressed right on. In April he had sent his advance guard of two
hundred of the Eleventh Pennsylvania under Major Powell to
strengthen the garrison at Wyoming. On the 23d, when not far from
the site of Wilkes-Barre, the party having reached, as they thought,
nearly the end of their journey, were desirous of entering the
settlement in good order and in fine personal appearance. They
halted, therefore, to brush and clean themselves, while the officers
put on their coats and ruffles. Then marching forward, but having
their attention called from possible present danger by the presence of
a deer crossing their path, they were led into an Indian ambuscade,
in which several of them were killed. In 1896 a monument was
reared to their memory by the Sons and Daughters of the Revolution.
Another incident previous to the movement of Sullivan’s force was
in the attack, by one hundred British and two hundred Indians under
command of Captain McDonald, fifteen miles above
Northumberland, Pa., on Freeland’s Fort. This they surrounded on
the 28th of July, 1779, and compelled the garrison of thirty-two men
to surrender. They also ambuscaded Captain Boon’s party, which had
marched to their relief, killing fourteen of his men.
During the same week Brant with a party of warriors moved down
the Wallkill valley, destroying the Minisink settlements in Orange
county, New York, killing many and making many prisoners. They
decoyed into an ambush more than 150 militia from Goshen, of
whom over 100 were slain. Brant then moved on to the destruction of
the settlement of Lackawaxen, which was laid in ashes and the
inhabitants slain.
 All this was done to distract and scatter the avenging army, but
every effort failed, and the Continentals moved steadily on.
General Sullivan was implored, by messengers who brought him
the terrible news, to march to the relief of the burned settlements.
Wisely and firmly he refused to detach a single soldier from his
column. He knew full well that advance into the enemy’s country
would compel both red and white foes to draw away their forces and
concentrate. This policy was really the best means of protecting the
settlements. He therefore hastened his preparations, so as to move
on at the first moment possible. On July 31, at 1 P. M., he broke camp
at Wyoming. Determined not to be led into ambush or to be
“Braddocked,” he threw out the riflemen in advance, to guard against
surprise, and moved in line of battle. The flotilla of boats, the line of
twelve hundred pack horses and seven hundred cattle, the park of
artillery and the brigades of infantry being all ready, the signal was
given by firing a cannon on the Adventurer, Proctor’s flagboat lying
in the Susquehanna. The march from Wyoming to Tioga Point,
through swamps and over frightful precipices, was safely made in
good order. The procession of boats on the water and of soldiers on
land were each several miles long. Reaching Sheshequin on the
Susquehanna, the soldiers faced the flood, locked arms and forded
the swiftly flowing river at where Milan, Pa., now stands, and then
again crossed the stream to reach the peninsula at Tioga Point,
where they encamped, awaiting the arrival of their right wing,
Clinton’s New York brigade.
 CHAPTER IV
THE MOVEMENT OF THE RIGHT WING

The right wing of the expedition, consisting of the 3rd, 4th and 5th
New York, the 6th Massachusetts, and 4th Pennsylvania, with four
companies of riflemen and two pieces of artillery, was under the
command of General James Clinton. This veteran officer gathered
his forces at Schenectady. He encamped his regiments around this
little palisaded frontier town, while his flotilla of over 215 boats was
building in the boat yards that then lined the Mohawk river, between
the stream and the town’s wooden walls on its north and west sides.
When all was ready, about June 15, the boats were pushed, poled
or rowed up the river to Canajoharie. Then both the stores and the
boats were loaded on wagons drawn by four yokes of oxen, carried
over the hills and unloaded on the beach at Otsego Lake. This very
toilsome work was over by July 3, and on the “Glorious Fourth” was
celebrated by a parade, salute of cannon, divine service and a
banquet with thirteen patriotic toasts. Herds of cattle had been
driven from Kingston, N. Y., by the great western route through the
Catskill mountains, to furnish fresh beef. The soldiers enjoyed their
camp life in the fragrant woods, though eager to move against the
enemy.
An engineer and the father of the “father of the Erie Canal,”
General Clinton’s first object was to provide enough water to float his
boats down out of the lake and into and along the shallow
Susquehanna, in order to make junction with Sullivan at Tioga Point.
To secure this, in the dry mid-summer a reservoir was made by
damming up the little lake at its source near the present
Cooperstown. The flow of rain not only in this, but also in the
adjoining Schuyler Lake, during four weeks of waiting to hear from
Sullivan, was thus secured. The gain of one month’s water from sky
and earth was apparent. It is uncertain from extant journals and
diaries how high a level was reached, some saying that three feet, but
one declaring that only one foot of water was gained. At any rate, the