Curved TVs improved watching experience when display curvature ...

Share
RESOURCES
As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with,
the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more:
PMC Disclaimer
|
PMC Copyright Notice
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position can influence TV watching experience as these factors affect the display field of view and viewing angles across the screen. For a given display size, if the display curvature radius approaches the viewing distance, the display field of view increases, while the variation in the viewing distances and viewing angles is less across the screen. Herein, the viewing angle refers to the angle between a horizontal line of sight and a normal line at a fixation point on the display surface. If the viewing distance decreases (if a viewer sits closer to the display), the display field of view increases. If the viewing position is more off-center, the viewing distance and viewing angle vary more across the screen and increase with respect to the center of display surface. A wider display field of view increases presence as a wider screen image occupies the viewer’s visual field to a greater degree [32]. Providing less varying viewing distances across the screen can reduce visual discomfort by reducing accommodation-vergence activities required for clear vision, whereas potential visual fatigue due to a prolonged visual task at similar focal distances [33] appears to be diminished by the aforementioned benefit [7]. Less varying viewing angles across the screen can enhance image quality, as it reduces the perceived distortion of an image displayed at the edge of the display [9]. A wider viewing angle can negatively affect image quality and visual comfort because the perceived image distortion increases with increasing viewing angles [34]. Thus, the display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position can affect TV watching experience and ultimately user satisfaction.
Similarly, lateral deviations in viewing position (or increases in viewing angle) can affect TV watching experience. Although images viewed at an angle experience trapezoidal distortions [47], non-central viewing positions are sometimes inevitable, especially in multi-viewer conditions. Typical viewing angles in such conditions range between ±60° [48] with a mean viewing angle of 23.3° [49]. Indeed, 73% of South Korean households in 2015 [50] and 70% of US households in 2012 [51] had more than one member, indicating watching TV together is common in most households. However, the degree to which viewing angle (or lateral viewing position) affects TV watching experience remains largely unknown.
Thus far, many TV watching experience elements have been considered: presence [16, 19], visual comfort [24, 26], image quality [17, 28], satisfaction [26], visual fatigue [26, 29], motion sickness [16, 57], image distortion [21], and emotional reactions [28]. The spatial presence felt by a display user can act as a predictor for user satisfaction [58]. Image quality and video quality, as the main elements of quality of experience [41, 42], also accounts for user satisfaction [59] and customer satisfaction [60]. A previous study on the development of an engagement scale for TV watching proposed a conceptual model that explains the effect of media and content characteristics on presence and the effect of presence on post-satisfaction [61]. However, no widely known study has considered major TV watching experience elements simultaneously. Moreover, it is largely unknown as to which TV watching experience elements can effectively explain user satisfaction associated with TV watching.
Thus, this study aimed to generate ergonomic guidelines for three major media form factors (display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position) to improve the overall TV watching experience and particular TV watching experience elements. These three media form factors and seven major TV watching experience elements (spatial presence, engagement, ecological validity, negative effects, visual comfort, image quality, and user satisfaction) were considered to examine 1) the main and interactive effects of these three media form factors on each TV watching experience element and 2) the relative importance of each TV watching experience element in explaining user satisfaction (Fig 1).
Hypothetical model for causal relationships between media form/content factors and TV watching experience, and between other TV watching experience elements and user satisfaction.
Materials and methods
Design and subjects
This study recruited 56 college students (Table 1), selected based on the following criteria: 1) normal or corrected–to–normal visual acuity ≥ 0.8 (20/25 in Snellen notation) for both eyes [62] determined using the Han Chun Suk visual acuity chart [63], 2) non-color deficiency determined using the Ishihara color blindness test [64], 3) no vision-related illnesses in the last six months, and 4) non-glasses or contact lens wearers. The study protocol was approved by the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST) Institutional Review Board (IRB). All the participants provided written informed consent, which the local IRB approved, and were compensated for their time.
Experimental settings and procedures
Laboratory experiments were conducted with external lights blocked using black curtains and black cloth covering the TV stand and walls to minimize color and light reflection. Each experimental TV mock-up consisted of projection film (EXZEN, Korea) attached to the front surface of a 55" (1218 mm × 685 mm; 16:9 aspect ratio) custom Styrofoam panel, and was placed on a stand (320 mm high) elevating the display center 648 mm from the floor. The gain of the projection films attached to the curved screen surfaces was 1.0. Display size is defined as the length of a straight or curved diagonal along the screen surface. Each particular combination of display curvature radius and lateral viewing position changed the actual viewing distance, viewing angle, and display field of view (Table 2), and provided on-screen images from different perspectives (Fig 2).
Each Styrofoam panel had a particular display curvature radius (2.3 m (2300R), 4 m (4000R), 6 m (6000R), and flat). A 5.1 channel speaker system (BR-5100T2, Britz, Korea) with one subwoofer on the left of the stand, one speaker on the right, and one speaker in each of the room corners was used. Video images were projected on each projection film by using a beam projector (EB-4950WU, Epson) with a wide ultra-extended graphics array (WUXGA; 1920 × 1200) resolution and a temporal frequency of 60 Hz. To correct the distortion of the image projected on the flat and curved screens, a 9(W) × 9(H) rectangular grid was displayed on the screen surface. Then, grid intersections were positioned to reference points by using Desktop Warpalizer® (UniVisual Technologies, Sweden).
Seven random pairs of individuals were assigned to one display curvature radius. Two viewers were seated together in the randomly selected paired lateral viewing positions on a sofa (width × depth × height: 250 × 60 × 45 cm). A total of five pairs of right-side lateral viewing positions were considered, assuming viewers sat with lateral symmetry (Fig 3). With one exception (P5-P1), two viewers sat 70 cm apart [65]. The first viewing distance for the current paired viewers was the second viewing distance for the previous paired viewers.
Independent variables
Three independent variables were investigated. The display curvature radius varied between subjects at four levels: 2300R (providing a 30° ‘effective’ field of view [71] at a 4 m viewing distance), 4000R and 6000R (adopted in commercialized TV models: UN55JU7550F, Samsung, Korea; and 105UC9, LG, Korea), and flat (the control treatment). All participants used two viewing distances [2.3 m and 4 m, respectively equivalent to 1.9 display width (W) or 3.4 display height (H) and 3.3 W or 5.8 H] and five lateral viewing positions [P1 (centered in front of the TV), P2 (35 cm to the right of P1), P3 (70 cm off-center), P4 (105 cm off-center), and P5 (140 cm off-center)]. A wide range of viewing distances, 2–14 W and 0.8–7 H, have been used in previous studies, which will be reviewed later in the study (see Table 5). Five pairs of lateral viewing positions (P1-P3, P2-P4, P3-P5, P4-P2, and P5-P1) were used in random order, with the second individual 70 cm to the right of the first in all configurations but P4-P2, and P5-P1 (Fig 3).
Table 5
TV viewing distances used in the current study vs. those from the literature.
Dependent variables
Seven dependent variables were used to assess TV watching experience: spatial presence, engagement, ecological validity, negative effects, visual comfort, image quality, and user satisfaction. Spatial presence is defined as “a binary experience, during which perceived self-location and, in most cases, perceived action possibilities are connected to a mediated spatial environment, and mental capacities are bound by the mediated environment instead of reality [72].” Engagement is defined as “a measure of a user’s involvement and interest in the content of the displayed environment, and their general enjoyment of the media experience [73].” Ecological validity is defined as “a tendency to perceive the mediated environment as lifelike and real [73].” Negative effects describe adverse physiological reactions, including dizziness, nausea, headache, and eyestrain [73].
The first four variables are sub-concepts of presence [73], and were assessed using 13 items selected from the Independent Television Commission-Sense of Presence Inventory (ITC-SOPI): three regarding spatial presence (Q7, 9, 18), three regarding engagement (Q2, 8, 16), three regarding ecological validity (Q5, 11, 27), and four regarding negative effects (Q14, 21, 26, 37). Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0: strongly disagree, 1: disagree, 2: neutral, 3: agree, 4: strongly agree), and the mean item values of each sub-concept were used in statistical analyses. Visual comfort, image quality, and user satisfaction were respectively rated on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) (0: Very uncomfortable, 100: Very comfortable), a 5-point scale (bad, poor, fair, good, and excellent), and a 100 mm VAS (0: Very dissatisfied, 100: Very satisfied).
Statistical analysis
A three-way mixed factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA; [74]) was used to examine the main and interaction effects of display curvature radius (four-level between-subjects variable), viewing distance (two-level within-subjects variable), and lateral viewing position (five-level within-subjects variable) on each of the seven dependent variables described in the previous subsection. When an effect was observed to be significant, the Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) test was conducted [75]. For the Likert scale and image quality data, the distances between any two adjacent points along the rating scale were assumed to be equal, and all these data were treated as interval-like. The effect size was interpreted as low, medium, or high when the partial η2 was 0.01, 0.06, or 0.14, respectively [76, 77]. A stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was performed to examine the degree to which user satisfaction variability (satisfaction associated with watching TV) was accounted for by the other six TV watching experience elements. A p-value of 0.1 (for each predictor to enter or leave the model) was applied as a threshold during the construction of the stepwise multiple linear regression model [78, 79]. All statistical analyses were performed using JMP™ (v12, SAS Institute Inc., NC, USA), with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.
Among the treatments belonging to Group A according to Tukey’s HSD test, the treatment with the highest mean spatial presence denoted as ★. Treatments not belonging to Group A denoted as ▽. Treatments without ▽ belong to Group A with the treatment with ★. Range of SEs: 0.03–0.13).
Among the treatments belonging to Group A according to Tukey’s HSD test, the treatment with the highest mean engagement denoted as ★. Treatments not belonging to Group A denoted as ▽. Treatments without ▽ belong to Group A with the treatment with ★. Range of SEs: 0.05–0.11).
Interaction effects of viewing distance × lateral viewing position
The interaction effect of viewing distance × lateral viewing position was significant for ecological validity (p = 0.031). Six of the ten treatments were in the same group (A) with 4m-P1 (viewing distance-lateral viewing position), which provided the highest mean (SD) ecological validity of 3.03 (0.62) (Fig 7).
Among the treatments belonging to Group A according to Tukey’s HSD test, the treatment with the highest mean ecological validity denoted as ★. Treatment not belonging to Group A denoted as ▽. Treatments without ▽ belong to Group A with the treatment with ★. Range of SEs: 0.08–1.12).
Effects of display curvature radius
Although display curvature radius (p = 0.025) significantly affected negative effects, the five display curvature radius levels were placed in one group according to post hoc testing.
Discussion
This study considered three media form factors (display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position) and examined their effects on seven TV watching experience elements. Although display curvature radius alone did not appreciably affect any of the seven TV watching experience elements, the interaction of display curvature radius × viewing distance × lateral viewing position significantly affected both spatial presence and engagement, indicating that the display curvature radius indirectly affected TV watching experience. Indeed, 4000R–4m–P1 (display curvature radius-viewing distance-lateral viewing position) exhibited the highest mean spatial presence and engagement. A further analysis recommended that the display curvature radius be equal to the viewing distance and lateral viewing position be P1 or P2 for a better TV watching experience. Among the three media form factors, lateral viewing position was the most influential to TV watching experience. Among the six TV watching experience elements, engagement was most influential to user satisfaction. Below, each effect is interpreted more in detail, and the effects of the field of view and viewing angle on TV watching experience are additionally discussed, as these two factors vary with the display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position.
Interaction effects
The interaction of display curvature radius × viewing distance × lateral viewing position significantly affected spatial presence and engagement. Spatial presence increased when the display curvature radius approached a viewing distance, and the lateral viewing position was less off-center, with the highest spatial presence observed at 4000R–4m–P1 (display curvature radius-viewing distance-lateral viewing position). Additionally, the lateral viewing position affected spatial presence more adversely for the flat vs. curved screen for both viewing distances. Engagement exhibited similar results to spatial presence, with the highest engagement observed at 4000R–4m–P1.
In addition, the interaction of viewing distance × lateral viewing position significantly influenced ecological validity. For viewing distances of 2.3 m and 4 m, ecological validity decreased as the lateral viewing position was more off-center, with a more prominent effect of the lateral viewing position observed at a viewing distance of 4 m. Specifically, ecological validity significantly decreased at P5 (140 cm) for a 2.3 m viewing distance vs. P4 (109 cm) for a viewing distance of 4 m. Therefore, sitting closer (2.3 m vs. 4 m) could be considered to improve ecological validity, especially when the lateral viewing position is inevitably approximately 1 m off-center (e.g. in multi-viewer conditions).
Effects of display curvature radius
Display curvature radius alone did not appreciably affect any of the seven TV watching experience elements. Contrarily, some previous studies showed that curved displays provided better TV watching experiences than flat displays. A study [68] found that the visual presence at a viewing distance of 2 m was 18% (for 2D content) and 9% (for 3D content) higher on a 45" 4200R curved TV screen relative to a 45" flat screen, argued to be due to improvements in visual sensitivity at the lateral areas of the curved screen. ‘Realness’ considered as a presence factor during watching was higher on 55" curved TVs relative to their flat counterpart when the viewing distance (5 m) was equal to the display curvature radius. Varying experimental durations and visual stimuli appear to have created these discrepancies [31].
Effects of viewing distance
In this study, viewing distance was significant only for visual comfort, with 6% greater comfort at 4 m (5.8 H) than 2.3 m (3.4 H). These two viewing distances were within the range recommended (3–7H for flat HD TVs [19]), although the 4 m (5.8 H) viewing distance exceeded the ranges recommended for non-HD TVs, 5H (29”), 3–5.2 H (38"), 3–4 H, and 0.8–4.8H for HD TVs [27, 40, 41, 45, 46], (see Table 5 and Fig 9). As median and mean viewing distances observed in homes of 6 H and 6.5 H [43], respectively, viewing distances outside the above recommended ranges appear common in practice. It was reported that the mean preferred viewing distance for visual comfort using HD TVs was 3.8 W (6.8 H) for 32" TVs, 3.6 W (6.5 H) for 37" TVs, and 3.6 W (6.5 H) for 42" TVs [80]. These values are also above the values (6 H for 36" and 5 H for 73" HD TVs) recommended by ITU [42]. It should be noted that these studies involved different display sizes and resolutions.
Viewing distances used in the current study vs. those from the literature (Data in the grey area are available only in terms of display height or display width; recommended range values are indicated by solid lines).
Although viewing distance had no significant effect on the four sub-concepts of presence investigated here (0.067≤ p ≤ 0.29), three sub-concepts of presence (excluding negative effects) were perceived higher at 2.3 m than 4.0 m. An appropriate viewing distance for a given display size is generally required to enhance presence, whereas watching TV from excessively short or long distances decreases presence [36, 37]. The presence of 29" analog TVs was highest at a viewing distance of 5 H (2 m), followed by 3 H (1.3 m) and 7 H (3 m) [40]. It was found that involvement [31], similar to engagement [62], was highest at a viewing distance of 5.2 H (1.1 m) for 17" TVs, 3 H (1.65 m) for 42" TVs, and 2 H (1.65 m) for 65" TVs, respectively. Additionally, it was found that a viewing distance of 2.5 H (2 m) provided the highest visual presence when watching 2D images on 65" flat ultra-high-definition (UHD) TVs, followed by 0.6 H (0.5 m) and 5 H (4 m) [68]. When similar viewing conditions are considered, the current results resemble those of these studies [31, 40, 68].
Effects of lateral viewing position
This study recommends viewing positions P1 and P2 (or a lateral viewing position < 70 cm off-center) for watching TV. More off-center positions than P2 degraded TV watching experience, evidenced by decreases in the spatial presence (11–23% for P3–P5), engagement (11–21% for P3–P5), ecological validity (10–24% for P4–P5), image quality (9–11% for P3–P5), and user satisfaction (7–12% for P4–P5) relative to P1. Such degradations can be attributed to the decrease in the field of view and increase in the viewing angle caused by more lateral deviations of the viewing position.
Effects of field of view and viewing angle
In this study, the field of view did not appear to influence TV watching experience substantially. Geometrically, the field of view increases as the display curvature radius approaches a viewing distance, a viewing distance decreases, or a lateral viewing position approaches the central position. In addition to shorter viewing distances [85] and larger display sizes [85], higher attention and arousal levels due to a wider field of view [86] can increase presence, a feeling of being in a virtual world. Presence is influenced by the relative amount of information incoming from the virtual compared with the physical environment [87]. Presence increases if the viewer’s visual field of view is more occupied by the on-screen image [88]. Though the magnitude of the field of view was predominantly determined by viewing distance in this study, the effects of viewing distance (2.3 m and 4 m) on spatial presence, engagement, and ecological validity were non-significant. A wider field of view at a viewing distance of 2.3 m did not significantly increase presence, presumably due to the decrease in visual comfort created by the shorter viewing distance (visual comfort at 2.3 m was 5.4% lower than at 4 m). Conversely, lateral viewing position significantly affected presence, although it affected the field of view less than viewing distance. Fields of view at 2.3 m were wider than those at 4 m by up to 12.8° across lateral viewing positions, whereas the difference in the fields of view between viewing distance 2.3 m and 4.0 m at the same lateral viewing position was ≤ 8° (See Table 3). Some prior studies using varying screen sizes rather than viewing distances showed that the field of view significantly influenced presence. It was found that the physical presence during a 30 min gaming task was higher on an 81" screen (diagonal field of view = 76°) than on a 13" screen (18°) [67]. The perceived presence during a driving task on a triple screen comprising three 2300 × 1750 mm screens was highest with a 180° field of view, followed by 140° and 60° [89]. However, the effect of change in viewing angle (as determined by lateral viewing position) on presence was not examined in these two studies.
In the present study, presence decreased as viewing angles increased (or lateral viewing positions were more off-centered). Specifically, significant decreases in presence (in terms of spatial presence, engagement, and ecological validity) began at a viewing angle of 17.0° (P3) for a 2.3 m viewing distance and 9.9° (P3) for a 4 m viewing distance. Previous studies reported mixed results. In one study, the visual presence of a 2D image on a 65" UHD flat TV at a viewing distance of 2 m deceased by 17% when the viewing angle was increased from 0° to 45° [54]. Conversely, the presence on an 86" screen at a viewing distance of 0.9 H (1.75 m) did not significantly change at three viewing angles (–19°, 0°, and +19°) [16]. This inconsistency is presumably due to the increased presence with the combined effect of a larger screen size (55–86") and a closer viewing distance (2–1.75 m) vs. 55"-2.3 m or 65"-2 m.
In the current study, image quality decreased as viewing angles increased (or lateral viewing positions were more off-centered). Significant decreases in image quality began at a viewing angle of 17.0° (P3) for a 2.3 m viewing distance and 9.9° (P3) for a 4 m viewing distance. Previous studies reported similar results. The quality of 2D images on 55" flat and curved TVs at a viewing distance of 2.2 m was degraded as viewing angle increased from 0° to 30°, with a more severe degradation observed with a flat TV [55]. Similarly, the quality of 2D images on flat displays at a 6H viewing distance decreased as viewing angle increased from 0° to approximately 80° [71].
Decreases in presence and image quality with increasing viewing angle (or at more off-center lateral viewing positions) observed in the current study appear to be in part due to the perceived image distortion with the increase in viewing angle [6]. In the current study, image quality at P1 and P2 was comparable across the four different display curvature radii. Viewing angles at a viewing distance of 2.3 m and at P3 increased by up to 29.6° for a flat TV, and image quality began to degrade. These results were in accordance with a previous finding—perceptual constancy observed within viewing angles ≤ 28.6° [9]. In addition, the image quality was positively correlated with the three sub-concepts of presence, namely, spatial presence, engagement, and ecological validity, with bivariate correlations of 0.40, 0.36, and 0.53 (p < 0.0001), respectively.
To better examine the effect of an actual TV viewing context on TV watching experience, it seems necessary to allow for wider viewing angles. Although the largest viewing angle considered in this study (30.3° at a viewing distance of 2.3 m) exceeded the mean viewing angle of 23.3° obtained in a field survey [48], viewing angles observed in actual households have ranged between ± 30° [90], ± 45° [91], and ±60° [49]. Of note, however, the current study recommends P1 or P2 (or lateral viewing positions closer than P3) for a better TV watching experience, and the viewing angle for 2.3m-P3 was 17°.
Regression of user satisfaction on six TV watching experience elements
In the current study, a regression model (R2adj = 0.67) for user satisfaction was developed using six TV watching experience elements. Based on the standardized beta weights, engagement, visual comfort, and image quality were 5.4 times (=0.43/0.08), 5.0 times (=0.40/0.08), and 2.8 times (=0.22/0.08) more influential to user satisfaction than negative effects, indicating that improving these three TV watching experience elements can improve user satisfaction more effectively. Engagement increased when the display curvature radius was equal to the viewing distance and the lateral viewing position was < 70 cm off-center (Figs ​(Figs66 and ​and8C).8C). The mean visual comfort rating was higher with a viewing distance of 4 m (Fig 8A). The image quality increased when the lateral viewing position was < 70 cm off-center (Fig 8E). Therefore, 4000R-4m-P1/2 (display curvature radius-viewing distance-lateral viewing position) is recommended for user satisfaction.
Limitations and future studies
Some limitations were encountered in the current study. First, display curvature radii were simulated using projection films and a beam projector instead of actual display panels. Although comparatively high-fidelity mock-ups were used in this study (vs. static images attached to curved surfaces [6, 11]), these mock-ups were different from actual displays. Second, 5 min videos were used in experiments. Previous studies on presence used task durations ranging from 1.5 min [69] to 1 h [31]. An additional study is warranted to examine the effects of display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position on diverse TV watching experience elements during longer-term TV watching. Third, subjective ratings were used to assess TV watching experience. Some behavioral or physiological measures are available to assess presence, visual comfort, image quality, and user satisfaction (including eye movements [92], electrocardiograms [92], and electroencephalograms [93]). Additional studies are necessary to develop validated objective measures and experimental methods that can account for the TV watching experience of multiple viewers simultaneously and to support conclusions of this study drawn based on subjective measures only. In addition, it would have been better to obtain a simultaneous judgment of confidence for each subjective rating made by the participant. Fourth, the effects of gender, age, and personal characteristics were not considered. The effect of display size on presence was not significant in the male group, whereas the female group reported higher presence with wider displays [1]. A separate study [40] revealed that those with higher immersive tendencies reported higher presence during TV watching, but observed no significant gender effects. TV watching experience could also be affected by ocular changes with age (e.g. functional degradations of the visual system with age [94] and visual fatigue in presbyopic eyes [95]). Personal characteristics (such as a willingness to suspend disbelief, knowledge or prior experience with the medium, and personal types [96]) are also important factors for presence. Fifth, in addition to the three media form factors (display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position) considered in this study, media content factors (overall theme, narrative, and story) can influence TV watching experience in terms of involvement [72], engagement, and ecological validity [73]. To examine the effects of the three media form factors on TV watching experience, this study controlled media content factors using similar videos. Finally, this study considered 55" screen sizes and two viewing distances; other screen sizes and viewing distances should be considered in future studies. Despite the above limitations, the findings of this study can help determine effective combinations of display curvature radius, viewing distance, and lateral viewing position for a better TV watching experience with 55" TVs.
Supporting information
S1 Data
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF–2016R1A2B4010158). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.