Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Marisa Putnam

dblp:51/11181 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Immersive interaction · 100%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Virtual and augmented reality · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Immersive interaction › locomotion
locomotion interface
0.112012
The cognitive implications of semi-natural virtual locomotion · VR 2012
Immersive interaction
virtual reality locomotion
0.112012
The cognitive implications of semi-natural virtual locomotion · VR 2012

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

spatial working memory · 0.3dual-task paradigm · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2012 The cognitive implications of semi-natural virtual locomotion
abstract
This study incorporated a dual-task paradigm, in which participants were asked to perform basic locomotion tasks with one of three interfaces while remembering a sequence of either spatial or verbal items. Interfaces varied in similarity to natural body movements. Stopping performance was compromised when concurrently remembering a spatial, but not verbal, sequence. Also users exhibited lower performance on spatial memory tasks while using more unnatural locomotion interfaces. These results confirm that semi-natural locomotion interfaces require spatial working memory resources and thus locomotion interfaces compete with ongoing spatial tasks, as opposed to those requiring verbal resources or general attention resources.
William Eric Marsh, Marisa Putnam, Jonathan W. Kelly, Veronica J. Dark, James H. Oliver
VR2