Comparison of subjective evaluations in virtual and real environments for soundscape research

Abstract

Emerging technologies of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are enhancing soundscape research, potentially producing new insights by enabling controlled conditions while preserving the context of a virtual gestalt within the soundscape concept. This study explored the ecological validity of virtual environments for subjective evaluations in soundscape research, focusing on the authenticity of virtual audio-visual environments for reproducibility. Different technologies for creating and reproducing virtual environments were compared, including field recording, simulated VR, AR, and audio-only presentation, in two audio-visual reproduction settings, a head-mounted display with head-tracked headphones and a VR lab with head-locked headphones. Via a series of soundwalk- and lab-based experiments, the results indicate that field recording technologies provided the most authentic audio-visual environments, followed by AR, simulated VR, and audio-only approaches. The authenticity level influenced subjective evaluations of virtual environments, e.g., arousal/eventfulness and pleasantness. The field recording and AR-based technologies closely matched the on-site soundwalk ratings in arousal, while the other approaches scored lower. All the approaches had significantly lower pleasantness ratings compared to on-site evaluations. The choice of audio-visual reproduction technology did not significantly impact the evaluations. Overall, the results suggest virtual environments with high authenticity can be useful for future soundscape research and design.