Perception informs people about the opportunities for action and their associated costs. To this end, explicit awareness of spatial layout varies not only with relevant optical and ocular-motor variables, but also as a function of the costs associated with performing intended actions. Although explicit awareness is mutable in this respect, visually guided actions directed at the immediate environment are not. When the metabolic costs associated with walking an extent increase—perhaps because one is wearing a heavy backpack—hills appear steeper and distances to targets appear greater. When one is standing on a high balcony, the apparent distance to the ground is correlated with one's fear of falling. Perceiving spatial layout combines the geometry of the world with behavioral goals and the costs associated with achieving these goals.

Distance perception seems to be an incredible achievement if it is construed as being based solely on static retinal images. Information provided by such images is sparse at best. On the other hand, when the perceptual context is taken to be one in which people are acting in natural environments, the informational bases for distance perception become abundant. There are, however, surprising consequences of studying people in action. Nonvisual factors, such as people's goals and physiological states, also influence their distance perceptions. Although the informational specification of distance becomes redundant when people are active, paradoxically, many distance-related actions sidestep the need to perceive distance at all.

Previous research has found performance for several egocentric tasks to be superior on physically large displays relative to smaller ones, even when visual angle is held constant. This finding is believed to be due to the more immersive nature of large displays. In our experiment, we examined if using a large display to learn a virtual environment (VE) would improve egocentric knowledge of the target locations. Participants learned the location of five targets by freely exploring a desktop large-scale VE of a city on either a small (25" diagonally) or large (72" diagonally) screen. Viewing distance was adjusted so that both displays subtended the same viewing angle. Knowledge of the environment was then assessed using a head-mounted display in virtual reality, by asking participants to stand at each target and paint at the other unseen targets. Angular pointing error was significantly lower when the environment was learned on a 72" display. Our results suggest that large displays are superior for learning a virtual environment and the advantages of learning an environment on a large display may transfer to navigation in the real world.

Proffitt, Stefanucci, Banton, and Epstein (2003) reported a set of studies showing that the perceived distance to a target is influenced by the effort required to walk to its location. Hutchison and Loomis (H&L) reported an experiment that failed to find a significant influence of effort on indices of apparent distance. There were numerous important differences between the design and methods of H&L's study and those of Proffitt et al. Moreover, there are important theoretical reasons to believe that these differences were responsible for the different results. The theoretical motivation of H&L's studies was also brought into question.

While acknowledging that their design and methods were different from the original Proffitt, Stefanucci, Banton, and Epstein (2003) study, Hutchison and Loomis (H&L) continue to argue that their findings qualify our account of energetic influences on distance perception. This reply provides a brief and focused discussion of the methodological differences between their study and ours and why these differences were likely responsible for the different results. It is also argued that the measures employed by H&L are assessments of apparent location, not apparent distance.

Studies of locomotion in virtual environments assume that correct geometric principles define the relationship between walking speed and environmental flow. However, we have observed that geometrically correct optic flow appears to be too slow during simulated locomotion on a treadmill. Experiment 1 documents the effect in a head-mounted display. Experiment 2 shows that the effect is eliminated when the gaze is directed downward or to the side, or when the walking speed is slow. Experiment 3 shows that the effect is unchanged by stride length. Experiment 4 verifies that the effect is not attributable to image jitter. The change in perceived speed from straight ahead to side or down gaze coincides with a shift from expanding optic flow to lamellar flow. Therefore, we hypothesize that lamellar flow is necessary for accurate speed perception, and that a limited field of view eliminates this cue during straight-ahead gaze.