Document is current

Article History

Received: 9 March 2025

Accepted: 29 January 2026

First Online: 18 February 2026

Competing interests

: The authors declare no competing interests.

: This study involved human participants and therefore required full ethics approval. The research protocol, experimental procedures, data-collection process, and consent procedures were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Hubei University of Technology. Approval Number: HBUT 20240087. Approval Date: [2024-05-18]Approval Body: Institutional Ethics Committee, Hubei University of Technology. The scope of the approval covered: (1) recruitment of adult participants; (2) administration of 3DCG urban-scene visual experiments; (3) collection of perceptual responses, cursor-based expectation-marking data, and questionnaire responses; (4) secure storage, anonymisation, and use of the data exclusively for academic research. The Ethics Committee confirmed that the study posed minimal risk, involved no physical or invasive procedures, and complied with all applicable ethical guidelines for human-subject research, including the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and institutional regulations. All components of the study—including pilot testing, participant briefing, data acquisition, and analysis—were performed in accordance with approved procedures. No part of the research commenced prior to obtaining formal approval.

: Written informed consent was obtained from all 223 participants prior to enrolment. The consent was administered in person from 2024-06-05 to 2024-07-05 by trained members of the research team. Participants were provided with full information regarding: (1) Purpose of the study – to examine perceptual expectation formation in curved-street environments; (2) Experimental procedures – viewing 3DCG street simulations, marking points of maximum expectation using mouse input, and completing a short questionnaire (total duration approx. 2 h); (3) Voluntary participation – participants could withdraw at any time, without penalty; (4) Potential risks – minimal visual fatigue possible; no physical, invasive, or high-risk procedures involved; (5) Data scope and usage – cursor-trajectory data, perceptual ratings, and questionnaire responses were anonymised, securely stored, and used solely for academic research and publication; (6) Confidentiality – no personal identifiers were collected or used in any part of the study or future dissemination. No minors or vulnerable individuals were included. No oral consent procedures were used; all consent was written and obtained prior to participation. Participants were explicitly informed of the purpose of the research, how their anonymised data would be utilized, and that their anonymity was fully assured. All consent procedures conformed to institutional ethics guidelines, and the approval was granted by the Institutional Ethics Committee.