To answer the question: “what is 3D good for?” we reviewed the body of literature concerning the performance implications of stereoscopic 3D (S3D) displays versus non-stereo (2D or monoscopic) displays. We summarized results of over 160 publications describing over 180 experiments spanning 51years of research in various fields including human factors psychology/engineering, human–computer interaction, vision science, visualization, and medicine. Publications were included if they described at least one task with a performance-based experimental evaluation of an S3D display versus a non-stereo display under comparable viewing conditions. We classified each study according to the experimental task(s) of primary interest: (a) judgments of positions and/or distances; (b) finding, identifying, or classifying objects; (c) spatial manipulations of real or virtual objects; (d) navigation; (e) spatial understanding, memory, or recall and (f) learning, training, or planning. We found that S3D display viewing improved performance over traditional non-stereo (2D) displays in 60% of the reported experiments. In 15% of the experiments, S3D either showed a marginal benefit or the results were mixed or unclear. In 25% of experiments, S3D displays offered no benefit over non-stereo 2D viewing (and in some rare cases, harmed performance). From this review, stereoscopic 3D displays were found to be most useful for tasks involving the manipulation of objects and for finding/identifying/classifying objects or imagery. We examine instances where S3D did not support superior task performance. We discuss the implications of our findings with regard to various fields of research concerning stereoscopic displays within the context of the investigated tasks. 
Stereoscopic 3D displays and human performance: A comprehensive review