WIP
This commit is contained in:
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ This result is consistent with \textcite{saito2021contact}, who found that displ
|
||||
|
||||
To summarize, when employing a visual hand rendering overlaying the real hand, participants were more performant and confident in manipulating virtual objects with bare hands in \AR.
|
||||
These results contrast with similar manipulation studies, but in non-immersive, on-screen \AR, where the presence of a visual hand rendering was found by participants to improve the usability of the interaction, but not their performance \cite{blaga2017usability,maisto2017evaluation,meli2018combining}.
|
||||
Our results show the most effective visual hand rendering to be the \level{Skeleton} one. Participants appreciated that it provided a detailed and precise view of the tracking of the real hand, without hiding or masking it.
|
||||
Our results show the most effective visual hand rendering to be the \level{Skeleton} one.
|
||||
Participants appreciated that it provided a detailed and precise view of the tracking of the real hand, without hiding or masking it.
|
||||
Although the \level{Contour} and \level{Mesh} hand renderings were also highly rated, some participants felt that they were too visible and masked the real hand.
|
||||
This result is in line with the results of virtual object manipulation in \VR of \textcite{prachyabrued2014visual}, who found that the most effective visual hand rendering was a double representation of both the real tracked hand and a visual hand physically constrained by the virtual environment.
|
||||
This type of \level{Skeleton} rendering was also the one that provided the best sense of agency (control) in \VR \cite{argelaguet2016role, schwind2018touch}.
|
||||
|
||||
This type of \level{Skeleton} rendering was also the one that provided the best sense of agency (control) in \VR \cite{argelaguet2016role,schwind2018touch}.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user