Remove comments
This commit is contained in:
@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
|
||||
We evaluated six visual hand augmentations, as described in \secref{hands}, displayed on top of the real hand, in two virtual object manipulation tasks in \AR.
|
||||
|
||||
During the \level{Push} task, the \level{Skeleton} hand rendering was the fastest (\figref{results/Push-CompletionTime}), as participants employed fewer and longer contacts to adjust the cube inside the target volume (\figref{results/Push-ContactsCount} and \figref{results/Push-MeanContactTime}).
|
||||
%Participants consistently used few and continuous contacts for all visual hand augmentations (\figref{results/Push-ContactsCount}), with only less than ten trials, carried out by two participants, quickly completed with multiple discrete touches.
|
||||
However, during the \level{Grasp} task, despite no difference in \response{Completion Time}, providing no visible hand rendering (\level{None} and \level{Occlusion} renderings) led to more failed grasps or cube drops (\figref{results/Grasp-ContactsCount} and \figref{results/Grasp-MeanContactTime}).
|
||||
Indeed, participants found the \level{None} and \level{Occlusion} renderings less effective (\figref{results/Ranks-Grasp}) and less precise (\figref{results_questions}).
|
||||
To understand whether the participants' previous experience might have played a role, we also carried out an additional statistical analysis considering \VR experience as an additional between-subjects factor, \ie \VR novices vs. \VR experts (\enquote{I use it every week}, see \secref{participants}).
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user