Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2004.12642

Influence of Hand Tracking as a way of Interaction in Virtual Reality on User Experience

Abstract

With the rising interest in Virtual Reality and the fast development and improvement of available devices, new features of interactions are becoming available. One of them that is becoming very popular is hand tracking, as the idea to replace controllers for interactions in virtual worlds. This experiment aims to compare different interaction types in VR using either controllers or hand tracking. Participants had to play two simple VR games with various types of tasks in those games - grabbing objects or typing numbers. While playing, they were using interactions with different visualizations of hands and controllers. The focus of this study was to investigate user experience of varying interactions (controller vs. hand tracking) for those two simple tasks. Results show that different interaction types statistically significantly influence reported emotions with Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM), where for hand tracking participants were feeling higher valence, but lower arousal and dominance. Additionally, task type of grabbing was reported to be more realistic, and participants experienced a higher presence. Surprisingly, participants rated the interaction type with controllers where both where hands and controllers were visualized as statistically most preferred. Finally, hand tracking for both tasks was rated with the System Usability Scale (SUS) scale, and hand tracking for the task typing was rated as statistically significantly more usable. These results can drive further research and, in the long term, contribute to help selecting the most matching interaction modality for a task.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jan-Niklas Voigt-Antons, Tanja Kojić, Danish Ali, Sebastian Möller. 2020-04-27. Influence of Hand Tracking as a way of Interaction in Virtual Reality on User Experience. https://doi.org/10.1109/qomex48832.2020.9123085

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Are explainable AI (XAI) evaluation strategies aligned? Comparing subjective, objective, and mathematical evaluation measures using saliency maps

The evaluation of explainable AI (XAI) approaches often relies on three families of methods: subjective measures (e.g., questionnaires on trust or satisfaction), objective measures (e.g., task performance metrics), and mathematical metrics (e.g., for faithfulness). Yet, it remains unclear how these families align or diverge in practice. In a{preregistered} between-subjects study (N=166), we use three established saliency map techniques (LIME, Grad-CAM, Guided Backpropagation) as a testbed to examine this issue. We find that each family of methods leads to different conclusions: participants reported no differences in trust or satisfaction, Grad-CAM improved user performance, while mathematical metrics favored Guided Backpropagation. At the same time, mathematical metrics were only partially related to user performance, and these relationships were sometimes counterintuitive. Our findings highlight the methodological importance of comparing subjective, objective, and mathematical approaches when evaluating XAI, illustrating both tensions and aspects that are aligned. We discuss implications for XAI evaluation frameworks.

cs.HC

Mind Your Ps and Qs: Positive Moderation Practice in the Positive Queue

Online communities rely on volunteer moderators to maintain order. Despite their key role, moderators are given a toolbox of punishments and far less support for encouraging contributions they want to see more of. We introduce the Positive Queue as a positive counterpart to Reddit's modqueue: a dedicated space for moderators to discover contributions and behaviors they want to encourage and positively reinforce. With five moderators, four with 6-14 years of experience, we use the Positive Queue to examine how moderators operationalize positive reinforcement. Moderators combined predicted community reception, observed engagement, and their own judgment; used prediction-engagement mismatches to identify overlooked content; and repurposed positive features for punitive and retrospective work. These findings surface tensions around labor, attribution, and community fit. We contribute the Positive Queue as a working system and conceptualize positive moderation as recognition infrastructure that shapes what moderators notice, whose judgment becomes visible, and how recognition reaches contributors.

cs.HC

PILOT: Control Surfaces for Authoring Social Media Feeds

Personalized social media feeds infer preferences from behavior, leaving people little direct control over what they see. Existing controls range from post-level reactions to rules and natural language, but little is known about how people use them together or how added expressiveness changes effort. We built PILOT, a Bluesky feed-authoring system that turns in-feed actions into explicit preferences, deterministic ranking, and inspectable outcomes. A study with seven participants informed an expanded implementation, which we organized into three nested control surfaces that ten participants compared within subjects. Participants assigned controls to distinct jobs: broad controls set direction, in-post actions refined results, and filters removed content. Richer surfaces did not necessarily feel more effortful, and participants' experiences depended more on whether they could verify and repair outcomes. Our findings show that usable feed control requires not simply more controls, but orchestration across mechanisms that support expression, inspection, repair, and episodic use.

cs.HC