Augmented reality application development faces the challenge of balancing key information visualization with user’s cognitive constraints. Virtual Reality Rehab, Inc. is developing an application blending augmented reality (AR) with synthetic vision for use in complex, time-sensitive military operations. This study investigated the effects of controller use and transparency on marker placement speed and accuracy. Method: Participants were required to mark targets by placing icons on the synthetic environment using either a mouse, speech recognition, or Xbox One controller. They were also asked to recall AR building labels. For each scenario, the display was set to 100%, 25%, 50%, or 75% transparency. Results: The 50% transparency condition resulted in the lowest speed and accuracy, while 25% and 75% were not significantly different. Participants performed the best while using the Xbox One controller. Discussion: Findings suggest that transparency should be investigated within the context of task, controller type, and interface design.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BartramL.StoneM. C. (2011). Whisper, Don’t Scream: Grids and Transparency. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 17(10), 1444–1458. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2010.237
2.
BowesJ.DearmanD.PerkinsR. (2003). Transparency for item highlighting.
3.
ChandaranaM. (2017). “Fly like this”: Natural language interface for UAV mission planning. Presented at the International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, Nice, France. Retrieved from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20170002593
4.
EllisS. R.MengesB. M. (1998). Localization of virtual objects in the near visual field. Human Factors; Santa Monica, 40(3), 415.
5.
ElmqvistN.AssarssonU.TsigasP. (2007). Employing Dynamic Transparency for 3D Occlusion Management: Design Issues and Evaluation. In Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2007 (pp. 532–545). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74796-3_54
6.
GunnC.MullerW.DattaA. (2009). Performance improvement with haptic assistance: A quantitative assessment. In World Haptics 2009 - Third Joint EuroHaptics conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (pp. 511–516). https://doi.org/10.1109/WHC.2009.4810805
7.
GuptaD. (2004). An Empirical Study of the Effects of Context-Switch, Object Distance, and Focus Depth on Human Performance in Augmented Reality (Thesis). Virginia Tech. Retrieved from https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/33507
8.
GutwinC.DyckJ.FedakC. (2003). The effects of dynamic transparency on targeting performance. In Graphics Interface.
9.
HarrisonB. L.KurtenbachG.VicenteK. J. (1995). An experimental evaluation of transparent user interface tools and information content. In ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (pp. 81–90).
10.
HelmkeH.OhneiserO.MühlhausenT.WiesM. (2016). Reducing controller workload with automatic speech recognition. In 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.2016.7778024
11.
JagacinskiR. J.HartzellE. J.WardS. (1978). Fitts’ law as a function of system dynamics and target uncertainty. Journal of Motor Behavior, 10(2), 123–131.
12.
KayJ. T. (2011). Group 1 Type: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) as a Force Multiplier to the Fire Support Team. MARINE CORPS COMMAND AND STAFF COLL QUANTICO VA. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA600748
13.
KimH.-Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
14.
LeeS.KimG. J. (2008). Effects of haptic feedback, stereoscopy, and image resolution on performance and presence in remote navigation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(10), 701–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.05.001
15.
LongS. K.BlissJ. P. (2016). The Effect of Control Device on Performance in a Robotic Arm Task. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 60(1), 795–799. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601182
16.
MacKenzieI. S.SoukoreffR. W. (2003). Phrase Sets for Evaluating Text Entry Techniques. In CHI ’03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 754–755). New York, NY, USA: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/765891.765971
17.
MassonS. R. (2006). Unmanned Aerial Vehicle use in Army Brigade Combat teams increasing effectiveness across the spectrum of conflict (PhD Thesis). Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School.
18.
RehakM.MabillardR.SkaloudJ. (2013). A Micro-Uav with the Capability of Direct Georeferencing. ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 317–323. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-1-W2-317-2013
19.
RogersR.BowmanN. D.OliverM. B. (2015). It’s not the model that doesn’t fit, it’s the controller! The role of cognitive skills in understanding the links between natural mapping, performance, and enjoyment of console video games. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 588–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.027
20.
RuppM. A.OppoldP.McConnellD. S. (2013). Comparing the Performance, Workload, and Usability of a Gamepad and Joystick in a Complex Task. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 57(1), 1775–1779. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213571398
21.
WongB. L. W.JoyekurunR.MansourH.AmaldiP.NeesA.VillanuevaR. (2005). Depth, Layering and Transparency: Developing Design Techniques. In Proceedings of the 17th Australia Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Citizens Online: Considerations for Today and the Future (pp. 1–10). Narrabundah, Australia, Australia: Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG) of Australia. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1108368.1108406
22.
WuH.CaiZ.WangY. (2012). Vison-based auxiliary navigation method using augmented reality for unmanned aerial vehicles. In IEEE 10th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (pp. 520–525). https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN.2012.6300922
23.
ZinchenkoK.WuC.SongK. (2017). A study on speech recognition control for a surgical robot. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 13(2), 607–615. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2016.2625818
24.
ZollmannS.HoppeC.LanglotzT.ReitmayrG. (2014). FlyAR: Augmented Reality Supported Micro Aerial Vehicle Navigation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(4), 560–568. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2014.24
