One versus Two-Handed Six Degree-of-Freedom Compensatory Tracking in 3D and the Effects of Practice

Abstract

Three-dimensional displays and input devices are now widely available. While research has investigated 3D input devices for a variety of applications, much research describes custom-made devices. There are also limited guidelines on the use of 3D input devices. A previous study investigating six degree-of-freedom (DOF) compensatory tracking performance found that novice users with little practice performed the task very poorly. This study investigates the effects of practice on performance. Subjects performed a compensatory tracking task using off-the-shelf six-DOF input devices with one device in one hand, or two devices, one in each hand splitting translation (X, Y, Z axis) and rotation (Heading, Pitch, Roll) control between hands. Examining Root Mean Square Error for each axis indicated that the tracking task was difficult to perform. Regression results and slopes indicated there was greater improvement over time for translation movements for the two hand condition, but performance for translation was better when using one hand. Research is needed to determine appropriate settings for the 3D mouse based on task type.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Balakrishnan

Kurtenbach

(1999). Exploring bimanual camera control and object manipulation in 3D graphics interfaces. CHI ′99: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States. 56–62.

Boritz

Booth

K. S.

(1997). A study of interactive 3D point location in a computer simulated virtual environment. VRST ′97: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland. 181–187.

Chittaro

Burigat

(2004). 3D location-pointing as a navigation aid in virtual environments. AVI ′04: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, Gallipoli, Italy. 267–274.

Hachet

Guitton

Reuter

(2003). The CAT for efficient 2D and 3D interaction as an alternative to mouse adaptations. VRST ′03: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Osaka, Japan. 225–112.

Hinckley

Pausch

Proffitt

(1997). Attention and visual feedback: The bimanual frame of reference. SI3D ′97: Proceedings of the 1997 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, Providence, Rhode Island, United States. 121-ff.

Hinckley

Pausch

Proffitt

Kassell

N. F.

(1998). Two-handed virtual manipulation. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., 5(3), 260–302.

McKenna

(1992). Interactive viewpoint control and three-dimensional operations. SI3D ′92: Proceedings of the 1992 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States. 53–56.

van Rhijn

Mulder

J. D.

(2006). Spatial input device structure and bimanual object manipulation in virtual environments. VRST ′06: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Limassol, Cyprus. 51–60.

Ware

Rose

(1999). Rotating virtual objects with real handles. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., 6(2), 162–180.

10.

Zhai

(1993). Investigation of feel for 6DOF inputs: Isometric and elastic rate control for manipulation in 3D environments. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting, 323–327.

11.

Zhai

Milgram

(1994). Asymmetrical spatial accuracy in 3D tracking. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, 38 245–249.

12.

Zhai

Milgram

Buxton

(1996). The influence of muscle groups on performance of multiple degree-of-freedom input. CHI ′96: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 308–315.