We study the performance and user experience of two popular mainstream text entry devices, desktop keyboards and touchscreen keyboards, for use in Virtual Reality (VR) applications. We discuss the limitations arising from limited visual feedback, and examine the efficiency of different strategies of use. We analyze a total of 24 hours of typing data in VR from 24 participants and find that novice users are able to retain about 60 of their typing speed on a desktop keyboard and about 40–45 of their typing speed on a touchscreen keyboard. We also find no significant learning effects, indicating that users can transfer their typing skills fast into VR. Besides investigating baseline performances, we study the position in which keyboards and hands are rendered in space. We find that this does not adversely affect performance for desktop keyboard typing and results in a performance trade-off for touchscreen keyboard typing.
Further, @cite_19 evaluated the effects of co-location of control and display space in fishtank VR and found only subtle effects of co-location in an object movement task using a tracked stylus. Similarly, further research on visuo-motor co-location on 3D spatial tasks resulted in inconclusive results, not indicating statistically significant differences @cite_24 @cite_10 .
@cite_24 @cite_19 @cite_10
2160641905 2533480359
Given the ease that humans have with using a keyboard and mouse in typical, non-colocated computer interaction, many studies have investigated the value of colocating the visual field and motor workspaces using immersive display modalities. Significant understanding has been gained by previous work comparing physical tasks against virtual tasks, visuomotor colocation versus non-colocation, and even visuomotor rotational misalignments in virtual environments (VEs). However, few studies have explored all of these paradigms in context with each other, and it is difficult to perform interstudy comparisons because of the variation in tested motor tasks. Therefore, using a stereoscopic fish tank display setup, the goal for the current study was to characterize human performance of a 3D Fitts' point-to-point reaching task using a stylus-based haptic interface in the physical, colocated non-colocated, and rotated VE visualization conditions. Five performance measures---throughput, efficiency, initial movement error, corrective movements, and peak velocity---were measured and used to evaluate task performance. These measures were studied in 22 subjects (11 male, 11 female, ages 20--32) performing a 3D variant of Fitts' serial task under 10 task conditions: physical, colocated VE, non-colocated VE, and rotated VEs from 45---315° in 45° increments. Hypotheses: All performance measures in the colocated VE were expected to reflect significantly reduced task performance over the real condition, but also reflect increased performance over the non-colocated VE condition. For rotational misalignments, all performance measures were expected to reflect the highest performance at 0°, reduce to the lowest performance at 90°, and rise again to a local maximum at 180° (symmetric about 0°). Results: All performance measures showed that the colocated VE condition resulted in significantly lower task performance than the physical condition and higher mean performance than the non-colocated VE condition, but the difference was not statistically significant. Also, rotation misalignments showed that task performance was mostly reduced to a minimum at 90°, 135°, and 225°. We conclude that colocated VEs may not significantly improve point-to-point reaching performance over non-colocated VEs. Also, visual rotations of ±45° affected throughput, efficiency, peak velocity, and initial movement error, but the number of corrective movements were not affected until ± 90°. Virtual reality systems often co-locate the display and input (motor) spaces. Many input devices, such as the mouse, use indirect input mappings, and are disjoint from the display space. A study of visual motor co-location was conducted to determine if there is any benefit to working directly “in” a virtual environment. Using a fish-tank VR setup, participants performed a 3D object movement task. This required moving an object from the centre of the environment to target regions, using a tracked pen, in both co-located and disjoint display input conditions. Results were analyzed in the context of Fitts' Law, which models rapid aimed movements. Ultimately, no significant differences were found between co-located and disjoint conditions. However, when analyzing object movement in specific directions, the co-located condition was somewhat better than the disjoint one. In particular, movement into the scene was faster when the display and input device were co-located rather than disjoint.