= 32, 16 pairs), we compared different combinations of three cues: Field-of-View (FoV) frustum, Eye-gaze ray, and Head-gaze ray against a baseline condition showing only virtual representations of each collaborator's head and hands. Through a collaborative object finding and placing task, the results showed that awareness cues significantly improved user performance, usability, and subjective preferences, with the combination of the FoV frustum and the Head-gaze ray being best. This work establishes the feasibility of room-scale MR collaboration and the utility of providing virtual awareness cues.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Piumsomboon et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: