Performance, Simulator Sickness, and Immersion of a Ball-Sorting Task in Virtual and Augmented Realities

Abstract

Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) can be defined by the amount of virtual elements displayed to a human’s senses: VR is completely synthetic and AR is partially synthetic. This paper compares VR and AR systems for variations of three ball-sorting task scenarios, and evaluates both user performance and reaction (i.e., simulator sickness and immersion). The VR system scored higher, with statistical significance, than the AR system in terms of effectiveness per each scenario and completion rate of all scenarios. The VR system also scored significantly lower than the AR system in terms of percentage error and total false positives. The VR group scored significantly lower than the AR group in efficiency performance: the VR group had less time spent in each scenario, less total time duration, and higher overall relative efficiency. Although post-scenario simulator sickness did not differ significantly between VR and AR, the VR condition had an increase in disorientation from pre-to-post scenarios. Significant correlations between performance effectiveness and post-scenario simulator sickness were not found. Finally, the AR system scored significantly higher on the immersion measure item for the level of challenge the scenarios provided. AR interface issues are discussed as a potential factor in performance decrement, and AR interface solutions are given. AR may be preferred over VR if disorientation is a concern. Study limits include causality ambiguity and experimental control. Next steps include testing VR or AR systems exclusively, and testing whether the increased challenge from the AR immersion is beneficial to educational applications.