Papers for

vr hardware designers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Controllers faster but hand tracking preferred with vibration feedback in VR

Comparing Haptic Feedback Across Hand Tracking and Controllers in VR Object Interaction Tasks

Abstract: Hand tracking offers natural VR interaction but lacks controllers' inherent tactile feedback, while haptic feedback across input methods remains understudied. We conducted a participant study comparing vibration, impulse, and no feedback in hand- and controller-based VR interaction across grasp-, pinch-, and tap-like gestures assessing performance, workload, and preference. A custom glove and controller-mounted device provided both feedback types, aiming for consistency across input modalities. Controllers were faster for grasp and pinch, whereas hand tracking was more accurate for pinch and preferred overall. Haptics had limited performance effects, although impulse reduced grasp accuracy with controllers. Participants preferred vibration and impulse over no haptic feedback, favouring vibration overall. Our findings reveal a more nuanced relationship between haptic feedback, input device, and interaction context than suggested by previous work.

Fri 18 SeptHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
In virtual reality, people can use hand tracking or controllers to interact with objects. Controllers let users perform some actions faster, but hand tracking is more accurate and liked better overall. The researchers tested different kinds of touch feedback like vibration and impulse with both input types. They found that adding these feedbacks didn’t strongly improve performance but most people liked feeling vibration best. This shows that the effect of touch feedback depends on the device and the action being done.
Open → 2609.21869v1

User studies improve understanding of VR motion privacy acceptance

Why User Studies and Participant Experience Reporting Matter for VR Motion Privacy?

Abstract: Public VR game leaderboards contain tracked motion recordings uploaded by hundreds of thousands of users. Once uploaded, these recordings are accessible to anyone and create privacy risks (i.e., identification and profiling). Prior work has proposed mechanisms that modify tracked movement to reduce these risks. Their utility is commonly evaluated through physical deviation, where smaller deviations indicate better utility, while user studies are less common. However, it remains unclear how well physical deviation explains users' acceptance of a mechanism compared to user studies. We examine this through a user study of three VR motion privacy mechanisms at five physical deviation levels. We find that user studies explain substantially more variation in mechanism acceptance than physical deviation, although physical deviation remains significant. We also find that prior VR experience and exposure to VR privacy mechanisms significantly affect acceptance. We recommend combining physical deviation with user studies and reporting participants' prior experience.

Fri 11 SeptHuman-Computer InteractionCryptography and Security
The gist
People playing VR games sometimes share their movement data on public leaderboards, which can put their privacy at risk. The authors studied three ways to change these movements to protect privacy and measured how much people liked them. They found that directly asking users what they think explains acceptance better than just measuring physical changes. Also, people who had more VR experience or saw privacy protections before were more likely to accept these changes. They suggest that both user opinions and physical measures should be used together when evaluating VR privacy tools.
Open → 2609.12415v1