Exploring Alternative Text Input Modalities in Virtual Reality: A Comparative Study

Text input in Virtual Reality (VR) is crucial for communication, search, and productivity. We compared four keyboard designs for VR text entry, leveraging the flexibility and the tracking options of a 3D environment. We used the Dvorak layout to control for experience differences. The designs were: (a) a floating keyboard with touch input, (b) a keyboard attached on the back of the hand with touch input, (c) a floating keyboard with eye tracking and pinch input, and (d) a keyboard laid out over a rolling shape with touch input. Designs (b), (c), and (d) can move in 3D space, while design (a) is static. Design (d) had similar efficiency to design (a) but with better usability and lower Physical Demand. Design (b) led to higher Physical Demand, Effort, and Frustration. Design (c) had lower Physical Demand but higher Mental Demand, Effort, and error rates. Typing speeds averaged 6.51 WPM (1.24% error rate) for (a), 5.56 WPM (3.82% error rate) for (b), 5.33 WPM (1.43% error rate) for (c), and 6.70 WPM (1.64% error rate) for (d).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3641825.3689505
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.74

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring Alternative Text Input Modalities in Virtual Reality: A Comparative Study

Kris Luyten, Jeroen Ceyssens, Mathias Jans
2 citations
Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
0.74
article

Exploring Alternative Text Input Modalities in Virtual Reality: A Comparative Study

Kris Luyten, Jeroen Ceyssens, Mathias Jans
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Text input in Virtual Reality (VR) is crucial for communication, search, and productivity. We compared four keyboard designs for VR text entry, leveraging the flexibility and the tracking options of a 3D environment. We used the Dvorak layout to control for experience differences. The designs were: (a) a floating keyboard with touch input, (b) a keyboard attached on the back of the hand with touch input, (c) a floating keyboard with eye tracking and pinch input, and (d) a keyboard laid out over a rolling shape with touch input. Designs (b), (c), and (d) can move in 3D space, while design (a) is static. Design (d) had similar efficiency to design (a) but with better usability and lower Physical Demand. Design (b) led to higher Physical Demand, Effort, and Frustration. Design (c) had lower Physical Demand but higher Mental Demand, Effort, and error rates. Typing speeds averaged 6.51 WPM (1.24% error rate) for (a), 5.56 WPM (3.82% error rate) for (b), 5.33 WPM (1.43% error rate) for (c), and 6.70 WPM (1.64% error rate) for (d).

Flanders Make (Belgium) (BE), Hasselt University (BE)
European Commission, Vlaamse regering
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
0.74
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.