Comparing head-mounted and handheld augmented reality for guided assembly

Abstract Different Augmented Reality (AR) displays are becoming more commonly used for work since AR promises benefits by offering support, e.g., with additional information or hints. However, most research compares AR with traditional work support, like paper-based or web-based instructions. Since various AR technologies offer device-specific advantages and disadvantages, different AR technologies are more or less suitable to offer support without overwhelming or distracting the worker. Research, therefore, needs to derive empirical results from comparing different AR displays to derive concrete recommendations for action on the use and design of AR for specific contexts. To address this research gap, this experimental study investigates the effect of video-see-through head-mounted AR (Varjo XR-3) vs. handheld AR (Apple iPad) on performance (time and committed failure), motivation, and cognitive load for guided assembly. The study results reveal that both AR displays can successfully guide people in guided assembly tasks. On a descriptive level, the head-mounted AR device reveals slightly better results in terms of time and committed failures. Notably, the impact of technical restrictions on the study results was still evident. Accordingly, further investigation of device-specific differences is of continuing importance.