Augmented Reality Usability: A Decade of Research Highlights Key Trends and Gaps
Category: User-Centred Design · Effect: Moderate effect · Year: 2018
A systematic review of a decade of augmented reality usability studies reveals a significant trend towards handheld devices and a persistent reliance on laboratory settings, indicating a need for more real-world testing and pilot studies.
Design Takeaway
Prioritize real-world testing and pilot studies when evaluating AR interfaces, especially for handheld devices, to ensure findings are applicable beyond controlled laboratory conditions.
Why It Matters
Understanding the evolution of AR usability research provides valuable context for current design practices. Identifying common methodologies and prevalent research settings helps designers anticipate potential challenges and opportunities when developing and testing AR interfaces.
Key Finding
Over a ten-year period, AR usability research increasingly focused on handheld devices, but largely remained confined to lab environments, with limited use of pilot testing.
Key Findings
- There is a growing trend towards user studies involving handheld AR devices.
- The majority of AR usability studies are conducted in laboratory settings.
- A significant portion of studies do not involve pilot testing.
- The landscape of AR user research has evolved considerably over the decade.
Research Evidence
Aim: To systematically review and analyze augmented reality usability studies conducted between 2005 and 2014 to understand trends, identify influential research, and pinpoint areas for future investigation.
Method: Systematic Review
Procedure: The researchers conducted a systematic review of 291 influential augmented reality user studies published between 2005 and 2014, classifying them by application area and analyzing trends in research focus and methodology.
Sample Size: 291 papers with 369 individual user studies
Context: Augmented Reality (AR) interface design and usability research.
Design Principle
Validate AR interface designs through diverse testing environments, including real-world scenarios, to ensure robust usability and user experience.
How to Apply
When designing and testing AR applications, actively seek opportunities for field studies and incorporate iterative pilot testing phases to uncover usability issues that may not be apparent in a lab setting.
Limitations
The review is limited to studies published between 2005 and 2014, potentially missing more recent advancements and trends in AR usability research.
Student Guide (IB Design Technology)
Simple Explanation: Researchers have looked at many studies about how easy it is to use Augmented Reality (AR) over 10 years. They found that more studies are using phones and tablets for AR, but most of these studies happen in a lab, not in the real world. Also, many studies don't do a small test run first.
Why This Matters: This research helps you understand the history of AR usability testing, showing what methods have been common and where there are gaps, which can inform how you design and test your own AR projects.
Critical Thinking: Given the trend towards laboratory settings, how might the findings of AR usability studies be biased, and what strategies can be employed to mitigate these biases in future research and design?
IA-Ready Paragraph: A systematic review of augmented reality usability studies from 2005 to 2014 by Dey et al. (2018) highlights a significant trend towards handheld AR devices but also a persistent reliance on laboratory settings and a lack of pilot testing. This suggests that while AR research has evolved, there is a need to increase the ecological validity of studies by conducting them in real-world environments and to incorporate pilot testing to refine methodologies and identify potential usability issues before larger-scale evaluations.
Project Tips
- When designing an AR experience, think about how it will be used in different environments, not just a controlled lab.
- Always plan for a pilot test to catch problems before a full user study.
How to Use in IA
- Reference this review when discussing the evolution of AR usability research and justifying your choice of testing methodology, particularly if you are conducting field studies or pilot tests.
Examiner Tips
- Demonstrate an awareness of the limitations of laboratory-based usability testing for AR and propose methods to address this, such as field studies.
Independent Variable: Time period (2005-2014), Application areas of AR
Dependent Variable: Trends in AR usability studies (e.g., device type, setting, pilot testing prevalence)
Strengths
- Comprehensive systematic review covering a decade of research.
- Classification of studies by application area provides structured insights.
Critical Questions
- How have the trends identified in this review continued or changed since 2014?
- What are the specific challenges and benefits of conducting AR usability studies in real-world versus laboratory settings?
Extended Essay Application
- An Extended Essay could investigate the impact of AR on specific industries by analyzing usability trends over a longer period, or by comparing usability findings from different AR platforms (e.g., mobile AR vs. VR).
- Students could conduct their own focused review of recent AR usability studies to identify emerging trends not covered by this paper.
Source
A Systematic Review of 10 Years of Augmented Reality Usability Studies: 2005 to 2014 · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · 2018 · 10.3389/frobt.2018.00037