Evaluating interaction methods in augmented reality training

Abstract

As augmented reality (AR) adoption expands across training and operational domains, interaction design has served as a key determinant of user experience (UX). Although natural interaction techniques are believed to better support AR than traditional WIMP (windows, icons, menus, and pointing devices) interfaces, direct comparisons remain limited. This study compared natural and WIMP-based interaction paradigms in an individual, high-stakes procedural AR training task to evaluate their effects on usability, workload, presence, and task performance. Thirty participants completed a within-subjects experiment using both interaction paradigms in a Tactical Combat Casualty Care AR training scenario delivered on a Meta Quest 3. Condition order was counterbalanced. Subjective outcomes included the System Usability Scale, NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), and Presence Questionnaire. Objective measures included task completion time, navigation errors, missed procedural steps, corrective actions, requests for clarification, and observed interaction smoothness. Paired-samples t -tests were used to compare conditions, with exploratory analyses examining order effects and relationships between immersive tendency and presence. Natural interaction produced significantly higher usability ( p = 0.009) and presence ( p = 0.001) than the WIMP interface. Participants also committed fewer navigation errors, missed fewer procedural steps, required fewer corrective actions, and demonstrated smoother interactions ( p < 0.05) in the natural condition. No significant differences were observed for workload, task completion time, clarification requests, or observed efficiency. An order effect indicated lower perceived workload during participants’ second session, regardless of interaction condition, suggesting a learning effect. Natural interaction improves usability, presence, and interaction quality in individual, high-stakes procedural AR training while minimizing execution errors, although it does not necessarily improve speed or decrease cognitive workload during initial use. This evidence suggests that the principal benefits of natural interaction lie in improving the overall UX quality rather than maximizing efficiency, providing guidance for the design of future AR training systems.