Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usability evaluation of monocular optical head-mounted displays on reading tasks

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores the factors affecting reading time, error rate, visual fatigue, and mental workload of subjects using a monocular optical head-mounted display (OHMD). Forty healthy participants were involved in this study using four factors: gender, reading conditions (walking and sitting), font sizes (12-, 16-, 20-, 24-, 28-, and 32-point), and contrast ratios (3.0:1, 7.5:1, 12.0:1, 16.5:1, and 21.0:1). The reading time, error rate, critical fusion frequency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s raw task load index, and visual fatigue scale were the dependent measures. Gender showed no significant effect on reading time or error rate. Reading conditions, font sizes, and contrast ratios had significant effects on reading time. Large font sizes produced the fastest reading times for both walking and sitting conditions. The walking condition produced significantly more visual fatigue and mental workload than the sitting condition. Font size and contrast ratio had significant effects on reading time and error rate. The fastest reading time was found at the 16.5:1 contrast ratio for both walking and sitting conditions. Combined with the 28-point font size, we found the fastest reading time and lowest error rate performance combination. Considering reading conditions, contrast ratios, and font size combinations, the 16.5:1 contrast ratio with 28-point font size in the sitting condition and the 16.5:1 contrast ratio with 32-point font size in the walking condition showed the best reading times and error rates. The results from this study can provide very useful reference information for OHMDs and related product interface designs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ayama M, Ujike H, Iwai W, Funakawa M, Okajima K (2007) Effects of contrast and character size upon legibility of Japanese text stimuli presented on visual display terminal. Opt Rev 14(1):48–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard M, Liao CH, Mills M (2001) The effects of font type and size on the legibility and reading time of online text by older adults. In: CHI’01 Ext Abstracts Human Factors Computing systems. pp 175–176

  • Bernard ML, Chaparro BS, Mills MM, Halcomb CG (2002) Examining children’s reading performance and preference for different computer-displayed text. Behav Inf Technol 21(2):87–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byers JC (1989) Traditional and raw task load index (TLX) correlations: are paired comparisons necessary? In: Advances in Industrial Ergonomics Safety. pp 481–485

  • Chen SJ, Kang YY, Lin CL (2016) Ergonomic evaluation of video game playing. J Ambient Intell Hum Comput 7(6):845–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi CF, Lin FT (1998) A comparison of seven visual fatigue assessment techniques in three data-acquisition VDT tasks. Hum Factors 40(4):577–590

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Darroch I, Goodman J, Brewster S, Gray P (2005) The effect of age and font size on reading text on handheld computers. In: Human–computer interaction. pp 253–266

  • Du X, Arya A (2015) Design and evaluation of a learning assistant system with optical head-mounted display (OHMD). In: International conference learning collaboration technologies. pp 75–86

  • Erra U, Capece N (2017) Engineering an advanced geo-location augmented reality framework for smart mobile devices. J Ambient Intel Hum Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-017-0654-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Google Inc. (2014) GLASS FAQ. Retrieved. IOP Publishing PhysicsWeb. https://sites.google.com/site/glasscomms/faqs. Accessed 23 July 2013

  • Hart SG (2006) NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 50(9):904–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heuer H, Hollendiek G, Kröger H, Römer T (1988) Rest position of the eyes and its effect on viewing distance and visual fatigue in computer display work. Zeitschrift fur experimentelle angewandte Psychologie 36(4):538–566

    Google Scholar 

  • Hua H, Javidi B (2014) A 3D integral imaging optical see-through head-mounted display. Opt Express 22(11):13484–13491

    Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (2007) American National Standard for human factors engineering of computer workstations (ANSI/HFES Standard No. 100-2007). Human Factors Ergon Soc, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang YY, Wang MJJ, Lin R (2009) Usability evaluation of e-books. Displays 30(2):49–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim HR, Jeong JH (2014) The study of visual fatigue by monitor letter contrast with an eye tracker. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc 19(4):533–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kooi FL (1997) Visual strain: a comparison of monitors and head-mounted displays. Adv Imaging Netw Technol 2949:162–171. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.266346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee DS, Ko YH, Shen IH, Chao CY (2011) Effect of light source, ambient illumination, character size and interline spacing on visual performance and visual fatigue with electronic paper displays. Displays 32(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CC (2003) Effects of contrast ratio and text color on visual performance with TFT-LCD. Int J Ind Ergon 31(2):65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CC, Huang KC (2009) Effects of color combination and ambient illumination on visual perception time with TFT-LCD. Percept Motor Skills 109(2):607–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lin H, Wu FG, Cheng YY (2013) Legibility and visual fatigue affected by text direction, screen size and character size on color LCD e-reader. Displays 34(1):49–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin H, Lin W, Tsai WC, Cheng YY, Wu FG (2014) Effect of the color tablet computer’s polarity and character size on legibility. In: International conference on universal access human–computer interaction. pp 132–143

  • Lin CC, Chen MT, Huang KC (2015) Effects of viewing angle and contrast ratio on visual performance using TFT-LCD. Int J Eng Res Appl 5(4):55–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Longley C, Whitaker D (2016) Google Glass Glare: disability glare produced by a head-mounted visual display. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 36(2):167–173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre B, Cowan WB (1992) A practical approach to calculating luminance contrast on a CRT. ACM Trans Graph (TOG) 11(4):336–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moroney WF, Biers DW, Eggemeier FT, Mitchell JA (1992) A comparison of two scoring procedures with the NASA task load index in a simulated flight task. In: Aerospace and electronics conference. NAECON. Proceedings of IEEE national. pp 734–740

  • Muensterer OJ, Lacher M, Zoeller C, Bronstein M, Kübler J (2014) Google Glass in pediatric surgery: an exploratory study. Int J Surg 12(4):281–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ponton K (2008) Concepts of interface usability and the enhancement of design through eye tracking and psychophysiology. Maritime Operations Division, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes T, Allen S (2014) Through the looking glass: how Google glass will change the performing arts. In: Arts management and technology laboratory. pp 1–12

  • Shibata T (2002) Head mounted display. Displays 23(1):57–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shieh KK, Lin CC (2000) Effects of screen type, ambient illumination, and color combination on VDT visual performance and subjective preference. Int J Ind Ergon 26(5):527–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spelke ES (2005) Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science? A critical review. Am Psychol 60(9):950

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tang J (2014) Beginning Google Glass development. Apress, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wang AH, Chen MT (2000) Effects of polarity and luminance contrast on visual performance and VDT display quality. Int J Ind Ergon 25(4):415–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HC (2011) Electronic paper display preferred viewing distance and character size for different age groups. Ergonomics 54(9):806–814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HC (2012) Visual fatigue and performances for the 40-min. mixed visual work with a projected screen. Ergon Open J 5:10–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu TS, Dameff CJ, Tully JL (2014) Ultrasound-guided central venous access using Google Glass. J Emerg Med 47(6):668–675

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HC, Chiu MC, Peng CW (2016) Visual fatigue occurrence time when using hand-held intelligent devices. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 7(6):829–835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Rau PLP (2015) Playing with multiple wearable devices: exploring the influence of display, motion and gender. Comput Hum Behav 50:148–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, National Tsing Hua University, No. 101, Sec. 2, Kuang Fu Road, Hsinchu, 30013, Taiwan, ROC

    Chih-Yu Hsiao, Yu-Ting Lu & Chien-Chi Chang

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering and Enterprise Information, Tunghai University, No. 1727, Sec. 4, Taiwan Boulevard, Xitun District, Taichung, 40704, Taiwan, ROC

    Mao-Jiun Wang

Authors
  1. Chih-Yu Hsiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mao-Jiun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yu-Ting Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chien-Chi Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mao-Jiun Wang.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hsiao, CY., Wang, MJ., Lu, YT. et al. Usability evaluation of monocular optical head-mounted displays on reading tasks. J Ambient Intell Human Comput 14, 14551–14560 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-018-1045-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-018-1045-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation