## 4 Results
### Comparative Analysis of the Results Between the TV and XR Environments  
As the next step, a comparative analysis of the TV and XR environments was conducted. To compare the two environments in terms of pragmatic quality, hedonic quality, and overall satisfaction, normality tests were first performed. Depending on the outcome, either a paired \(t\)-test (for normally distributed data) or a Wilcoxon signed-rank test (for non-normal data) was applied. The analysis revealed significant differences between the two environments in pragmatic quality and overall satisfaction. Specifically, pragmatic quality did not meet the assumption of normality, and thus the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used, which showed a statistically significant difference between the two environments (W = 54.50, \(p\) = 0.0007). For overall satisfaction, the data met the assumption of normality; the paired \(t\)-test also revealed a significant difference (t(29) = \(-3.41\), \(p\) = 0.0019). In contrast, no significant difference was found in hedonic quality between the environments (t(29) = \(-0.16\), \(p\) = 0.876). Based on these findings, gesture-level comparisons between the two environments (Table 5) were analyzed further for the dimensions that showed significant differences: pragmatic quality and overall satisfaction. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Scale** & **Gesture Type** & **Test** & **Stat** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Pragmatic Quality} & Surface-Touch Gesture & Paired \(t\)-test & \(-1.002\) & \(>\)0.05 ns \\  & Gesture & Paired \(t\)-test & \(-4.275\) & \(<\)0.01 * \\  & Micro Finger-Touch Gesture & Wilcoxon & 131.5 & \(>\)0.05 ns \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Overall Satisfaction} & Surface-Touch Gesture & Paired \(t\)-test & \(-0.832\) & \(>\)0.05 ns \\  & Gesture & Paired \(t\)-test & \(-3.768\) & \(<\)0.001 ** \\ \cline{1-1}  & Micro Finger-Touch Gesture & Wilcoxon & 164.0 & \(>\)0.05 ns \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Results of the gesture-level comparative analysis between the TV and XR environments for pragmatic quality and overall satisfaction. The analysis revealed that the mid-air gesture was the only gesture type that showed a statistically significant difference between the two environments. Specifically, the mid-air gesture was perceived as functionally more favorable in the XR environment than in the TV environment (t(29) = \(-\)4.275, \(p\) = 0.0002), and the mean score for hedonic quality was also higher in XR. Consequently, the overall satisfaction for the mid-air gesture dramatically improved in the XR environment compared to that in the TV environment (t(29) = \(-\)3.768, \(p\) = 0.0007). In summary, the UEQ-S analysis indicated that a significant difference between the TV and XR environments was observed only for the mid-air gesture. To investigate these environment-dependent differences further, we analyzed the participants' rank order preferences for the gesture types across the two environments. After experiencing all gestures in both environments, the participants were asked to rank the gesture types in order of preference. The results of this ranking task are presented in Figure 9.  
In the TV environment, the Surface-Touch gesture was most frequently selected as either the first or second preference (27 times), whereas the mid-air gesture was the least selected in the first or second positions (14 times) and was most frequently ranked third (16 times). In contrast, in the XR environment, the mid-air gesture received the highest number of first and second rankings (25 times), while the Surface-Touch gesture was least frequently selected in the top two positions (16 times) and most frequently ranked third (14 times). To provide a more intuitive comparison, a weighted ranking score was calculated by assigning three points to first place, two points to second place, and one point to third place. The results were then converted to a 100-point scale. The micro finger-touch gesture scored identically in both environments (64.4 points).