# Mdpj
## 4 Results  
### NASA TLX  
Figure 6 presents the boxplot for the NASA TLX results. The X-axis represents each sub-scale, and the Y-axis denotes the overall score for each sub-scale. Outliers, indicated by bubbles above the boxes, were excluded as they significantly differ from all other values and could skew the results. We conducted \(t\)-tests to measure the significance for each pair of sub-scales and found significance in mental (\(p=0.042\)), physical (\(p=0.0218\)), and temporal demand (\(p=0.0271\)). Pairs with \(p\)-values smaller than 0.05 are labeled with asterisks. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Question No.** & **Question Text** \\ \hline
1 & Participant’s age \\ \hline
2 & Prior experience with MR HMD \\ \hline
3 & Rating preference for Natural interaction on a scale from 0 (dislike) to 10 (very much like) \\ \hline
4 & Rating preference for WIMP interaction on a scale from 0 (dislike) to 10 (very much like) \\ \hline
5 & Based on the demo, what aspects of natural interaction do \\  & participants prefer compared to WIMP interaction? \\ \hline
6 & Based on the demo, what do participants perceive as the \\  & shortcomings of natural interaction compared to WIMP? \\ \hline
7 & Do participants think natural interaction could reduce the learning \\  & barrier of new technology, and why? \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: A list of questions we included in the Google form survey Mental demand evaluates the level of task complexity. When comparing the mental demand between case_NI and case_WIMP, it becomes evident that the median of case_WIMP (22.5) is lower than that of case_NI (27.5). This suggests that although both tasks present a low degree of difficulty, case_WIMP is marginally less complex than case_NI. Additionally, the interquartile range (IQR) of case_NI is broader than that of case_WIMP, indicating a greater dispersion of user scores for case_NI. The quartiles disclose that the middle 50% of data for case_NI are situated between 20 and 50, while for case_WIMP, they are between 10 and 30, which is a lower range compared to case_NI. Based on this analysis, it can be concluded that users generally perceive the task in case_WIMP to be less complicated than in case_NI. Another crucial category is physical demand, which assesses the level of physical effort needed to accomplish a task. When comparing the data for both cases, case_NI exhibits a considerably higher median (30) than case_WIMP (10), suggesting that users generally regard case_NI as more physically demanding. Furthermore, the middle 50% of case_NI data ranges between 10 and 55, which is both broader and higher than that of case_WIMP (5 to 20). The whiskers of case_NI (5 to 70) also extend further than those of case_WIMP (5 to 20), signifying that the full spectrum of user ratings for case_WIMP is much more constrained than that of case_NI. The last set of data pertains to temporal demand, which evaluates whether the pace required for task completion is leisurely or swift. In line with the other two subcategories, the median of case_NI (30) surpasses that of case_WIMP (17.5), implying that users perceive the task in case_NI as involving greater time pressure compared to case_WIMP. The IQR of case_NI (10 to 40) is more expansive than that of case_WIMP (10 to 25), and the whisker of case_NI (10 to 70) also extends further than that of case_WIMP (0 to 30). This demonstrates a higher degree of variability in user ratings for case_NI. Overall, the NASA TLX results reveal that case_NI demands greater mental, physical, and temporal effort. These findings correspond with our expectations, as natural interaction involves supplementary tasks, such as inserting a virtual key into a virtual lock. This process necessitates increased time and physical exertion compared to simply pressing a virtual button. Moreover, people are more accustomed to WIMP interaction,  
Figure 6: Scores for NASA TLX measurement; we labeled significant groups (\(p<0.05\)) using asterisks.