## 4 Results
### The Evaluation Results for Specific Gesture Actions by Type  
Participants evaluated the specific actions within each gesture type and were asked to identify actions they perceived as natural and those they felt were uncomfortable. This approach enabled an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses associated with each gesture type, and the findings of these results are illustrated in Figures 10 and 11 below. Figure 9: Ranking results for preferred gesture types in TV/XR environments. The gesture type rated highest in each environment is highlighted with a blue rectangular outline, while the gesture type rated lowest is highlighted with a red rectangular outline. The participants predominantly reported that the small movement and selection gestures were most natural, describing that these gestures were intuitive, simple, and easy to use. Examples of such gestures include briefly moving one's finger to shift the selection area or performing basic selection taps on a surface or with one's index finger/thumb. These actions appeared naturally intuitive to the participants largely due to their similarity to the conventional interactions already familiar within daily smart-device usage. Notably, the pointing gesture in the mid-air gesture category received more positive evaluations in the XR environment than in the TV environment. This favorable response is likely attributable to the mixed-reality setting, where the spatial user interface panels and card components are presented directly in front of users, making pointing interactions with one's fingertips substantially more intuitive and natural compared to similar gestures directed toward distant TV screens. Conversely, as illustrated in Figure 11, most of the participants answered that the following gestures--large movements, return/cancel, and back to home--were particularly awkward or uncomfortable. These gestures either significantly deviated from previously  
Figure 11: Gestures negatively evaluated by the participants in the TV/XR environments for each of three gesture types. Figure 10: Gestures positively evaluated by the participants in TV/XR environments for each of the three gesture types. embodied interaction patterns (e.g., the back to home gesture, performed by swiping all of one's fingers across a surface in the Surface-Touch gesture type) or presented difficulties in terms of cognitively differentiating large movement gestures from more convenient gestures like the small movement gestures. Consequently, these gestures could impose additional cognitive demands, requiring users to engage in new learning processes and increasing the mental effort required to recall specific gesture associations during interactions with the interfaces. The Evaluation Results for Gesture Execution Times: An Analysis of the Correlation with the UEQ-S Scores  
To investigate how gesture performance time influenced the user experience in different environments further, we analyzed the gesture execution time (GET) for the hand gestures and its correlation with the User Experience Questionnaire, Short Version (UEQ-S) scores. The primary objective was to examine whether temporal efficiency in gesture execution influenced users' satisfaction and usability perceptions across different environments and gesture types. Based on this direction point, firstly, the GET data were collected via the rules established in Section 3.4.1 (Figure 12). The correlation analysis between the GETs and UEQ-S scores revealed a marginally significant negative correlation with pragmatic quality ([PERSON]'s r = \(-0.135\), \(p\) = 0.070), and statistically significant negative correlations with hedonic quality ([PERSON]'s r = \(-0.151\), \(p\) = 0.044) and overall satisfaction ([PERSON]'s r = \(-0.176\), \(p\) = 0.018). These results imply that longer execution times may slightly reduce users' overall satisfaction and emotional experience with gesture interactions.