## 4 Results and Discussion
### Addressing Research Questions  
**(RQ1):** The first research question examined the relationship between demographics and the perceived security of different obfuscation techniques. Figure 3 shows privacy concerns by age group, highlighting a trend of increasing concern with age. Younger participants (ages 15-25 and 26-35) generally showed fewer privacy concerns, with many expressing little or no concern. Conversely, those aged 55+ expressed the most privacy concerns, with a significant proportion showing extreme concern. The age groups 36-45 and 46-55 exhibited moderate concerns. This suggests that younger generations may be more accustomed to sharing personal information online, while older generations, more aware of privacy risks, demonstrate greater caution. Figure 4 presents an analysis of privacy concern levels by educational level. Elementary school graduates tended to have fewer privacy concerns, possibly due to less exposure to online activities or a lack of awareness about privacy issues. High school graduates showed a more varied distribution of privacy concerns, with a noticeable increase in moderate to high levels when compared to elementary school graduates. Participants with a higher technical qualification exhibited a higher percentage of moderate to high privacy concerns, likely due to their technical background and awareness of privacy issues. Figure 3: The distribution of privacy concern levels across five age groups (18–25, 26–35, 36–45, 46–55, 55+). The different colored segments within each bar correspond to the percentage of individuals who selected a particular level of privacy concern on a Likert scale (1 = Not at all; 5 = Extremely). Bachelor's degree holders had a significant proportion of high levels of privacy concerns, indicating more awareness and concern about privacy issues. Master's degree holders showed a high level of privacy concerns, similarly to bachelor's degree holders, suggesting that higher education levels correlate with increased privacy awareness and concern. Finally, due to their extensive education and potential involvement in research and data processing, PhD holders exhibited the highest levels of privacy concerns. Figure 5 shows the distribution of privacy concerns across occupations. Students revealed the most variation and generally fewer concerns. Participants with backgrounds in technology and educational fields displayed more concern, suggesting a greater awareness of privacy risks in these fields. Health professionals, in particular, had concentrated concerns at level 4, likely due to their sensitivity to patient privacy. Retirees exhibited moderate concern, and unemployed participants showed lower levels, with responses centered around levels 2 and 3. Figure 4: Privacy concern levels vary across different education levels. The chart shows the distribution of privacy concern levels (1 = Not at all; 5 = Extremely) for individuals at six different education levels. Figure 5: The distribution of privacy concern levels across six different occupations (student, technology, education, health, retired, unemployed). The different colored segments within each bar correspond to the percentage of individuals who selected a particular level of privacy concern on a Likert scale (1 = Not at all; 5 = Extremely). The analysis indicates that privacy concerns tend to vary across different occupations. Careers in technology, education, and health are more likely to have high levels of privacy concerns. This trend suggests that professional background plays a significant role in raising awareness about privacy issues and the importance of protecting personal information online. **(RQ2):** The second research question examined how different obfuscation techniques affect user experience in AR applications. Figure 6 exhibits the adequacy ratings for three obfuscation techniques (masking, pixelation, and blurring) in four distinct AR contexts: the outdoor bike, outdoor people, the indoor document, and the indoor screen.