6 104 6. Gaze-contingent processing improves mobility performance all participants, this effect was found to be significant (p<0.001 for both comparisons). The results of analyzing the angular eye- and head velocities are displayed inFigure6.8. The gaze velocity in the gaze-contingent study condition was higher compared to the gaze-locked condition (p<0.001), but lower compared to the gaze-ignored condition (p<0.001). Also, the head velocity was significantly higher in the gaze-contingent study condition compared to the gaze-locked study condition (p<0.001), but lower compared to the gaze-ignored study condition (p=0.0062). Compared to the gaze-ignored study condition, the gaze-locked condition was characterized by a lower gaze-velocity (p< 0.001) and a lower head velocity (p<0.001). Figure 6.7: Example eye-gaze trajectories (raw data) in three trials of a representative participant in Experiment 2. Colors indicate the elapsed time. Each of the visualized trials had a different study condition (from left to right: gaze-locked, gaze-contingent, and gaze-ignored). Figure 6.8: Analysis of the angular eye- and head velocity in Experiment 2. A) Average eye velocity. B) Average head velocity. *p<0.0167; **p<0.003; ***p<0.0003 (N=19, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Questionnaires After each block in Experiment 1, the participants ranked the subjective experience of the trials in that block. In 68% of the responses, trials with the gaze-locked condition were ranked as the most tiring, versus 13% and 19% of the responses, respectively, ranking the gaze-contingent trial or the gaze-ignored trial as the most tiring. In 77% of the responses, the trial with the gaze-locked condition was marked as the least comfortable
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw