The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly
Abstract
Although there has been much speculation about the potential of Augmented Reality (AR), there are very few empirical studies about its effectiveness. This paper describes an experiment that tested the relative effectiveness of AR instructions in an assembly task. Task information was displayed in user's field of view and registered with the workspace as 3D objects to explicitly demonstrate the exact execution of a procedure step. Three instructional media were compared with the AR system: a printed manual, computer assisted instruction (CAI) using a monitor-based display, and CAI utilizing a head-mounted display. Results indicate that overlaying 3D instructions on the actual work pieces reduced the error rate for an assembly task by 82%, particularly diminishing cumulative errors - errors due to previous assembly mistakes. Measurement of mental effort indicated decreased mental effort in the AR condition, suggesting some of the mental calculation of the assembly task is offloaded to the system.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Azuma, R. T. (1997) · Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments · doi:10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355 · Cited by 10,121
Cited by
Augmented reality in education: a meta-review and cross-media analysis
Radu, I. (2014) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s00779-013-0747-y · Cited by 1,045
Augmented reality technology in the manufacturing industry: A review of the last decade
Bottani, E., & Vignali, G. (2019) · IISE Transactions · doi:10.1080/24725854.2018.1493244 · Cited by 441
Using Animated Augmented Reality to Cognitively Guide Assembly
Hou, L., Wang, X., Bernold, L., & Love, P. E. D. (2013) · Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering · doi:10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000184 · Cited by 261
Context-Aware Online Adaptation of Mixed Reality Interfaces
Lindlbauer, D., Feit, A. M., & Hilliges, O. (2019) · Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology · doi:10.1145/3332165.3347945 · Cited by 254
Comparing Video and Augmented Reality Assistance in Manual Assembly
Loch, F., Quint, F., & Brishtel, I. (2016) · 2016 12th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE) · doi:10.1109/ie.2016.31 · Cited by 110
Metadata
- Authors
- Tang, A., Owen, C., Biocca, F., & Mou, W.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2003-04-05
- Pages
- 73-80
- OpenAlex
- W2119468946
- Cited by
- 603
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.40
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/642611.642626
- The paper
- Tang, A., Owen, C., Biocca, F., & Mou, W. (2003). Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642626
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
