{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01986491855383393, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003972983710766786, 'mean_word_length': 4.855813953488372, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Can Augmented Reality Assist Data Entry Task? A Preliminary Study

Data entry is considered to be one of the common and essential tasks in workplaces. Almost every industry has a data entry department which is responsible for entering data into the database of the company’s systems. Data entry operators are required to input data from a handwritten paper into the computer systems using a keyboard and a mouse. The repetitive nature of the job that occurs in this scenario from looking at the paper and onto the computer screen induces fatigue in the operators. A study has shown that prolonged work creates cognitive fatigue that affects the cognitive components of the data entry process (Healy et al., 2004). The goal of the project described in this paper is to explore various methods and interfaces for data entry. We report the evaluation results of a data presentation interface introduced in Jeong et al. (2020). This interface was developed using a wearable augmented reality (AR) heads-up display. In the current study, the interface was compared with two other interfaces for data presentation, which include an extra monitor and a hand-written paper (as a baseline). Eighteen participants were asked to enter the information displayed to them on a separate stand-alone laptop using a keyboard. The participants were told that their performance would be judged based on two parameters: (1) how fast they can complete their tasks (time required to complete the task) and (2) how many errors they commit while typing the information onto the laptop. Better task performance is reflected by the lower values of the two parameters. The participants were presented with different interfaces in a random order to minimize bias. Participants were asked to fill out a NASA-TLX survey and a post-task survey for subjective evaluations of helpfulness, preference, and ease of use. It was found that AR was not as good for participants as we expected. Participants experienced various difficulties with the current AR interface as this was a novel method of data presentation and participants were more comfortable with something they had more experience with. An interesting take-away from this study was that the AR device performed equally well as the conventional paper-based data presentation method. After conducting this study, it was inferred that an AR device could potentially be a good data presentation interface with slight adjustments in its weight and field of view as suggested by the participants.