Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Natalia Ocampo

dblp:420/7804 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Immersive interaction · 87% Usability and user experience research · 13%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Immersive interaction › avatar
avatar representation
0.912025
Comparing Hand and Controller Avatars with Hand Tracking and Controller-Based Interaction · ISMAR 2025
Immersive interaction › 3d user interface
virtual reality input
0.912025
Comparing Hand and Controller Avatars with Hand Tracking and Controller-Based Interaction · ISMAR 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

user study · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Comparing Hand and Controller Avatars with Hand Tracking and Controller-Based Interaction
abstract
Previous research suggests that the congruency between common VR input devices - such as controllers or hand tracking - and their visual representations (e.g., hand or controller avatars) influences user experience and performance. However, the specific effects of input-avatar combinations remain underexplored. We study the effects of common input devices (hand tracking and controllers) and visual representations (hand and controller avatars) on performance and perceived success in target acquisition tasks. We included both grasping and pinching gestures across 16 combinations of input, avatar, and target size. Results indicate that hand tracking benefits from any form of visual representation-even when mismatched-achieving up to 5.8% greater accuracy compared to having no avatar, likely due to its reliance on visual feedback in the absence of a physical prop. Controllers were generally preferred and offered faster task completion. However, mismatched avatars had a stronger negative effect with controllers, particularly when the virtual gesture did not align with the physical action, leading to a 5.6% drop in accuracy compared to the matched condition-suggesting that inaccurate feedback can be more disruptive than having no avatar feedback at all.
Natalia Ocampo, Johann Felipe Gonzalez Avila, Robert J. Teather
ISMAR1