Exploring the Impact of Display Field-of-view and Display Type on Text Readability and Visual Text Search on Large Displays in Virtual Reality

Samiha Sultana, Md. Ashraful Alam

Letter Of Changes:

We thank the reviewers for their constructive feedback. We appreciate that the reviewers found our paper “well-written” (R1), that “results are in detail” (R2), and that “the results are clear and well-discussed” (Meta-reviewer). We also thank the Meta-reviewer for summarizing the required changes for the revision. We tried to incorporate all of their concerns and suggestions into our revision. Here is the summary of our revision:

Discuss narrower text width, angular distortion, and multiple columns (R2, Meta reviewer)

R2 and the Meta reviewer recommended adding more discussion on how narrow text widths affect user performance and how display with larger field-of-views can benefit from separating text into multiple columns. We therefore added the following:

In 5.1.2:
“This is a plausible explanation for the lower performance observed in the "Flat360" field-of-view, which could be attributed to the difficulty of managing longer lines of text without losing the reading flow. These results are consistent with prior work [9] which mentions that narrower paragraph widths lead to faster reading and better comprehension.”
“A potential solution to this issue could be breaking longer lines into multiple columns. By doing so, the text field-of-view would more closely resemble narrower text columns, reducing the need for extensive horizontal eye movements and making it easier for users to maintain their place while reading.”

In 6.1.1:
“To improve readability on wider displays, app developers should consider breaking longer lines into multiple columns to enhance reading flow and comprehension.”

In 6.2:
“Although this factor might be negligible within a 90-degree field of view, it becomes significant as the display width varies greatly. Moreover, angular distortion on large flat displays is another factor that negatively impacts readability which we did not cover in our paper. While breaking longer lines into multiple columns could mitigate some readability issues, further investigation is needed. Future studies should explore the advantages of adjusting font sizes to minimize angular distortion and implementing narrower text columns for improved readability.”

Add teaser caption, shorten abstract, better explain task, and study design (R1)

Based on R1’s comments we added s caption to the teaser (figure 1). We additionally shortened our abstract to make it more concise.

We added the following text to better explain the reading comprehension task in section 3.6:
“After pressing the trigger button on the right controller, the passage disappeared, and the questions appeared. Participants could not revisit the passage once the questions appeared.”

We added the following text to better explain the study design in section 3.6:
“This experiment employed a 2 (Tasks: Text Readability, Visual Search) × 2 (Display Type: Flat, Curved) × 4 (Display Field-of-view: 90°, 180°, 270°, 360°) × 2 (Questions) within-subjects design.”

We added the following text to better explain our dependent variables in section 3.7:
“We used the NASA-TLX [3] questionnaire to collect participants' perceived workload and their preference for each display.”

Change keyword “Layout” to “Field-of-view” (Meta reviewer)

Based on the meta reviewer’s suggestion we changed the keyword from “Layout” to “Field-of-view” throughout the paper including the images.

Add missing related works (R1, R2 and Meta reviewer)

We added the missing references suggested by the reviewers to justify and better discuss our results.

In section 1:
“Changing the field-of-view of a display can alter paragraph width, which has been found to impact reading accuracy, with narrower paragraphs leading to faster reading times and better comprehension [9]”

In section 5.1.2:
“While curved displays mitigate some of the issues by providing a more uniform viewing experience, large flat displays exacerbate angular distortion, making text harder to read as users need to move their gaze more frequently across the screen [44].”

And in section 2.2:
“There is limited research on text readability in virtual reality environments as most research focuses on pointing at targets [51, …].”

Fix Typos (R1)

We fixed the mentioned typos and proofread the paper to check for grammar and spelling.

Keywords: Display Field-of-view, Large Display, Text Readability, Visual Search

TL;DR: We explored the effect of 8 displays (four flat and four curved field-of-views) on text readability and visual text search in VR

Abstract:

Large curved displays enhance the viewing experience beyond flat screens by more closely aligning with the human field of vision.
Despite the growing prevalence of curved displays in immersive environments, there remains a significant gap in understanding how different display field-of-views (i.e., semicircular, fully circular) influence user experience, particularly regarding reading comprehension and visual search performance in VR.
This study examines text readability and visual text search across four curved layouts (90°, 180°, 270°, 360°) and their flat counterparts.
Findings indicate that narrower field-of-views significantly improve reading speed over wider ones, and curved displays outperform flat ones in search accuracy. Curve90 (90°) was preferred for its lower subjective workload.
Participants preferred the Curve90 display due to its ergonomic advantages and lower perceived effort, while flat displays with wider field-of-views were found to be more demanding.
These results offer guidelines for optimizing reading and search tasks in virtual displays.

Submission Number: 7