ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
From Controllers to Multimodal Input: A Chronological Review of XR Interaction Across Device Generations.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Electroencephalogram-Based Analysis of Monomodal and Multimodal Interaction in Mixed Reality Games.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study provides a chronological analysis of how Extended Reality (XR) interaction techniques have evolved from early controller-centered interfaces to natural hand- and gaze-based input and, more recently, to multimodal input, with a particular focus on the role of XR devices. We collected 46 user study-based XR interaction papers published between 2016 and 2024, including only studies that explicitly defined their interaction techniques and reported quantitative and/or qualitative evaluation results. For each study, we documented the XR hardware and software development kits (SDKs) used as well as the input modalities applied (e.g., controller, hand tracking, eye tracking, wrist rotation, multimodal input). These data were analyzed in relation to a device and SDK timeline spanning major platforms from the HTC Vive and Oculus Rift to the Meta Quest Pro and Apple Vision Pro. Using frequency summaries, heatmaps, correspondence analysis, and chi-square tests, we quantitatively compared input modality distributions across device generations. The results reveal three distinct stages of XR interaction development: (1) an early controller-dominant phase centered on the Vive/Rift (2016-2018), (2) a transitional phase marked by the widespread introduction of hand- and gaze-based input through the Oculus Quest, HoloLens 2, and the Hand Tracking SDK (2019-2021), and (3) an expansion phase in which multisensor and multimodal input became central, driven by MR-capable devices such as the Meta Quest Pro (2022-2024). These findings demonstrate that the choice of input modalities in XR research has been structurally shaped not only by researcher preference or task design but also by the sensing configurations, tracking performance, and SDK support provided by devices available at each point in time. By reframing XR interaction research within the technological context of device and SDK generations-rather than purely functional taxonomies-this study offers a structured analytical framework for informing future multimodal and context-adaptive XR interface design and guiding user studies involving next-generation XR devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.