borderline significantp = 0.055
The main effect of Type of HoloLens was not significant for both tasks (2D stepping target: F (1,15) = 0.76, p = 0.398, ƞ p 2 = 0.048; 3D obstacle crossing: F (1,15) = 2.64, p = 0.125, ƞ p 2 = 0.149), while the Type of Object × Type of HoloLens interaction was borderline significant for 2D target-stepping ( F (1,15) = 4.34, p = 0.055, ƞ p 2 = 0.225; Fig 5B ) and 3D obstacle-crossing ( F (1,15) = 4.62, p = 0.048, ƞ p 2 = 0.235; Fig 4C ) tasks, indicating that, at least for holographic 3D obstacle crossing, the initial orientation was significantly smaller for HoloLens 2 than for HoloLens 1 ( t (15) = 2.23, p = 0.041) in the absence of HoloLens differences for real-world 3D obstacles ( t (15) = -0.57, p = 0.578), a finding consistent with our expectations regarding the difference in AR-FOV size between HoloLenses.