DiminishAR: Diminishing Visual Distractions via Holographic AR Displays

TL;DR

The paper addresses the cognitive costs of smartphone presence and proposes diminished reality via holographic AR to visually suppress distractions. It introduces two interventions, Visual Camouflage and Visual Substitution, implemented on the Microsoft HoloLens 2 and tested against four conditions using OSPAN, RSPM, and GNG tasks. Results show that visually cancelling the phone with AR yields cognitive performance comparable to physically removing the device, supporting salience reduction and attentional guidance as core mechanisms. The work provides design guidelines for holographic overlays, discusses practical applications beyond smartphones, and highlights ethical considerations for real-world deployment.

Abstract

Smartphones are integral to modern life, yet research highlights the cognitive drawbacks associated with their mere presence. While physically removing them can mitigate these effects, it is often inconvenient and may heighten anxiety due to prolonged separation. To address this, we use holographic augmented reality (AR) displays to visually diminish distractions with two interventions: 1) Visual Camouflage, which disguises the smartphone with a hologram that matches its size and blends with the background, making it less noticeable, and 2) Visual Substitution, which occludes the smartphone with a contextually relevant hologram, like books on a desk. In a study with 60 participants, we compared cognitive performance with the smartphone nearby, remote, and visually diminished by our AR interventions. Our findings show that the interventions significantly reduce cognitive impairment, with effects comparable to physically removing the smartphone. The adaptability of our approach opens new avenues to manage visual distractions in daily life.

Figures (8)

• Figure 1: Left image shows a gradient of orange shades from dark to bright demonstrates the impact of color on visibility, with brighter hues providing better concealment. Right image shows a gradient in grayscale, where brighter whites obscure the underlying object compared to darker shades.
• Figure 2: (a) shows a white hologram with a white surface, concealing the phone. (b) shows a dark hologram on a white surface, where the phone is translucent. (c) shows a white hologram on a dark surface, where the hologram becomes prominent. (d) shows a dark hologram on a dark surface, where translucency reveals the phone, demonstrating the limited effectiveness of darker holograms for concealment.
• Figure 3: (a) shows a wood grain surface. (b) depicts the cuboid hologram during inpainting process with the wood grain texture. (c) displays a smartphone placed on the wood surface. (d) shows the smartphone covered by a hologram with the wood texture, indicating the importance of texture alignment to avoid the unnatural appearance due to mismatched patterns.
• Figure 4: (a) The size of book hologram is exaggerated, disrupting the visual coherence of the scene. (b) Despite the smartphone's thinness, the phone's three-dimensionality is apparent, making the 2D approach ineffective. (c) Multiple holograms diverge focus, opting for a single hologram scene.
• Figure 5: Static dog hologram (left) is still, while dynamic dog hologram (right) constantly barks with movements.