Efficient text entry remains a primary bottleneck preventing Virtual Reality (VR) from evolving into a viable productivity platform. To address this, we conducted an empirical comparison of six physical input systems across three interaction styles Controller Driven, Free Hand, and Virtual Touch evaluating both discrete tap typing and continuous gesture typing (swiping), alongside a speech to text (Voice) condition as a non physical reference modality. Results from 21 participants show that the Controller Driven Tap Gesture Combo (CD TGC) delivers the best productivity performance, achieving speeds 2.25 times higher than the slowest system and 30% faster than the current industry standard, while reducing error rates by up to 68%. A clear trade off emerged between performance and perceived usability: although controller based gesture input led on speed and accuracy, participants rated Virtual Touch Tap Typing highest in subjective experience, scoring 80% higher on the System Usability Scale (SUS) than the lowest rated alternative. We further observe that Free Hand interaction remains limited by tracking stability and physical fatigue, whereas Voice input introduces practical constraints related to privacy, editing control, and immersive engagement. Together, these findings characterize the tension between throughput and natural interaction in immersive text entry and provide data driven guidance for future VR interface design.

翻译：高效文本输入仍是阻碍虚拟现实（VR）发展为实用生产力平台的主要瓶颈。为此，我们针对三种交互风格（控制器驱动、徒手操作与虚拟触控）下的六种物理输入系统开展了实证对比研究，评估了离散敲键输入与连续手势滑动输入（滑动输入）两种模式，同时将语音转文本（语音）条件作为非物理参考模态。来自21名参与者的实验结果表明，控制器驱动敲击-手势组合（CD TGC）实现了最佳生产力性能，其输入速度是最慢系统的2.25倍，且比当前行业标准快30%，同时错误率降低了68%。性能和感知可用性之间存在明显权衡：尽管基于控制器的手势输入在速度和准确性上领先，但参与者在主观体验上对虚拟触控敲击输入评价最高，其系统可用性量表（SUS）得分比最低评分方案高出80%。我们进一步观察到，徒手操作交互仍受限于追踪稳定性和身体疲劳，而语音输入则面临隐私、编辑控制及沉浸感投入等方面的实际限制。这些发现共同揭示了沉浸式文本输入中吞吐量与自然交互之间的张力，并为未来VR界面设计提供了数据驱动的指导。