IVAR: Typos

content/2024/04/interaction-in-virtual-and-augmented-reality-project.md

@@ -276,9 +276,9 @@ One participant was female (P3), the others (P4 - P6) were male. The age average
 
 In the pre-study, the participants were able to finish more rounds. While this could correlate with the locomotion system theoretically, it is more plausible, that this is due to the increased interaction requirement from solving only one object task in the pre-study per race track part, instead of five in the final study. Thus keeping the participants longer busy with the interaction task and preventing them from moving forward.
 
-In the pre-study, only Part 3 had coins up in the air. In parts 1 and 2 all coins were placed on the ground in the pre-study, while the final study, had for every part some coins on the ground and some in the air. The results show, that people collected some more coins on average in the final study in Part 3 than in the pre-study, backing up my overall impression, that people struggled with jumping in the pre-study and had an easier time collecting them in the final study due to the new flying locomotion technique.
+In the pre-study, only part 3 had coins up in the air. In parts 1 and 2 all coins were placed on the ground in the pre-study, while the final study, had for every part some coins on the ground and some in the air. The results show, that people collected some more coins on average in the final study in part 3 than in the pre-study, backing up my overall impression, that people struggled with jumping in the pre-study and had an easier time collecting them in the final study due to the new flying locomotion technique.
 
-However, there is not enough data, to have a strong guess, why the average collected coins in part 1 and part 2 have mixed results. It might be, that people performed better in part 1 in the final study than in the pre-study, due to the locomotion system slowing down horizontal acceleration more quickly, thus allowing better control in this part of the race track with the most curves. In part 2, however, people collected more coins in the pre-study, this could be due to the fact, that all coins were on the ground in the pre-study, but many coins were flying in the final study - and simultaneously, this part only has a single curve, thus, potential improvements in the horizontal agility might not have a huge impact, in contrast to the results of part 1.
+However, there is not enough data, to have a strong guess as to why the average collected coins in part 1 and part 2 have mixed results. It might be, that people performed better in part 1 in the final study than in the pre-study, due to the locomotion system slowing down horizontal acceleration more quickly, thus allowing better control in this part of the race track with the most curves. In part 2, however, people collected more coins in the pre-study, this could be due to the fact, that all coins were on the ground in the pre-study, but many coins were flying in the final study - and simultaneously, this part only has a single curve, thus, potential improvements in the horizontal agility might not have a huge impact, in contrast to the results of part 1.
 
 
 ##### Task Interaction Error Offset Average