One size fits none: a multi-method evaluation of VR interaction techniques across autistic and neurotypical users

Selecting suitable interaction techniques is critical for the effectiveness of autism-related virtual reality (VR), yet most evaluations still rely heavily on subjective feedback. This study applied a multi-method framework to compare two locomotion techniques (Teleport vs. Step) and two object interaction techniques (Hand-tracking vs. Controller) across autistic (N = 16) and neurotypical (N = 18) participants. Each technique was evaluated through three complementary lenses: trial duration as a behavioral efficiency indicator, EEG alpha and theta power spectral density as physiological proxies for attentional engagement and working-memory demand, and a direct perceived-ease prompt as a subjective indicator. Adaptation was quantified using trial-wise slopes across repeated exposure. Across the present sample, participants generally became faster over time in all four techniques. However, these behavioral gains did not consistently converge with EEG proxies or perceived-ease. The strongest group-sensitive finding emerged in locomotion: autistic participants showed sustained alpha suppression during Step, while neurotypical participants showed an alpha rebound. In object interaction, a subgroup of autistic participants who perceived Hand-tracking as easier showed alignment across all three measures, pointing to the potential value of low-abstraction and direct-action interfaces. These findings suggest that VR interaction techniques in autism-related contexts are best understood as multidimensional profiles rather than as universally optimal solutions. However, given the small and heterogeneous autistic field sample, substantial group differences in participant characteristics, and the use of a low-density consumer EEG headset, the findings should be interpreted as exploratory interaction profiles and physiological proxies rather than definitive population neural differences.