skip to main content
research-article

Design and User Experience of a Hybrid Mixed Reality Installation that Promotes Tinian Marble Crafts Heritage

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 December 2022Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Hybrid physical-digital installations in museums are interactive systems or exhibits that seamlessly combine physical (tangible) artifacts with virtual environments. In the museum, hybrid installations offer direct, hands-on experiences to visitors and thus may enhance their interest and engagement. Moreover, the entanglement of tangible and virtual interfaces may reinforce learning about the respective heritage. This article reports on the design, implementation, and evaluation of an interactive installation that promotes the heritage of Tinian marble crafts that is included in the representative list of intangible heritage by UNESCO and resides in the Museum of Marble Crafts in Tinos, Greece. The installation puts the museum visitor in the role of a crane operator in a virtual reconstruction of a historic quarry and requires them to operate the crane and move marble volumes with safety in cooperation with non-playable characters (NPCs). Our design approach aimed to engage visitors in a playful learning experience, incorporating aspects of the two museum's exhibits (crane, quarry). The empirical evaluation took place at the lab and the museum with promising results on UX and learning. In addition, we identify and discuss several prospects and drawbacks of designing playful tangible interfaces for other practitioners to consider in similar applications.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Ciolfi L. and Bannon L. J.. 2007. Designing hybrid places: Merging interaction design, ubiquitous technologies, and geographies of the museum space. CoDesign 3, 3 (2007), 159180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. [2] Ciolfi L.. 2021. Hybrid Interactions in Museums: Why Materiality Still Matters. In Virtual Heritage: A Guide, E. M. Champion (ed.). London: Ubiquity Press. 6779.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Petrelli D. and O'Brien S.. 2018. Phone vs. tangible in museums: A comparative study. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. [4] Claisse C., Petrelli D., Dulake N., Marshall M. T., and Ciolfi L.. 2018. Multisensory interactive storytelling to augment the visit of a historical house museum. In Proceedings of the 2018 3rd Digital Heritage International Congress held jointly with 2018 24th International Conference on Virtual Systems & Multimedia. IEEE. 18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. [5] Hirsch L., Mall C., and Butz A.. 2021. Do touch this: Turning a plaster bust into a tangible interface. In Creativity and Cognition Conference Proceedings. 18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [6] Nofal E., Panagiotidou G., Reffat R. M., Hameeuw H., Boschloos V., and Moere A. V.. 2020. Situated tangible gamification of heritage for supporting collaborative learning of young museum visitors. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 13, 1 (2020), 124.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. [7] Muntean R., Hennessy K., Antle A., Rowley S., Wilson J., and Matkin B.. 2015. ʔeləw̓k̓ʷ–Belongings: Tangible interactions with intangible heritage. Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts 7, 2 (2015), 5969.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Chu J. H., Clifton P., Harley D., Pavao J., and Mazalek A.. 2015. Mapping place: Supporting cultural learning through a lukasa-inspired tangible tabletop museum exhibit. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 261268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. [9] Bannon L., Benford S., Bowers J., and Heath C.. 2005. Hybrid design creates innovative museum experiences. Communications of the ACM 48, 3 (2005), 6265.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. [10] Liarokapis F., Petridis P., Andrews D., and de Freitas S.. 2017. Multimodal serious games technologies for cultural heritage. In Mixed Reality and Gamification for Cultural Heritage. Springer, Cham. 371392.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Arnab S., Petridis P., Dunwell I., and de Freitas S.. 2011. Enhancing learning in distributed virtual worlds through touch: A browser-based architecture for haptic interaction. In Serious Games and Edutainment Applications, M. Ma, A. Oikonomou, L. C. Jain (ed.). Springer, London, (2011). 149167Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. [12] White M., Mourkoussis N., Darcy J., Petridis P., Liarokapis F., Lister P., and Gaspard F.. 2004. ARCO-an architecture for digitization, management and presentation of virtual exhibitions. In Proceedings of the Computer Graphics International, (2004). IEEE. 622625.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. [13] Damala A., Hornecker E., Van der Vaart M., van Dijk D., and Ruthven I.. 2016. The Loupe: tangible augmented reality for learning to look at Ancient Greek art. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 16, 5 (2016), 7385.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. [14] Marshall M. T., Dulake N., Ciolfi L., Duranti D., Kockelkorn H., and Petrelli D.. 2016. Using tangible smart replicas as controls for an interactive museum exhibition. In Proceedings of the TEI'’16: 10th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 159167.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. [15] Anagnostakis G., Antoniou M., Kardamitsi E., Sachinidis T., Koutsabasis P., Stavrakis M., Vosinakis S., and Zissis D.., 2016. Accessible museum collections for the visually impaired: combining tactile exploration, audio descriptions and mobile gestures. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human–Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct. 10211025.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. [16] Okerlund J., Segreto E., Grote C., Westendorf L., Scholze A., Littrell R., and Shaer O.. 2016. Synflo: A tangible museum exhibit for exploring bio-design. In Proceedings of the TEI'’16: 10th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 141149.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. [17] Bontchev B.. 2015. Serious games for and as cultural heritage. Digital Presentation and Preservation of Cultural and Scientific Heritage 5, (2015), 4358.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. [18] Mortara M., Catalano C. E., Bellotti F., Fiucci G., Houry-Panchetti M., and Petridis P.. 2014. Learning cultural heritage by serious games. Journal of Cultural Heritage 15, 3 (2014), 318325.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Paliokas I. and Sylaiou S.. 2016. The use of serious games in museum visits and exhibitions: A systematic mapping study. In Proceedings of the 2016 8th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications. IEEE. 18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. [20] Lu Q., Ma S. E., Li J., Mi H., and Xu Y.. 2019. Irelics: Designing a tangible interaction platform for the popularization of field archaeology. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 4554.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Dimitropoulos A., Dimitropoulos K., Kyriakou A., Malevitis M., Syrris S., Vaka S., Koutsabasis P., Vosinakis S., and Stavrakis M.. 2018. The loom: interactive weaving through a tangible installation with digital feedback. In Digital Cultural Heritage. Springer, Cham. 199210.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. [22] Clarke L., Hornecker E., and Ruthven I.. 2021. Fighting fires and powering steam locomotives: Distribution of control and its role in social interaction at tangible interactive museum exhibits. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 117.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. [23] Vosinakis S., Nikolakopoulou V., Stavrakis M., Fragkedis L., Chatzigrigoriou P., and Koutsabasis P.. 2020. Co-Design of a playful mixed reality installation: An interactive crane in the museum of marble crafts. Heritage 3, 4 (2020), 14961519.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Schrepp M., Hinderks A., and Thomaschewski J.. 2017. Construction of a benchmark for the user experience questionnaire (UEQ). International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence 4, 4 (2017), 4044.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. [25] Bekele M. K. and Champion E.. 2019. A comparison of immersive realities and interaction methods: Cultural learning in virtual heritage. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 6 (2019), 91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. [26] Economou M. and Pujol L.. 2007. Evaluating the impact of new technologies on cultural heritage visitors. Technology Strategy, Management and Socio-Economic Impact, Heritage Management series 2 (2007), 109121.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. [27] Not E., Cavada D., Maule S., Pisetti A., and Venturini A.. 2019. Digital augmentation of historical objects through tangible interaction. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 12, 3 (2019), 119.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Design and User Experience of a Hybrid Mixed Reality Installation that Promotes Tinian Marble Crafts Heritage

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage
          Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage   Volume 15, Issue 4
          December 2022
          483 pages
          ISSN:1556-4673
          EISSN:1556-4711
          DOI:10.1145/3572828
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 6 December 2022
          • Online AM: 25 July 2022
          • Accepted: 25 February 2022
          • Received: 3 September 2021
          Published in jocch Volume 15, Issue 4

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Full Text

        View this article in Full Text.

        View Full Text

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format