Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology

Abstract

With a rise in the use Virtual Reality (VR) applications in museums and exhibition displays, digital heritage has still shown limitations in what a visitor can experience from the intersection of technology and history. Traditionally, interpretative narrative within the museum has been communicated through text panels offering limited context from a largely connoisseurly perspective. In addition to these interactive digital resources are often data base orientated via touch screen technologies with no multisensory immersion. This paper addresses the digital changes in these educational landscapes and the way it is being handled to co-create digital tools for exhibitions to educate and entertain museum visitors. This paper explores the use of haptic technology in conjunction with virtual reality to facilitate multi-faceted modes of interpretation, that offer novel access to an artefact’s history from a range of perspectives. It also provides evidence of increased visitor engagement with a ceramic display through these immersive methods to communicate a narrative. This research bridges the gap between history and technology to offer an immersive experience of visiting a museum virtually and providing an intimate one-one experience to interact with artefacts and learn about history. As its focus, this research digitally reconstructs a collection of East-Asian ceramics bequeathed by Ernest Thornhill in 1944 to North Staffordshire Technical College (Now known as Staffordshire University). The digital prototype was developed to replicate the museum environment without the restrictions to access artefacts and handle them. This experience offers visual insights to contextualise the history of a ceramic to be utlised as an education tool to enhance learning within a museum setting. Evidence showed a significantly positive response to this prototype in museum and gallery settings, responses revealed these methods of interaction did assist in learning about ceramics, with a distinct majority of participants confirming these installations would encourage future visits, shaping the possibilities of how history can be combined with technology to create new and innovative solutions to learn about an artefact.

Full text

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual
Museum with Haptic Glove Technology
Emma, EF, Fallows∗
School of Computing and Digital
Technologies, Staordshire University
emma.fallows@stas.ac.uk
David, DW, White
School of Computing and Digital
Technologies, Staordshire University
david.white1@stas.ac.uk
Neil, NJB, Brownsword
School of Creative Arts and
Engineering, Staordshire University
neil.brownsword@stas.ac.uk
ABSTRACT
With a rise in the use Virtual Reality (VR) applications in museums
and exhibition displays, digital heritage has still shown limitations
in what a visitor can experience from the intersection of technology
and history. Traditionally, interpretative narrative within the mu-
seum has been communicated through text panels oering limited
context from a largely connoisseurly perspective. In addition to
these interactive digital resources are often data base orientated via
touch screen technologies with no multisensory immersion. This
paper addresses the digital changes in these educational landscapes
and the way it is being handled to co-create digital tools for exhibi-
tions to educate and entertain museum visitors. This paper explores
the use of haptic technology in conjunction with virtual reality to
facilitate multi-faceted modes of interpretation, that oer novel
access to an artefact’s history from a range of perspectives. It also
provides evidence of increased visitor engagement with a ceramic
display through these immersive methods to communicate a narra-
tive. This research bridges the gap between history and technology
to oer an immersive experience of visiting a museum virtually
and providing an intimate one-one experience to interact with arte-
facts and learn about history. As its focus, this research digitally
reconstructs a collection of East-Asian ceramics bequeathed by
Ernest Thornhill in 1944 to North Staordshire Technical College
(Now known as Staordshire University). The digital prototype
was developed to replicate the museum environment without the
restrictions to access artefacts and handle them. This experience
oers visual insights to contextualise the history of a ceramic to be
utlised as an education tool to enhance learning within a museum
setting. Evidence showed a signicantly positive response to this
prototype in museum and gallery settings, responses revealed these
methods of interaction did assist in learning about ceramics, with
a distinct majority of participants conrming these installations
would encourage future visits, shaping the possibilities of how his-
tory can be combined with technology to create new and innovative
solutions to learn about an artefact.
∗Corresponding author.
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 prot or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation
on the rst 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 specic permission and/or a
fee. Request permissions from permissions@acm.org.
Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
©2022 Association for Computing Machinery.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-9955-5/22/11. . . $15.00
https://doi.org/10.1145/3569219.3569382
CCS CONCEPTS
•Virtual Reality;•Digital Heritage;•Haptic Technology;
KEYWORDS
Museum Heritage, Design and Development, Education
ACM Reference Format:
Emma, EF, Fallows, David, DW, White, and Neil, NJB, Brownsword. 2022.
Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with
Haptic Glove Technology. In 25th International Academic Mindtrek conference
(Academic Mindtrek 2022), November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland . ACM,
New York, NY, USA, 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3569219.3569382
1 INTRODUCTION
Virtual Reality (VR) comprises of computer-rendered visuals in a
fully immersive environment, to create an alternate, articial reality
to real-life. Commonly VR is experienced through two of the ve
senses: Sight and Sound. However, this paper brings the addition of
touch to the experience to create an innovative alternative to how
visitors can interact with an artefact.
The use of Virtual Reality has signicantly increased in popular-
ity and has steadily shown a growth in becoming a top recognised
gaming platform with an expanding worldwide market [
1
]. With
the early stages of Virtual Reality primarily for entertainment pur-
poses, VR is being explored to oer alternative educational appli-
cations, supporting the ever-growing demand to teach immersive
digital content [
2
]. However, the use of technological advance-
ments appears underdeveloped within museums and tourism with
strong evidence from existing research that this could strengthen
engagement with outdated displays and enhance a visitors museum
experience [3].
Hassan Taher published a thesis study on the various eects
of digital technology on museums and how Malmö Museum can
develop new interactions for their visitors [
4
], they highlighted
the eects of Covid-19 and the importance for museums to reach
their visitors through multi-medias and creating a digital presence.
Through testing a Norwegian method- Tingens Metod (Method
of Things) with the Malmö Museum, they have shown collabora-
tive digital workshops with participating groups that have led to
evidence showing a new-found appreciation for history and par-
ticipants would like to use digital tools and interactions in their
exploration of museum displays [4].
An article published by Claire Browning, a Curator at Iziko Mu-
seum of South Africa discusses the concerns on when exhibitions
no longer reect our current understanding of how life and Earth
evolved, however old displays can be preserved by technology to
transform them into a digital version. Iziko partnered with the Za-
mani Project; a non-prot heritage documentation organization

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
based at the University of Cape Town. This article highlights the
usefulness of 3D scanning technologies in the preservation of his-
tory, this project oered valuable accessibility to connect with a
wide range of visitors in a virtual environment during the Covid-19
pandemic [
5
], which for a majority of museums had to be closed
until the virus was under control.
This project introduces a model surrounding multisensory op-
portunities with haptic glove technology, that allows visitors to use
their sense of touch to handle ceramic artefacts. Introducing hap-
tics opens new possibilities in the way museums can contextualise
and interoperate a ceramic’s historiography through technology.
History can now be interpreted in an intimate 1-1 experience and
provide unique opportunities for interactivity to educate museum
visitors. This project allows innovative ways of incorporating tech-
nology to engage young and contemporary audiences, while attract-
ing the attention of technology enthusiasts to come and experience
history with an alternative incentive.
A dening factor for a lack of young adults (18–30-year-olds)
visiting can be a lack of interpretation, heritage sites generally do
not cater to younger demographics. A survey with 2000 18– 30-
year-olds by OnePoll in 2018 found that 19% those surveyed had
never visited a museum and 36% never visited a gallery. However,
52% of 18-30 years old stated that a heritage sites online presence
would encourage them to visit in person [6].
Visitors attend museums for various outcomes, insightful knowl-
edge, visual gaze, and entertainment but this is dicult to achieve
with limited methods of interpretation. Text or audio alone can
be dicult to communicate the signicance of an object and what
eect it had on history.
This research demonstrates how the 3D reconstructions of his-
toric objects accessed via a virtual reality prototype, can stimulate
cross-sensory interactions that facilitate a greater understanding
of their signicance and develop deeper contexts into their journey
through time.
1.1 Research Questions
•
Question One:How can the visual and tactile characteristics
of historic ceramic artefacts from the Thornhill Collection
be recorded, displayed and experienced through innovative
modes of digital dissemination?
•
Question Two: How can the historic context of ceramic
artefacts be experienced through immersive Virtual Reality,
to educate and inform museum audiences?
•
Question Three:What innovations can the use of haptic
glove technology bring to modes of interpretation of ceram-
ics selected from the Thornhill Collection?
•
Question Four: How could this prototype be applied to a
museum environment to increase engagement for the future
benet of learning about history?
•
Question Five: How can the design and development of this
prototype be extended to enhance engagement at multiple
levels of complexity?
2 EXISTING TECHNOLOGY IN MUSEUMS
Curatorial and security protocols within museums, galleries and
exhibitions have traditionally limited the visitor’s sensory expe-
riences, as text panels and audio sources used to mediate display
information quickly outdate are insucient as a way of sustaining
audience engagement.
Leeds Museums and Galleries, for example, have guidelines for
text displays to oer the easiest and most comfortable reading ex-
perience, their intention is to provide text panels that are accessible
and welcoming for as many types of visitors as possible [
7
]. This
use of language is an eective way to communicate complex infor-
mation to a broad range of visitors, however, this limits the visitor
to the interpretation of text alone. This approach is unlikely to suit
every style of learner and would be limited to the single language
used.
Exploring other avenues of communication could be a huge
benet, since multiple senses can engage a visitor into retaining
information more easily [
8
]. A secondary issue would be interna-
tional visitors, text panels feature one language with the occasional
second translation, meaning visitors outside these languages would
not be able to understand the written text. Audio devices are useful
in these circumstances as the technology can be set up with a multi-
lingual system, however, audio relies on the visitor consistently
keeping up with the words that are said, therefore can be easily
disturbed with distractions in the room or technical issues.
Physical interaction is universal, most human beings can inter-
act visually or physically to understand an objects physicality or
context. Other alternatives include the Amsterdam Museum who
introduced a solution using a QR code for multilingual visitors to
access information in 10 dierent languages [
9
]. This solution still
nds limitations in visitors who speak a language outside of the 10
oered and limits the user to reading text or listening to audio to
acquire any information.
The prominent function of any museum is to preserve culture
and disseminate knowledge to a universal audience. As part of this
role, museums have been exploring the opportunities to combine
digital content with displays that can enrich, engage, entertain, and
educate a visitor. Digital media has been employed into museums
but restricts the visitor’s ability to interact. Displays can include
digital content that consists of short texts, short lms, audio guides,
recorded interviews, podcasts, and web pages [
10
] but this limits
the visitor to a at, tablet screen for a source of interaction.
Recent innovations in Virtual Reality technology demonstrate
how immersive digital content can increase engagement and cre-
ate a lasting impact. Mariapina Truno & Salvatore Campana [
3
]
found considerable evidence from testing a Virtual experience in
The Ara Pacis Museum in Rome. This project called “The Ara as
it was” project, examined the impact of AR and VR experiences
on museum service aspects and overall, analysing the visitors ex-
perience and satisfaction. The experience was developed by ETT,
an international digital and creative company who specialise in
supplying engaging experiences using advanced technologies and
innovative story telling. This experience was set up next to the
Ara Monument to provide further context to the Ara reliefs to life
and making them regain their original splendour and colours [
3
].
Virtual reconstruction is becoming a frequently used technique to
be able to see a full 360°view of an object and how it looked in its
primary form.
Virtual tours within museums are not an unknown concept and
these are utilised as a valuable tool to show potential visitors 3D
museums and collections to entice them to physically visit. Virtual

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
screen tours are frequently used to oer viewers an alternative
to 2D images and text. This has been demonstrated by the British
Museum with ‘The Museum of the World’ [
11
], who have combined
a digital archive of artefacts with an interactive scene, allowing
the user to click on the timeline to nd out about objects in the
museum.
However, in most cases these tours are limited to the user staring at
a at screen and using a mouse to navigate around the environment,
and do not have the immersive potentials which Virtual Reality can
oer. Some sources such as SketchFab [
12
] do oer VR platforms
to view 3D models, but the user would not be able to interact with
objects freely as it would require a controller instead of a haptic
device that would mimic hands on interaction.
Additional motives for the development of technological alterna-
tives come from the recent events of Covid-19 causing a worldwide
pandemic and forcing museums to close for over a year, this showed
diculties in how history can be accessed and highlighted many
museums current relationships with technology. The literature re-
view showed how limited a visitor is to interact with an artefact.
This research oers a display design to attract contemporary audi-
ences by incorporating technology to oer multisensory methods
of learning.
Through the forced closures of the Covid-19 pandemic, virtual
museums and tours have hit an all-time high at being accessible
around the world by remote visitors and has sparked a huge interest
in how digital heritage could be utilised to document and display
history whilst remaining accessible through the internet. A blog
article by Vision Direct featured eight virtual museum tours they
recommended during the self-isolation period at the start of the
Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 [
13
] and Deutsche Welle, an interna-
tional broadcaster in media outlets posted an article on ‘Six Museum
to explore virtually during lockdown’ which was also released in
2020 [
14
]. These examples displayed a desire to still access museum
content during a time when in person visits were prohibited, these
articles boast upon the accessibility of these museum being ‘one
click away’ and viewed from the comfort of the viewers own home
environment.
A virtual tour can be found on The National Museum of Natural
History [
15
] located in Washington DC, USA on their interactive
website designed by Loren Ybarrondo who created a self-guided
navigation experience to explore dierent areas and rooms of the
museum. With the feature of high-denition panorama on compat-
ible devices the navigation is done by clicking on available arrows
that point in the direction you will go.
The Natural History Museum [
15
] claims that some of the virtual
tours feature previously unseen archives and holdings which gives
them a unique attraction to use this with the addition of visiting
in real-life, the high-quality content makes this experience useful
for viewers to see what exactly is on display and have the ability to
zoom in without losing detail. However, content on signs for the
intended displays can be dicult to read making it not suitable for
viewers who want a reliable source of information for the object
that they are viewing, with no option to access external context
whilst using the virtual tour this makes its uses limited to navigation
and examining the visuals of the object alone.
Through the success of existing VR applications, this research
aims to use VR technology within museums to provide visitors with
Figure 1: Phantom Omni Device. Image published
by Herbet Rodrigues (Public Domain), via Research
Gate.(https://www.researchgate.net/gure/Figura-1-
Dispositivo-HapticoPHANToM-Omni-da-SensAble-
Technologies-Inc_g1_228579672)
an additional motive to attend and learn about history, through the
ability of interacting with artefacts directly, museums can oer a
unique addition to already existing virtual experiences.
2.1 Haptic Technology in Museums
Existing research (Stephen Brewster [
16
], Mariza Dima [
17
] and
Radu Comes [
18
]) have explored the possibilities of combining hap-
tic technologies in a museum or exhibition environment, however,
each piece of research has shown a slightly dierent dynamic of
what the visitor will experience.
Dierent technologies have been introduced to this eld of re-
search to experiment with how a visitor can interact with a historic
ceramic artefact and what type of haptics can be achieved. Stephan
Brewster [
16
] researched the impact of haptic touching technol-
ogy on cultural applications. The main haptic device used was the
PHANToM device from SensABLE Technologies.
This device acts as a stylus pen that can be held and moved
freely around the area connected to the device, when the device
encounters an object, it will apply force to resist the user’s move-
ment and mimic contact with an object. This device has interesting
opportunities to interact and feel where a surface and edge would
be but still limits the user to holding a stylus pen-type shape where
the pen can only travel as far as the base will allow by its handle.
Mariza Dima [
17
] proposed two methods of interaction to go
hand in hand to create the closest experience to touching the orig-
inal artefact. The rst method consisted of a 3D laser scan of the
artefact and 3D printing to create a plastic replica. This would give
visitors an insight into the positive and negative space but is not
able to replicate the material properties or roughness of the original,
however, this does provide an alternative to handle curated objects
of high value or restricted by conservation protocol.
The second method involved using a haptic device called the
Omni instead of the user’s hands. This is placed next to the replica
print to act as a guide for where to direct the haptic device as it will
be invisible for the user. This method uses a stylus pen for haptic

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
feedback making it limited in what the user can feel, despite this
paper being sixteen years more current than Brewster’s it has still
implemented a similar style haptic device.
Radu Comes [
18
] research paper examines the haptic devices
found within museums. This research conrmed the use of a similar
haptic device called the Geo Magic Touch System. This system
involves the use of a stylus pen-like device that can mimic force
feedback responses; however, evidence did show it was not possible
to show mass properties and can only travel around the stationary
object. This system shows major restrictions when compared to
the SenseGlove haptic device which can oer the freedom to pick
up and handle an object with each ngertip.
It is clear from the time these papers were published that their
options in technology were limited the older the research was con-
ducted. However, even the more recent papers still show similarities
in the way the technology functions and how it is used. These limi-
tations come from the way the device is designed, limiting the user
to a pen like handle meaning the user cannot handle the ceramic
and interact with an object freely, therefore reassuring the new
contributions to knowledge in this research through the use of
force-feedback haptic gloves in Digital Heritage.
Recent research from the Manchester Museum [
19
] proposed
a project that introduces digital touch replicas by laser scanning
artefacts to create a digital replica. This research creates a physical
prototype and integrates novel touch sensors, allowing information
to be strategically placed on to the object. When a sensor is touched
information is delivered as images, audio or video on a screen to
communicate associating information. This concept helps create a
more engaging experience for visitors as the small interaction and
mixed medias are more entertaining and easier to maintain focus
than a text panel display. However, this prototype still limits the
user to a at screen for information and does not provide enough
context as to what extent you can interact with the 3D digital
replicas.
3 METHODOLOGY
The methodology adopted in this project includes a practice-based
research approach [
20
], to implement multisensory technology into
museums.
As there exists no prescriptive ‘procedure’ to conduct practice-
led research the methodological framework applied in this project
has developed an individually tailored approach. This has derived
partly from an analysis of other examples including Paul Green-
halgh [
21
] who developed an object analysis framework to break-
down a ceramics historiography and to benet the way that infor-
mation can displayed to educate a visitor. The procedure involves
breaking down a ceramic to understand:
•The makers personal and social background
•The consumers personal and social background
•The role of the object (What function it served)
•
The class of the object (Compared value with other ceramics
in the same genre)
•Value within the current marketplace
•Current political and social trends
•The material properties
•The crafting techniques and creation timeline
Object analysis is a process of breaking down the contextual
information of an object’s physical properties. there are three pri-
mary areas of analysis to conduct to understand the substance of
an artifact, these include the material, aesthetic, and interactive
qualities, followed with sourcing information on their social and
cultural contexts. This information can then aid the interpretation
of displaying these objects virtually or physically and give them
meaning and purpose to their history.
These sources of information can be used within this project to
visually reconstruct the answers and create relating interactions to
feel a personal connection to the ceramics and its story.
The academic social research in this study approaches the
changes in society and how we have incorporated technology into
our daily lives, there was a clear lack of use with technology within
museum settings to reinvent the way history is communicated.
Social research is essential for generating new knowledge and ex-
panding our understanding of contemporary social life [
22
]. This
was found to be an ideal research method to apply to this project, as
its core aim is to incorporate new technologies into a traditionally
outdated environment. This research is essentially a concept aiming
to explain a theory, in which history can be shown in a new and
exciting form that brings words to life and oers multiple layers of
contextual visuals and interactions.
Theory-research relates to the qualitative data collected by ex-
ploring a research question and pursuing the theory for the research
to formulate an answer [
22
]. This theoretical technique was found
suitable for this research as this will drive the collection and anal-
ysis of data from a social environment to eectively analyse how
technology can change the way visitors experience museums.
There were a few factors with the technology that highlighted
limitations with the object analysis framework in this research.
The SenseGlove haptic device used in this project was unable to
provide a weighted simulation and the ability to use your ngertips
to feel texture precisely. These limitations impacted the extent
interpretation could be achieved, but virtual reality opens new
doors in the way we can communicate the artefacts information.
This includes the ability to transport the user into an environment
that represents a similar original to where the ceramic was found.
This provides the opportunity to demonstrate how it was utilised
and show where its former origin was before appearing in a museum
cabinet. Certain details on an object may not be understood to a
viewer, however VR will oer the ability to show them alternative
visuals to show what something means, this also becomes very
useful if an artefact is damaged and virtual reconstruction can ll
in these gaps to show the object in its original form.
Another dening limitation was costs, most museums will only
have so much funding to budget what they spend on a display,
haptic technology ranges in price but is often in the thousands such
as the SenseGlove’s Nova glove for £3826 [23].
Making it a commitment to invest in the technology, projects such as
this one shows the potential and results show the positive response
from visitors; however, museums need the ability to see how they
can utilise this technology in various displays and functions to
justify the price point.

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
Figure 2: The Nova Glove. (Permission Granted by Sense-
Glove). (https://www.senseglove.com/product/nova/.
Figure 3: Photogrammetry setup used by the researcher.
3.1 Methodology- Practical
Photogrammetry was chosen for the digitising process of this
project due to other research supporting this method for the digiti-
sation of an artefact. Photogrammetry is a technique used to take a
physical object or environment and deconstruct it into a 3D digital
model using high-quality photographs [
24
]. These photographs
hold the essential data that will measure up the coordinates in a
3D reconstruction software to nd links and process a 3D replica
model. This method is commonly used among the digital heritage
sector [
25
], [
26
], [
27
], with multiple benets to the preservation,
representation, and accessibility of artefacts around the world [
28
].
This is due to the versatility of photogrammetry, whereas laser
scanning requires a trained handler to use the technology due to
the complicated nature and value of the device, photogramme-
try can be achieved with little previous experience to achieve the
desired results. Also, laser scanning does not create the material
texture automatically when creating the 3D model, which means
Figure 4: When Sir David met Sir David in the
VR Experience at the Tate Modern Museum. (Pub-
lic domain) Via Natural History Museum. (https:
//www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2018/march/explore-
the-museumwith-sir-david-attenborough.html.
photogrammetry would need to be used additionally to create the
texture. It, therefore, made more sense to use photogrammetry
solely.
Digitisation is the method employed to digitally reconstruct the
data collected from the photographs into a full 3D model. Digitisa-
tion is a process of converting physical information into a digital for-
mat. This process consists of taking the photographs from the pho-
togrammetry phase and processing them in a 3D re-construction
software, this then processes the photographs to link matching
points in the data and create a full 3D mode [29].
Other research in digital heritage does support using Photogram-
metry as the most suitable method to digitise artefacts, including
the VR experience for the Tate Modern Museum who worked with
Factory 42 which used photogrammetry to recreate the museum
and hologram of Sir David Attenborough, as well as the individual
artefacts [30].
A study was made at the beginning of this research in 2019 to
discover what haptic devises already exist and what they oer as
part of their experience. Results showed that a limited number of
devices oered a full force feedback in their design, all 8 devices
found used motion tracking to let the player use their hands as
controllers within VR and be able to see them in the scene. Most
devices did not oer anything additionally with motion tracking and
relied solely on the visuals of the hands for the player to use them,
2 devices used vibrations to alert the player they are interacting
with an object and 2 devices oered a full force feedback experience.
This project had a strong focus on incorporating full force feedback
as that was a unique aspect to the museum experience to be able to
interact with artefacts freely without limitations.
The device chosen from this research was the SenseGlove haptic
device, due to their ability to adjust to dierent sized hands so being
suitable to the public domain and this device was available at the
time of gathering research, whilst oering VR and AR compatibility
with a pre-made software development kit (SDK), which makes the
device simple to set up and get started with within a game engine.

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
3.2 Methodology- Data Analysis
When deciding how to sample the data for this research it was
decided that two locations would be selected to receive a secure
and adequate number of participants. This research focused on
evaluating the behaviour and response from participants when
testing the prototype in the museum setting, to gauge levels of user
satisfaction and interaction.
This research adopted a User Interface Satisfaction Questionnaire
(QUIS) method to compare responses and evaluate the software
and hardware used for the user testing phase. The Questionnaire
for User Interface Satisfaction is a usability testing tool designed to
gauge a user’s subjective satisfaction with the computer interface,
or in this case The Thornhill experience.
The QUIS contains a demographic questionnaire that measure
users’ satisfaction based on screen factors, terminology, and system
feedback, learning factors and system capabilities [
31
]. When ap-
plied to this research the questionnaire assessed whether museum
visitors enjoyed the 3D visuals, understood how the information
was displayed about the artefacts, if they learnt about the ceramics
during the testing phase and how this experience can adapt in the
future based on the user’s feedback. This data analysis structure
helped to assure the right questions were asked when receiving
feedback and that the research questions were addressed when
analysing the data collected.
The questionnaire was created to assure a positive experience
from participants lling it in, this includes a short set of questions to
avoid it taking longer than 5 minutes to complete and all questions
consisted of multiple-choice answers to make for a simplistic layout.
4 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
The design and development process focuses on the building of The
Thornhill Experience. The rst stage begins using photogrammetry
to digitise the Thornhill ceramics, digitisation is a process of taking
a real-life object and turning it in to a virtual 3D model replica [
32
].
A plan was created with 4 core interactions for the experience,
this included allowing the player to hold the ceramic and the ability
to break it. The third follows with further context to the Musician
on Horseback by bringing a replica Tang Dynasty drum into the
room to show what the musician is holding; the player can pick the
drum up and play the authentic sound with their hand or drumstick.
The fourth interaction involves visual context by transporting the
player into an environment that replicates the tomb the ceramics
were discovered in.
A selection process was made to decide which ceramics will
feature in the experience. These decisions were based on the object
analysis breakdown in the methodology of this research.
The chosen ceramics date back to the Han and Tang dynasty
period to keep them within a similar timeline, this was to create
consistency in the second environment the player would teleport
into, the tomb represented the ceramics former use to demonstrate
where they were discovered and communicate that the ceramics
were oerings to the afterlife.
The environment was designed to replicate a traditional Tang
Dynasty tomb that would have featured ceramic oerings in their
burial rituals. The murals on the walls were direct projections of
Figure 5: Visual Storyboard for interactions.
murals found in an existing uncovered Tang tomb. Additional ob-
jects were created including a ceramic goose lamp and a decorative
con that accurately represented the resting place of Lady Dai, a
female aristocrat who dies during the Han Dynasty [
33
]. The tomb
also featured descriptions relating to each ceramic for additional
context.
Finally, a puzzle was added to the nal environment to quiz
the player on knowledge they should have learnt throughout the
experience, this interaction was added to assess the success of
players retaining information through a multisensory experience.
4.1 Digital Creation
To digitise a ceramic, the photographs were processed in a 3D re-
construction software to produce the 3D model, Multiple software’s
were tested and noted with pros and cons to decide the most suitable
software for this project.
Here are some examples of other software’s tested in this phase:
•
Autodesk Recap- This had a very limited UI with a lack of
editing abilities, the results were ok but usually had a poor
resolution on the texture quality making it unsuitable to
show o real-life replicas of objects. This is a good starter
software as it is simplistic in nature and provides quick re-
sults compared to the other options.
•
Reality Capture- This was a highly rated software known for
its fast results [
34
]; however, this software can become ex-
pensive as it charges for every export you make on a model,
the software was complex in nature meaning it would take
adequate time to understand the UI to achieve good results.
The potential of this software is great with the ability to cre-
ate some clean precise results, but this was found unsuitable
for the timescale of this project.
•
3DF Zephyr- This was the close second in comparison to all
of the others, this would have been the alternative software if

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
Figure 6: UI Layout in Meshroom. (Public Domain) via Meshroom Manual. (https://meshroommanual.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
tutorials/sketchfab/sketchfab.htm)
Figure 7: Retopologisation process for the Musician on Horseback.
Meshroom was not used. This software was free but oered
quite a few limitations to encourage the user to pay for a
full version, the limitations impacted to the results required
for this project so was found unsuitable overall, many issues
occurred including images often getting rejected due to it
not recognising where they are in the world, this then results
in errors in the nal model, or the model not being created.
This ltered in to requiring results within a certain time and
nding it risky to provide what was needed.
Meshroom by AliceVision [
34
] was chosen as the most suitable
software due to its thorough framework to exibly adjust settings
to suit certain ceramic scans, this gave the scans a higher success
rate with minimal errors.
If errors occurred there was a breakdown of which stage failed
in the process, this saved time to be able to understand the problem
and x it rather than running it repeatedly until the results were
desired.
The digitising process has 4 distinct stages of development, af-
ter the scan is completed in Meshroom, it is imported into a 3D
modelling software to clean up any errors. This would then be a
completed high poly version, for the experience 3D models are
retopologised to create low poly versions so they are easier to ren-
der in the game engine software. You can see the low poly under
‘retopologise’.
After, the model has the high poly texture baked on to the low
poly model to gain the colour details from the original scan. Once
this is completed the model was ready to be imported into the
experience.
The second stage demonstrates the process of creating the envi-
ronments. This involved selecting an environment that will deliver
visual information on a ceramic, the rst room would consist of a
classic museum that imitates the real-life perspective of where a
visitor would usually see a ceramic artefact.
Followed with transformative journey in to a second environ-
ment to display a reconstruction of a Tang Dynasty tomb to visually
communicate where these ceramics were discovered and recovered.
This visual context can explain the former use of an artefact without
the need of additional text, whilst creating an immersive interaction
for a visitor to explore. The tomb symbolizes the ability to transport

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
Figure 8: Texturing process for the Musician on Horseback.
Figure 9: The Thornhill Experience Museum Room.
a visitor out of the typical museum room and give them a unique
method of engagement with an artefact’s history.
The third stage explains a breakdown of how the interactions
were created and how the gaming elements were selected as the
most appropriate for this experience. The interactions oer the abil-
ity to implement sources of information in an engaging alternative,
these visual sources of information broke down what was achiev-
able for the visitor to experience that would usually be dicult to
replicate in the real-world museum and usually results in a text
panel for context. These interactions included limitless accessibility
to hold and observe the ceramics in a close-range, having surprise
cues for certain ceramics to interact with relating objects to ex-
plain certain characteristics, showing the visitor a small amount of
text to explain the ceramics dynasty and random fact, and nally
quizzing the visitor on their knowledge of the ceramics to see what
information was retained from the experience.
Figure 10: The Thornhill Experience Tomb room.
Figure 11: The Thornhill Experience, Puzzle room.
The fourth stage involves how SenseGlove has been integrated
into the experience. SenseGlove has an ecient system to get a new
user started in Unity. Unity is a game development platform used
to create games and applications [
35
]. This engine software was
chosen due to its compatibility with Augmented Reality and Virtual
Reality to oer experimentation at the beginning of this research,
Unity also oers compatibility with SenseGlove and their pre-made
Software Development Kit (SDK) to import into a scene, SDKs
are a set of tools from a third-party developer to produce certain
applications in a game engine with their partnering technology
[36].
The SenseGlove SDK provided everything needed to understand
how to perform an initial set up and to test if the gloves were
working via default applications that show you dierent interac-
tions the gloves can do. When it comes to setting up the SDK, it
included pre-sets of SenseGlove settings to be able to quickly setup
the SenseGlove to work within play mode.
These settings gave exibility in how the gloves behave and the
properties that can be adjusted to manipulate what the player can

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
Figure 12: The Thornhill Experience, displaying a smashed
ceramic.
feel, this process is doing using the pre-sets options combined with
mesh colliders.
Mesh Colliders are applied to Mesh assets in a scene and given a
collider cage, so the haptic gloves understand what type of material
it is, such as hard and bendable. when the SenseGlove device reaches
to pick up an object it can feel the density properties, these were
used on all the objects within the scene to provide full interactivity.
More adjustments were made to the ceramic objects to try and
mimic the way a ceramic would feel in real-life, including the den-
sity of the material and applying physics. Physics dictates how the
object behaves in the scene, if the object is to be dropped it would
fall and smash upon impact with another surface.
5 THE TESTING PHASE
The data demonstrates qualitative results after conducting an analy-
sis on a participant’s behaviour and reaction to a virtual interactive
experience in multiple settings. This research also includes a ques-
tionnaire response from each participant to gather feedback and
thoughts on their experience.
This analysis highlights how easily a participant was able to
navigate around the environment and any complications they found
that impacted their experience, these results show what age ranges
used the experience the most and who the target demographic
could be if developed further.
This research uncovers how the public felt about haptic feedback
gloves and if they provided a realistic sense of interaction with
virtual ceramics and whether an experience such as this one can
oer new ways to eectively learn about ceramics and understand
new contexts of information through visual interpretations and
interactions.
The rst testing phase was conducted at the British Ceramics
Biennial event, a ceramics festival celebrating and showcasing con-
temporary ceramics from across the world [
37
]. This took place in
September 2021 from the 10th to the 17th. The second testing phase
took place at The Potteries Museum and Art Gallery in November
2021 from the 5th to the 8th.
Figure 13: Example question using emotional responses to
analyse user satisfaction with the experience.
5.1 Structure for Questions
All questions were multiple choice for a simplistic layout that made
it ecient to complete in less than 5 minutes and included 10
questions in total. This questionnaire employed a User Interface
Satisfaction (QUIS) method, which gets a participants opinions
based on the usability of an interface and assesses user satisfactory
and acceptance of the system [
38
]. There was a nal section of
the questionnaire that was an open opportunity for participants
to express any opinions they may have whether that be positive,
negative or suggestions.
The questionnaire begins with quantitative formed questions for
data collection such as age and gender. The remaining questions
required qualitative data to record the visitor’s responses to the
technology and provide a voice to the targeted audience within this
research.
Some of the questions required a more emotional response re-
garding how they felt during the experience, this was recorded
using various faces to signal how satised the visitor felt. See Fig-
ure 13 to see an example question.
The questions in this study are as follows:
•1.How did you nd navigating around the environment?
•
2.Do you feel like this experience helped you learn more
about the ceramics?
•
3.Do you think haptic gloves provide a realistic sense of
touch?
•
4.Do you think a digital surrogate is an eective alternative
to interact with a ceramic?
•
5.Frequencies on ‘Do you think haptic gloves provide a real-
istic sense of touch?
•
6.How important do you think interaction is to understand
a ceramics physical properties?
•7.What was your favourite part/s of the experience?
•
8.Do you think installations like this could encourage you
to visit a museum?
•
9.Would you like to see more technology in museums in the
future?
The questionnaire was completed primarily from guests who
were attending a ceramic event or visiting the museum casually,
however a range of experts within the museum and heritage eld
including archaeologists and museum curators also took part to
include a range of knowledge and understanding.
After the rst testing phase was completed the questionnaire
and responses were assessed on any issues found to adjust for the
second round of testing. It was found that the age ranges were
not varied enough from the original 65+ as some participants were

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
Figure 14: Demographic group chart for age.
known to be 70+ and 80+ in a few cases so it felt the questionnaire
was not as precise as it could be, this was changed for the second
testing phase to feature more age categories.
5.2 Participant Backgrounds
Participants involved in testing phase one were visitors to the
British Ceramics Biennial, this project was accepted positively due
to the contemporary techniques to display ceramics virtually and of-
fered advanced technology to create a unique exhibition for visitors.
This project was installed for 1 week and acquired 35 participants
in total.
Testing Phase 2 was conducted at The Potteries Museum and Art
Gallery, a museum which showcases a technical section in their ce-
ramic gallery illustrating the production techniques of pottery and
includes multiple ceramic collections [
39
], The Potteries Museum
has also featured more technology and shown a strong interest to
experiment with how it can be implemented into dierent exhibi-
tions, included the recent development of the spitre gallery, an
extension on the museum featuring an RAF Spitre, along with
virtual replicas of other spitre designs on small screens [
40
]. This
project was accepted to be showcased alongside the launch of the
spitre exhibition; this attracted a total sample size of 24 partici-
pants in the duration of 4 days.
The participants who took part in this experience were adults
aged between 18-65+ in the rst testing phase and 18-81+ in the
second testing phase, this was due to observing the rst round of
testing and noticing a bigger demographic of senior ages that were
interested in trying this project, it was evident that age did not have
a cut-o point when it came to wanting to participate.
6 RESULTS
Results showed the largest age group of participants consisted
of 18–25-year-olds conrming the evidence within the literature
review that the younger audiences engage with technology more
than any other age group. However, all the other age groups had
a consistency in participants and showed that a large group of
museum visitors would be willing to try this type of installation.
Unfortunately, the two oldest age groups remain at 0% partici-
pation, however this would have been relevant in the rst testing
phase if implemented as a few participants asked why their age
Figure 15: Frequencies on ‘How did you nd navigating
around the environment?’
Figure 16: Frequencies on ‘Do you feel like this experience
helped you learn more about the ceramics?’
bracket stopped at aged 65 when they were in fact in their 70s or
80s.
The largest number of participants were female with a close
evenness with males, showing a consistent interest across genders.
This questionnaire did include a Third gender as an option to par-
ticipants who do not identify solely as a male or female, this group
totalled as 1.7% of the total results.
The results from the data collection show that the majority of
participants found the environment easy to navigate and explore,
showing a success in creating an environment that is suitable to a
wide range of visitors, with no responses recording that they had a
negative experience.
The main aim of The Thornhill Experience was to demonstrate
new and innovative methods to communicate history to help re-
tain information through engaging content, results show that 28
participants out of 59 felt they denitely learnt about the ceramics
through this experience, with a second highest amount of 21 who
felt this likely helped them learn about the ceramics. The remaining
10 felt impartial to if they had learnt from the experience which
could raise questions on the methods of delivering the content to
suit a wider range of visitors.
When the questions came to the haptics it was asked if the
participant felt as though the sense of touch was realistic to how it
would feel physically, the questions were displayed with a series of

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
Figure 17: Frequencies on ‘Do you think haptic gloves provide
a realistic sense of touch?’
faces to make the question visually simple to answer, with a sad face
if they disagreed and a happy face is they agreed to the question.
The most chosen response was a general yes with 23 out of 59,
however this question did receive 10 in a neutral response, three
with a sad face and 1 with a very sad face. This shows that some
participants did not feel this technology gave them the realistic
sense of touch they desired from the technology and experience.
This research oers an alternative solution to accessing mu-
seum objects via more holistic modes of interpretation that engage
participants with a multi-sensory learning experience. The virtual
handling of an object can facilitate access to details of the object
limited by the xed viewing planes within a vitrine. The SenseGlove
haptic device cannot oer the ability to feel the weight and texture
of an object, however it can oer the ability to feel the artefacts
freely and view from every angle, without risk. The questionnaire
asks, do you think a digital surrogate is an eective alternative to
interact with a ceramic? Results showed most participants agreed
that this was an eective alternative to hold a precious ceramic,
however 10 out of 59 felt unsure, while three felt this is not an
eective alternative. While it is understandable that you are limited
to what you can experience with touch, this experience oers the
ability to interact with an object that is usually prohibited or in
this case currently with the Thornhill Collection, in storage and
unavailable to view.
There are limited solutions to this limitation in museums that in
most cases you must view the object behind a glass cabinet, making
it dicult to engage with for more than a glance. It was clear from
these results that participants understood they were not going to
feel like they were touching a real ceramic, although what makes
the experience unique is the way you can interact and gain context
visually.
Additionally to the previous question ‘if a participant felt as
though a digital surrogate is an eective alternative to interact with
a ceramic’, participants were asked if it was important to interact
with a ceramic to understand its physical properties, with the results
showed that 26 participants felt in was extremely important and 24
feeling it is very important, which is in most cases is impossible in
traditional displays, reassuring a desire to explore these possibilities
in how visitors can interact with ceramics and how important they
feel that is to their experience.
Figure 18: Frequencies on ‘Do you think a digital surrogate
is an eective alternative to interact with a ceramic?’
Figure 19: Frequencies on ‘How important do you think in-
teraction is to understand a ceramic’s physical properties?’
Subsequent questions focused on the user satisfaction from the
experience, participants were asked what the participants favourite
part of experience was. This received a mix of responses with the
majority voting that their favourite was interacting 1-1 with a ce-
ramic object, followed with exploring the tomb showing a positive
response from putting the participant in multiple environments. In
this case the Participant was taken into a tomb to visually demon-
strate where the ceramics were found and providing a reconstruc-
tion of what a traditional Tang Dynasty tomb looked like. The
option with the least votes was the playing with the drum, which
was an anticipated result, as the drum was added as a surprise
interaction to see if the participant could discover it upon doing a
certain action.
The action required dropping the musician on horseback ceramic
whilst in the museum, the interaction aimed to show the musician
was holding a drum by dropping a full-size Tang dynasty drum
into the scene upon the ceramic smashing on to the oor, this also
let the player pick up the drum and make authentic sounds upon
touch the drum with a drumstick or hand.
This action acted as a discoverable source of information, this
unpredictable interaction was implemented to encourage the visitor
to stay engaged and maintain focus throughout the experience.
After focusing on User Satisfaction, the questionnaire then went
on to nding out about the desirability of this experience and if
participants would want to try this again. Showing an overwhelm-
ing 43 out of 59 would denitely feel encouraged to visit a museum

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
Figure 20: Frequencies on ‘What was your favourite part/s of
the experience?’
Figure 21: Frequencies on ‘Do you think installations like
this could encourage you to visit a museum?’
if they were previously informed of installations similar to this
one, with 15 agreeing they probably would feel encouraged and
1 participant feeling impartial, however no participants answered
that this would not encourage them to visit a museum.
This research focuses on exploring the possibilities of how mu-
seum can incorporate technology into museum settings to enhance
a visitor experience, with this aim it was important to question
the desirability from visitors to see technology incorporate into
museums in the future. Results show a signicant 54 out of 59
participants would like to see more technology in museums in the
future, this shows a distinct desirability towards this research and
therefore solidies the signicance to develop suitable technology
for museum installations.
7 DISCUSSION
Results show some complications with the haptic gloves appearing
realistic enough for participants to interact freely with the ceramics,
however from observations it was clear the most important element
of this experience was what the player could do additionally to
understand deeper contexts to the artefact, such as transporting into
a tomb to know where the artefact was found and understanding
its former use.
Evidence also showed from testing that the visitor responded
well to a playable source of information, interactions kept the visi-
tor engaged until the experience ended. Easter egg like encounters,
such as the drum appearing upon dropping the musician on horse-
back ceramic oered surprise motives to encourage the player to
explore the experience thoroughly.
Figure 22: Victoria & Albert Museum ceramics
in display cases. (Public Domain) Via V&A Mu-
seum. (http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/t/the-
ceramicsgalleries-old-and-new/.
Data conrmed this experience oered an alternative method of
accessibility to museum visitors that open new interactions with
the object itself and surrounding visuals that would be impossible
or very dicult to replicate in real-life. These unique interactions
conrm the usefulness to incorporate this technology to help visi-
tors use this experience as a tool for visual information and provide
a role of creating engaging installations that show an artefact in a
multimode of contexts.
This research was undertaken within museum development and
to dene the purpose of using digital heritage in the public domain.
It was clear from the literature that there was a signicant lack of
technological advancement in the museum setting and therefore
negatively impacting visitor engagement with ceramic displays.
The displays showed a signicant lack of context that could only
be provided through audio guides or at screen displays; however,
these methods still limit the users’ senses and inability to engage
with an artefact. The research starts with an overview of what
current museums oer to a visitor, enabling the research to iden-
tify a new approach on developing a virtual reality system that
introduces a limitless way of interacting and learning about the
Thornhill ceramics. Studies showed that technology is being used
more in recent years, but these exhibitions only remain temporary
for a matter of weeks or months which limits the visitor to a time
frame.
7.1 7 Conclusion
Museums have certainly seen an increase in experimentation to
include technology in their installations, with the majority of con-
sistent experiences oering virtual guides around the museum and
the limitation of seeing the ceramic with no further interaction [
11
].
Figure 20 shows a traditional glass cabinet display in the Victoria
& Albert Museum in London, United Kingdom.
It is common practice to oer audio guides to visitors walking
around the museums to oer an alternative source of context than
the traditional text panel. This research assures the desire and
intention to create exciting and new technological advancements

Design and Development Approach for an Interactive Virtual Museum with Haptic Glove Technology Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland
Figure 23: Set up of the SenseGlove haptic gloves with the
HTC Vive headset, for The Thornhill Experience.
within the history and heritage domain, therefore reinforcing the
desire for this project. Haptic technology is still in its very early
stages and has a long road of potential to create more vigorous
and polished haptic gloves that can oer full accessibility in virtual
reality to interact freely. This project proves the potential of how
haptic gloves to better enhance a VR experience for visitors in a
museum and how the added sense of touch adds a new dimension
to what the visitor can do compared to physical displays.
The research undertaken has highlighted the issues with muse-
ums oering a range of experiences that avoid the traditional text
panel format, this prototype contributes as an example model of
technology can utilised within museum displays. The results from
the design and development process show a solid workow that
can be applied to any museum artefact and implement it into a VR
application.
This research project contributes practically with a reliable sys-
tem to create digital replicas of ceramics that can serve as surrogate
versions. This project exploits the potential of using haptic glove
technology and how this can be utilised to enhance a museum
visitor’s experience and introduce a new dynamic of multisensory
experiences that would alternatively be forbidden with the original
artefact. Visualisation contextualises the ways visitors can learn
about a ceramic’s historiography and the ways this information
can be constructed into innovative forms of interaction to appeal
to a digital age of learners.
The innovation lies in the opportunity of how history can be
interpreted into a digital alternative, and the ways visitors can learn
through hands on interaction and multisensory experiences, these
forms of interpretation create new concepts to visitors who wish
to learn about history through an intimate, hands-on approach.
Results from the data collection showed this prototype enhanced
engagement and helped assist the visitor retain information about
ceramics. Therefore, bringing a sense of purpose and evident de-
mand to bring various forms of Digital Heritage into mainstream
museums and exhibitions.
REFERENCES
[1]
T. Alsop, “Augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and mixed re-
ality (MR) market size worldwide in 2021 and 2028,” 2022. [Online].
Available: https://www.statista.com/statistics/591181/globalaugmented-virtual-
reality-market- size/#statisticContainer. [Accessed 13 October 2022].
[2]
S. Evans, "Technology is bringing museums back to life," 2017. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.verdict.co.uk/technology-museums-back- tolife/. [Accessed 13
October 2021].
[3]
M. Truno, "Innovating the cultural heritage museum service model through
virtual reality and augmented reality: the eects on the overall visitor experience
and satisfaction," Journal of Heritage Tourism, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1-19, 2021.
[4]
H. Taher, "Digitalisation at," 17 09 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.
divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:1480519/FULLTEXT01.pdf . [Accessed 26 07
2020].
[5]
C. Browning, "Technology and planning help museums manage out-
dated exhibitions," The Conversation, 26 08 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://theconversation.com/technology-and- planninghelp-museums- manage-
outdated-exhibitions- 143852. [Accessed 26 07 2022].
[6]
M. Rowland, "Museums Association," 10 12 2018. [Online]. Available: https:
//www.museumsassociation.org/museumsjournal/news/2018/12/10122018-
fth-young- peoplenever-visit- museums/. [Accessed 13 07 2022].
[7]
L. M. a. Galleries, "Leeds Museums and Galleries: A practical guide for text inter-
pretation," 2017. [Online].Available: https://www.museumdevelopmentyorkshire.
org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2017/12/Practical-guide- for-textinterpretation-
2017.pdf. [Accessed 17 November 2021].
[8] P. Barron, "Visitor engagement at museums: Generation Y and ‘Lates’ events at
the National Museum of Scotland," Museum Management and Curatorship, vol.
32, no. 5, pp. 473-490, 2017. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[9]
L. Ward, "6 Examples of Language and Technology in Museums," K International,
16 05 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.kinternational.com/blog/language-
and-technology- inmuseums/. [Accessed 14 07 2022].
[10]
L. White, "Digital images in museums: Digital desires: What are museums up
to?," Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol.
34, no. 4, pp. 12-16, 2008. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[11]
B. Museum, "The Museum of the World," British Museum, 1] 2020. [Online].
Available: https://britishmuseum.withgoogle.com. [Accessed 13 07 2022].
[12]
SketchFab, "SketchFab," SketchFab, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://sketchfab.
com/. [Accessed 13 07 2022].
[13]
V. Direct, "8 best virtual museum tours during self3] isolation," 2020. [Online].
Available: https://www.visiondirect.co.uk/blog/best-virtualmuseum-tours/. [Ac-
cessed 26 05 2022].
[14]
S. Braun, "Six museums to explore virtually during 4] lockdown," DW, 13 04 2020.
[Online]. Available: https://www.dw.com/en/six-museums- to-explorevirtually-
during-lockdown/a- 53073411. [Accessed 13 07 2022].
[15]
N. M. o. N. History, "National Museum of Natural History - 5] Virtual Tours," Na-
tional Museum of Natural History, 2021.[Online]. Available: https://naturalhistory.
si.edu/visit/virtual-tour. [Accessed 13 07 2022].
[16]
S. A. Brewster, "The Impact of Haptic ‘Touching’ 6] Technology on Cultural
Applications," 2008. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[17]
M. Dima, "Touching the Past: Haptic Augmented Reality for Museum Artefacts,"
in International Conference on Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality, 2014.
[18]
R. Comes, "HAPTIC DEVICES AND TACTILE EXPERIENCES IN MUSEUM EX-
HIBITIONS," JOURNAL OF ANCIENT HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY, vol. 3,
2016. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[19]
M. Museum, "Digital Touch Replicas," 2022. [Online]. Available: HTTPS://
MUSEUM.MANCHESTER.AC.UK/ABOUT/DIGITALT OUCHREPLICAS. [Ac-
cessed 17 07 2022].
[20]
L. Candy, "Practice Based Research: A Guide," Creativity & 0] Cognition Studios,
Sydney, 2006. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[21]
"Social Complexity and the Historiography of Ceramic," 14 1] 10 2001. [Online].
Available: https://ceramicsmuseum.alfred.edu/perkins_lect_series/g reenhalgh/.
[Accessed 27 07 2022].
[22]
T. Clark, Bryman’s Social Research Methods, Oxford: OUP 2] Oxford; 6th edition,
2021. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[23]
SenseGlove, "The New Sense in VR for enterprise," 3] SenseGlove, 2022. [Online].
Available: https://www.senseglove.com/product/nova/. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[24]
J. Aber, "Small-Format Aerial Photography," Elsevier, 28 4] 05 2010. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.elsevier.com/books/small-format-aerialphotography/aber/978-
0-444- 53260-2. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[25]
T. L. Foundation, "A Simple Method for Reliable Creation 5] of 3D Ar-
tifact Models in the Field," The Leaky Foundation, 03 03 2016. [Online].
Available: https://leakeyfoundation.org/a-simple-photogrammetryrig- for-the-
reliable-creation- of-3d- artifact-models- in-theeld/. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[26]
C. Walbridge, "Robot photogrammetry in Minneapolis," 6] SketchFab,
13 02 2018. [Online]. Available: https://sketchfab.com/blogs/community/
robotphotogrammetry-minneapolis/. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[27]
DigVentures, "How To
. . .
Do Photogrammetry For Archaeology (Part 1)," DigVen-
tures, 04 05 2016. [Online]. Available: https://projects.digventures.com/under-
theuplands/timeline/diary/how-to- do-photogrammetry- forarchaeology-part-
1/. [Accessed 17 07 2022].

Academic Mindtrek 2022, November 16–18, 2022, Tampere, Finland Emma Fallows et al.
[28]
A. Knodell, "Photogrammetry for Documentation and 8] Sharing," AR-
CHAEOLOGY IN THE COWLING ARBORETUM, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://archaeologyinthearb.com/archaeology-pine-hillvillage/2017-
eldwork/artifact-analysis- 2/. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[29]
T. Choukroun, "Digitisation vs digitalisation," You Sign, 9] 2022. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://yousign.com/blog/digitisation-vs- digitalisation. [Accessed 17 07
2022].
[30]
M.-C. Eylott, "Museum to star in Sky VR experience with 0] Sir David
Attenborough," National History Museum, 20 04 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2017/april/muse um-to-star-in-sky-vr-
experience-with-sir-davidattenborough.html. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[31]
B. D. Harper, "Improving user satisfaction: The questionnaire for user interaction
satisfaction version 5.5 (1993)," in Proceedings of the 1st Annual Mid-Atlantic
Human Factors Conference, 1993.
[32]
Culture24, "1. What do we mean by digitisation?," Digital Pathways, 2022. [On-
line]. Available: https://digipathways.co.uk/what-do-we- mean-bydigitisation/.
[Accessed 19 07 2022].
[33]
D. C. E. Chan, "The search for immortality: The Tomb of Lady Dai," SmartHis-
tory, 10 01 2022. [Online]. Available: https://smarthistory.org/tomb-of- lady-dai/.
[Accessed 27 07 2022].
[34]
A. Lewis, "The Top 10 Best Photogrammetry Software 4] 2022 (4 are Free!),"
Sourced, 31 12 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.3dsourced.com/3dsoftware/
best-photogrammetry- software/. [Accessed 19 07 2022].
[35]
Unity, "Unity 2022.2 alpha," Unity, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://unity3d.com/
unity/alpha/. [Accessed 19 07 2022].
[36]
L. Valdellon, "What is an SDK? Everything You Need to Know," CleverTap, 2020.
[Online]. Available: https://clevertap.com/blog/what-is-an-sdk/. [Accessed 19 07
2022].
[37]
BCB, "Festival 2021," British Ceramics biennial, 2021. [Online]. Available: https:
//www.britishceramicsbiennial.com/festival/bcb202 1/. [Accessed 19 07 2022].
[38]
J. Chin, "Development of an Instrument Measuring User Satisfaction of the
Human-Computer Interface," 1988. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[39]
PM&AG, "Galleries," 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.stokemuseums.org.
uk/pmag/galleries/. [Accessed 19 07 2022].
[40]
PM&AG, "The Spitre Gallery," 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.
stokemuseums.org.uk/pmag/exhibitions/spi tre/. [Accessed 19 07 2022].
[41]
L. White, "Digital Desires: What Are Museums Up To?," Bulletin of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 12-16, April 2008.
[42]
S. Brewster, "The Impact of Haptic ‘Touching’ Technology on Cultural," Glasgow
Interactive Systems Group, Glasgow, 2001. [Accessed 17 07 2022].
[43]
A. Lewis, "The Top 10 Best Photogrammetry Software 4] 2022 (4 are Free!),"
3DSourced, 31 12 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.3dsourced.com/
3dsoftware/best-photogrammetry- software/. [Accessed 28 07 2022].