A framework for constructing and evaluating the role of MR as a holographic virtual guide in museums

Abstract

Mixed reality (MR) is a cutting-edge technology at the forefront of many new applications in the tourism and cultural heritage sector. This study aims to reshape the museum experience by creating a highly engaging and immersive museum experience for visitors combing real-time visual, audio information and computer-generated images with museum artefacts and customer displays. This research introduces a theoretical framework that assesses the potential of MR guidance system in usefulness, ease of use, enjoyment, interactivity, touring and future applications. The evaluation introduces the MuseumEye MR application in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo using mixed method surveys and a sample of 171 participants. The results of the questionnaire highlighted the importance of the mediating the role of the tour guide in enhancing the relationship between perceived usefulness, ease of use, multimedia, UI design, interactivity and the intention of use. Furthermore, the results of this study revealed the potential future use of MR in museums and ensured sustainability and engagement past the traditional visitor museum experience, which heightens the economic state of museums and cultural heritage sectors.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Source: Microsoft (2015)

Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

References

  1. Ajzen I, Fishbein M, Heilbroner RL (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior, vol 278. Prentice-hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  2. Albrecht U-V, Folta-Schoofs K, Behrends M, Von Jan U (2013) Effects of mobile augmented reality learning compared to textbook learning on medical students: randomized controlled pilot study. J Med Internet Res 15(8):e182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alizadehsalehi S, Hadavi A, Huang JC (2019) Virtual reality for design and construction education environment. In: AEI 2019: integrated building solutions—the national agenda. American Society of Civil Engineers Reston, pp 193–203

  4. Alizadehsalehi S, Hadavi A, Huang JC (2020) From BIM to extended reality in AEC industry. Autom Constr 116:103254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Allison C (2018) Asus mixed reality headset review. Accessed from https://www.wareable.com/vr/asus-mixed-reality-headset-review-7465. Accessed 10 Jan 2018

  6. Almagor U (1985) A tourist’s “vision quest” in an African game reserve. Ann Tour Res 12(1):31–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Antlej K, Horan B, Mortimer M, Leen R, Allaman M, Vickers-Rich P, Rich T (2018) Mixed reality for museum experiences: a co-creative tactile-immersive virtual coloring serious game. Paper presented at the 2018 3rd Digital heritage international Congress (DigitalHERITAGE) held jointly with 2018 24th International conference on virtual systems and multimedia (VSMM 2018)

  8. Antón C, Camarero C, Garrido M-J (2018) Exploring the experience value of museum visitors as a co-creation process. Curr Issues Tour 21(12):1406–1425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Antoniou A, Dejonai MI, Lepouras G (2019) ‘Museum Escape’: a game to increase museum visibility. Paper presented at the International conference on games and learning alliance

  10. Ardito C, Buono P, Desolda G, Matera M (2018) From smart objects to smart experiences: an end-user development approach. Int J Hum Comput Stud 114:51–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Atkinson T (2018) Product review: Dell Visor Windows MR headset. Accessed from https://techtrends.tech/tech-trends/product-review/product-review-dell-visor-windows-mr-headset/. Accessed 04 Jan 2018

  12. Avramova V, Yang F, Li C, Peters C, Skantze G (2017) A virtual poster presenter using mixed reality. Paper presented at the International conference on intelligent virtual agents

  13. Ayeh JK, Au N, Law R (2013) Towards an understanding of online travellers’ acceptance of consumer-generated media for travel planning: integrating technology acceptance and source credibility factors. In: Cantoni L, Xiang Z (eds) Information and communication technologies in tourism 2013. Springer, Berlin, pp 254–267

  14. Balog A, Pribeanu C (2010) The role of perceived enjoyment in the students’ acceptance of an augmented reality teaching platform: a structural equation modelling approach. Stud Inform Control 19(3):319–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bekele MK, Pierdicca R, Frontoni E, Malinverni ES, Gain J (2018) A survey of augmented, virtual, and mixed reality for cultural heritage. J Comput Cult Herit 11(2):1–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bellotti F, Berta C, De Gloria A, Margarone M (2002) User testing a hypermedia tour guide. IEEE Pervasive Comput 1(2):33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Best K (2012) Making museum tours better: understanding what a guided tour really is and what a tour guide really does. Mus Manag Curatorship 27(1):35–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Boland P, Johnson C (1996) Archaeology as computer visualization: virtual tours of Dudley Castle c. 1550. Br Mus Occas Pap 114:227–233

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bray MZB (2018) What is mixed reality? Accessed from https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/mixed-reality. Accessed 15 May 2018

  20. Brůha L, Laštovička J, Palatý T, Štefanová E, Štych P (2020) Reconstruction of lost cultural heritage sites and landscapes: context of ancient objects in time and space. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 9(10):604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Burgard W, Cremers AB, Fox D, Hähnel D, Lakemeyer G, Schulz D, Thrun S (1999) Experiences with an interactive museum tour-guide robot. Artif Intell 114(1):3–55

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Cameron DF (1968) A viewpoint: The museum as a communications system and implications for museum education. Curator Mus J 11(1):33–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1968.tb00883.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cantatore E, Lasorella M, Fatiguso F (2020) Virtual reality to support technical knowledge in cultural heritage. The case study of cryptoporticus in the archaeological site of Egnatia (Italy). Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spatial Inf Sci 44:465–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Carrozzino M, Bergamasco M (2010) Beyond virtual museums: experiencing immersive virtual reality in real museums. J Cult Herit 11(4):452–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chin JP, Diehl VA, Norman KL (1988) Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human–computer interface. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems

  26. Cho V, Cheng TE, Lai WJ (2009) The role of perceived user-interface design in continued usage intention of self-paced e-learning tools. Comput Educ 53(2):216–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Choi H (2014) The conjugation method of augmented reality in museum exhibition. Int J Smart Home 8(1):217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Chung N, Han H, Joun Y (2015) Tourists’ intention to visit a destination: the role of augmented reality (AR) application for a heritage site. Comput Hum Behav 50:588–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Claudy MC, Peterson M, Pagell M (2016) The roles of sustainability orientation and market knowledge competence in new product development success. J Prod Innov Manag 33:72–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Clini P, Quattrini R, Frontoni E, Pierdicca R, Nespeca R (2017) Real/not real: pseudo-holography and augmented reality applications for cultural heritage. In: Handbook of research on emerging technologies for digital preservation and information modelling. IGI Global, Philadelphia, pp 201–227

  31. Cohen E (1985) The tourist guide: the origins, structure and dynamics of a role. Ann Tour Res 12(1):5–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(85)90037-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Comrey AL, Lee HB (2013) A first course in factor analysis. Psychology Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Cortana J (2017) The future of holograms in museums. Accessed from https://www.cortinaproductions.com/holograms-in-museums/. Accessed 15 Mar 2018

  34. Costello AB, Osborne JW (2005) Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval 10(7):1–9

    Google Scholar 

  35. Craig AB (2013) Augmented reality concepts. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos

    Google Scholar 

  36. Cultnat (2016) Participation in the Egyptian Museum’s celebration of its 114th anniversary. Accessed from http://www.cultnat.org/NewsDetails/350/Participation_in_the_Egyptian_Museum%E2%80%99s_Celebration_of_its_114th_Anniversary. Accessed 15 Apr 2018

  37. Damala A, Stojanovic N (2012) Tailoring the adaptive augmented reality (A2R) museum visit: identifying cultural heritage professionals’ motivations and needs. Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE International symposium on mixed and augmented reality-arts, media, and humanities (ISMAR-AMH)

  38. Damala A, Cubaud P, Bationo A, Houlier P, Marchal I (2008) Bridging the gap between the digital and the physical: design and evaluation of a mobile augmented reality guide for the museum visit. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts, Athens, Greece

  39. Davis FD (1985) A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  40. Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3):319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1992) Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. J Appl Soc Psychol 22(14):1111–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Dean D (2002) Museum exhibition: theory and practice. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  43. Doering ZD, Pekarik AJ (1996) Questioning the entrance narrative. J Mus Educ 21(3):20–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ducey AJ, Coovert MD (2016) Predicting tablet computer use: an extended technology acceptance model for physicians. Health Policy Technol 5(3):268–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Duffy C (1989) Museum visitors—a suitable case for treatment. Paper presented at the unpublished paper for the Museum Education Association of Australia conference

  46. Falk JH, Dierking LD (2016) The museum experience revisited. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  47. Fenu C, Pittarello F (2018) Svevo tour: the design and the experimentation of an augmented reality application for engaging visitors of a literary museum. Int J Hum Comput Stud 114:20–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Fevgas A, Fraggogiannis N, Tsompanopoulou P, Bozanis P (2014) The iMuse Virtual Museum: towards a cultural education platform. Paper presented at the IISA 2014, the 5th international conference on information, intelligence, systems and applications

  49. Fine EC, Speer JH (1985) Tour guide performances as sight sacralization. Ann Tour Res 12(1):73–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison Wessley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  51. Flavián C, Ibáñez-Sánchez S, Orús C (2019) The impact of virtual, augmented and mixed reality technologies on the customer experience. J Bus Res 100:547–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Goode L (2019) Microsoft’s HoloLens 2 puts a full-fledged computer on your face. Accessed from https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-hololens-2-headset/. Accessed 28 Feb 2019

  53. Goodwin C (2007) Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse Soc 18(1):53–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Gorini A, Gaggioli A, Riva G (2008) A second life for eHealth: prospects for the use of 3-D virtual worlds in clinical psychology. J Med Internet Res 10(3):e21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Gorman PJ, Meier AH, Krummel TM (2000) Computer-assisted training and learning in surgery. Comput Aided Surg 5(2):120–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gorsuch RL (1983) Factor analysis, 2nd edn. LEA, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  57. Guerra JP, Pinto MM, Beato C (2015) Virtual reality-shows a new vision for tourism and heritage. Eur Sci J 11(9):49–54

    Google Scholar 

  58. Hain V, Hajtmanek R (2019) Industrial heritage education and user tracking in virtual reality. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90679. Available from: https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/industrial-heritage-education-and-user-tracking-in-virtual-reality

  59. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Babin BJ, Black WC (2010) Multivariate data analysis: a global perspective, vol 7. Pearson, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  60. Hammady R (2019) Virtual guidance using mixed reality in historical places and museums. (PhD PhD), Staffordshire University, Staffordshire Repositry. Accessed from http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/5838/1/Thesis.pdf. Accessed 01 Jan 2020

  61. Haugstvedt A-C, Krogstie J (2012) Mobile augmented reality for cultural heritage: a technology acceptance study. Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR)

  62. Hayes AF (2012) PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [Whitepaper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf

  63. Hayes A (2013) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis a regression-based approach (Series Editor’s Notes by Little, DT). In: The Guilford Press, London

  64. Hayes AF (2017) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. Guilford Publications, New York

    Google Scholar 

  65. Hayes AF, Montoya AK, Rockwood NJ (2017) The analysis of mechanisms and their contingencies: PROCESS versus structural equation modeling. Australas Mark J (AMJ) 25(1):76–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Hockett P, Ingleby T (2016) Augmented reality with HoloLens: experiential architectures embedded in the real world. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.04281

  67. Hodge R, D’Souza W, Rivière GH (1979) The museum as a communicator: a semiotic analysis of the Western Australian Museum Aboriginal Gallery, Perth. Mus Int 31(4):251–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0033.1979.tb01899.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Holloway JC (1981) The guided tour a sociological approach. Ann Tour Res 8(3):377–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Hong J-C, Hwang M-Y, Hsu H-F, Wong W-T, Chen M-Y (2011) Applying the technology acceptance model in a study of the factors affecting usage of the Taiwan digital archives system. Comput Educ 57(3):2086–2094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Hooper-Greenhill E (1999) The educational role of the museum. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  71. Hooper-Greenhill E (2013) Museums and their visitors. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  72. Horn AL (1980) A comparative study of two methods of conducting docent tours in art museums. Curator Mus J 23(2):105–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Hughes K (1991) Tourist satisfaction: a guided “cultural” tour in North Queensland. Aust Psychol 26(3):166–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Hughes CE, Smith E, Stapleton C, Hughes DE (2004) Augmenting museum experiences with mixed reality. Paper presented at the Proceedings of KSCE 2004

  75. Hughes CE, Stapleton CB, Hughes DE, Smith EM (2005) Mixed reality in education, entertainment, and training. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 25(6):24–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Hurter C, McDuff D (2017) Cardiolens: remote physiological monitoring in a mixed reality environment. Paper presented at the ACM SIGGRAPH 2017 emerging technologies

  77. Jan D, Roque A, Leuski A, Morie J, Traum D (2009) A virtual tour guide for virtual worlds. Paper presented at the International workshop on intelligent virtual agents

  78. Joachims T, Freitag D, Mitchell T (1997) Webwatcher: a tour guide for the world wide web. Paper presented at the IJCAI (1)

  79. John B, Wickramasinghe N (2020) A review of mixed reality in Health Care. In: Wickramasinghe N, Bodendorf F (eds) Delivering superior health and wellness management with IoT and analytics. Springer, Berlin, pp 375–382

  80. Jung T, tom Dieck MC, Lee H, Chung N (2016) Effects of virtual reality and augmented reality on visitor experiences in museum. In: Jung T, tom Dieck MC, Lee H, Chung N (eds) Information and communication technologies in tourism 2016. Springer, Berlin, pp 621–635

  81. Karoulis A, Sylaiou S, White M (2006) Usability evaluation of a virtual museum interface. Informatica 17(3):363–380

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. Kateros S, Georgiou S, Papaefthymiou M, Papagiannakis G, Tsioumas M (2015) A comparison of gamified, immersive VR curation methods for enhanced presence and human-computer interaction in digital humanities. Int J Herit Digit Era 4(2):221–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Keil J, Pujol L, Roussou M, Engelke T, Schmitt M, Bockholt U, Eleftheratou S (2013) A digital look at physical museum exhibits: designing personalized stories with handheld augmented reality in museums. Paper presented at the Digital heritage international Congress (DigitalHeritage), 2013

  84. Kim S, Park E, Xu M (2020) Beyond the authentic taste: the tourist experience at a food museum restaurant. Tour Manag Perspect 36:100749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Knez EI, Wright AG (1970) The museum as a communications system: an assessment of Cameron’s viewpoint. Curator Mus J 13(3):204–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1970.tb00404.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Koenig-Lewis N, Marquet M, Palmer A, Zhao AL (2015) Enjoyment and social influence: predicting mobile payment adoption. Serv Ind J 35(10):537–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Kopp S, Gesellensetter L, Krämer NC, Wachsmuth I (2005) A conversational agent as museum guide—design and evaluation of a real-world application. Paper presented at the International workshop on intelligent virtual agents

  88. Kress BC, Cummings WJ (2017) Towards the ultimate mixed reality experience: HoloLens display architecture choices. Paper presented at the SID symposium digest of technical papers

  89. Lanir J, Kuflik T, Dim E, Wecker AJ, Stock O (2013) The influence of a location-aware mobile guide on museum visitors’ behavior. Interact Comput 25(6):443–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Lee H, Chung N, Jung T (2015) Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: comparison of South Korea and Ireland. In: Tussyadiah I, Inversini A (eds) Information and communication technologies in tourism 2015. Springer, Berlin, pp 477–491

  91. Lee K-F, Chen Y-L, Hsieh H-C, Chin K-Y (2017) Application of intuitive mixed reality interactive system to museum guide activity. Paper presented at the 2017 IEEE international conference on consumer electronics-Taiwan (ICCE-TW)

  92. Lee H, Jung TH, tom Dieck MC, Chung N (2020) Experiencing immersive virtual reality in museums. Inf Manag Sci 57(5):103229

    Google Scholar 

  93. Lepouras G (2004) Virtual museums for all: employing game technology for edutainment. Virtual Real J Virtual Real Soc 8(2):96–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-004-0141-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Leue M, Jung T (2014) A theoretical model of augmented reality acceptance. e-Rev Tour Res 5:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  95. Liarokapis F, Sylaiou S, Mountain DM (2008) Personalizing virtual and augmented reality for cultural heritage indoor and outdoor experiences. Paper presented at the VAST

  96. Liu I-F, Chen MC, Sun YS, Wible D, Kuo C-H (2010) Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Comput Educ 54(2):600–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Loizides F, El Kater A, Terlikas C, Lanitis A, Michael D (2014) Presenting cypriot cultural heritage in virtual reality: a user evaluation. Paper presented at the Euro-Mediterranean conference

  98. Luarn P, Lin H-H (2005) Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use mobile banking. Comput Hum Behav 21(6):873–891

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Madsen JB, Madsen CB (2015) Handheld visual representation of a castle chapel ruin. J Comput Cult Herit 9(1):1–18

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Magic Leap (2018) Magic Leap. Accessed from https://www.magicleap.com/. Accessed 10 Jan 2019

  101. Mancini M (2000) Conducting tours: a practical guide. Nelson Education, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  102. Microsoft (2015) Microsoft HoloLens. Accessed from https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens/buy. Accessed 08 Mar 2018

  103. Microsoft (2019) HoloLens 2 A new vision for computing. Accessed from https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens/hardware. Accessed 10 Mar 2019

  104. Mihelj M, Novak D, Beguš S (2014) Virtual reality technology and applications. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  105. Milgram P, Takemura H, Utsumi A, Kishino F (1995) Augmented reality: a class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In: Telemanipulator and telepresence technologies, vol 2351. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 282–292

  106. Miyashita T, Meier P, Tachikawa T, Orlic S, Eble T, Scholz V, Gapel A, Gerl O, Arnaudov S, Lieberknecht S (2008, 15–18 Sept. 2008) An augmented reality museum guide. Paper presented at the 7th IEEE/ACM international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, 2008. ISMAR 2008

  107. Munodawafa D (2008) Communication: concepts, practice and challenges. Health Educ Res 23(3):369–370. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyn024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Muñoz A, Martí A (2020) New storytelling for archaeological museums based on augmented reality glasses. In: Hageneuer S (ed) Communicating the past in the digital age. Ubiquity Press, London. https://doi.org/10.5334/bch.g

    Google Scholar 

  109. Ng Giap Weng E, Parhizkar B, Chai Hsiao Ping L, Habibi La Shkari L (2011) Augmented reality for museum artifacts visualization. Int J Comput Sci Inf Secur 9(5):174–185

  110. Owen R, Buhalis D, Pletinckx D (2005) Visitors’ evaluations of ICTs used in cultural heritage. Paper presented at the Vast

  111. Pietroszek K, Tyson A, Magalhaes FS, Barcenas CEM, Wand P (2019) Museum in your living room: recreating the peace corps experience in mixed reality. Paper presented at the 2019 IEEE Games, entertainment, media conference (GEM)

  112. Pollalis C, Fahnbulleh W, Tynes J, Shaer O (2017) HoloMuse: enhancing engagement with archaeological artifacts through gesture-based interaction with holograms. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the tenth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction

  113. Pollefeys M (2017) Second version of HoloLens HPU will incorporate AI coprocessor for implementing DNNs. Retrieved from: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/second-version-hololens-hpu-will-incorporate-ai-coprocessor-implementing-dnns/

  114. Pond KL (1993) The professional guide: dynamics of tour guiding. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York

    Google Scholar 

  115. Prasuethsut L (2016) Meta 2 first impressions: AR feels closer than ever. Accessed from https://www.wareable.com/ar/meta-2-review. Accessed 02 Apr 2017

  116. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods 40(3):879–891

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Pujol L (2004) Archaeology, museums and virtual reality. Revista digital de humanidades, UOC. http://www.uoc.edu/humfil/articles/eng/pujol0304/pujol0304.pdf

  118. Pujol L, Roussou M, Poulou S, Balet O, Vayanou M, Ioannidis Y (2012) Personalizing interactive digital storytelling in archaeological museums: the CHESS project. Paper presented at the 40th Annual conference of computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology. Amsterdam University Press

  119. Rahimian FP, Seyedzadeh S, Oliver S, Rodriguez S, Dawood N (2020) On-demand monitoring of construction projects through a game-like hybrid application of BIM and machine learning. Autom Constr 110:103012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Raptis GE, Fidas C, Avouris N (2017) Cultural heritage gaming: effects of human cognitive styles on players’ performance and visual behavior. Paper presented at the Adjunct publication of the 25th conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization

  121. Raptis GE, Fidas C, Avouris N (2018) Effects of mixed-reality on players’ behaviour and immersion in a cultural tourism game: a cognitive processing perspective. Int J Hum Comput Stud 114:69–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Rasimah CMY, Ahmad A, Zaman HB (2011) Evaluation of user acceptance of mixed reality technology. Australas J Educ Technol 27(8):1369–1387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Rauschnabel PA, Ro YK (2016) Augmented reality smart glasses: an investigation of technology acceptance drivers. Int J Technol Mark 11(2):123–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Rekimoto J, Ayatsuka Y (2000) CyberCode: designing augmented reality environments with visual tags. Paper presented at the Proceedings of DARE 2000 on Designing augmented reality environments, Elsinore, Denmark

  125. Rift O (2020) Oculus Rift. Accessed from https://www.staffs.ac.uk/news-archive/students-virtual-tutankhamen-tour-guide-brings-museum-to-life-tcm4296023.jsp. Accessed 21 Feb 2020

  126. Rosentraub MS, Joo M (2009) Tourism and economic development: which investments produce gains for regions? Tour Manag 30(5):759–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Roussou M, Katifori A, Pujol L, Vayanou M, Rennick-Egglestone SJ (2013) A life of their own: museum visitor personas penetrating the design lifecycle of a mobile experience. Paper presented at the CHI ‘13 Extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, Paris, France

  128. Rubino I, Xhembulla J, Martina A, Bottino A, Malnati G (2013) Musa: using indoor positioning and navigation to enhance cultural experiences in a museum. Sensors 13(12):17445–17471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Ryffel M, Zünd F, Aksoy Y, Marra A, Nitti M, Aydın TO, Sumner B (2017) AR museum: a mobile augmented reality application for interactive painting recoloring. ACM Trans Graph (TOG) 36(2):19

    Google Scholar 

  130. Rzayev R, Karaman G, Henze N, Schwind V (2019) Fostering virtual guide in exhibitions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 21st international conference on human–computer interaction with mobile devices and services

  131. Sampaio AZ, Martins OP (2014) The application of virtual reality technology in the construction of bridge: the cantilever and incremental launching methods. Autom Constr 37:58–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Schaper M-M, Santos M, Malinverni L, Berro JZ, Pares N (2018) Learning about the past through situatedness, embodied exploration and digital augmentation of cultural heritage sites. Int J Hum Comput Stud 114:36–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Schmalstieg D, Wagner D (2007) Experiences with handheld augmented reality. Paper presented at the 6th IEEE and ACM International symposium on mixed and augmented reality, 2007. ISMAR 2007

  134. Serubugo S, Skantárová D, Nielsen LK, Kraus M (2017) Comparison of wearable optical see-through and handheld devices as platform for an augmented reality museum guide. Paper presented at the VISIGRAPP (1: GRAPP)

  135. Shang D, Wu W (2017) Understanding mobile shopping consumers’ continuance intention. Ind Manag Data Syst 117(1):213–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Shneiderman B, Plaisant C (2010) Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human–computer interaction. Pearson Education India, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  137. Siebert JN, Ehrler F, Gervaix A, Haddad K, Lacroix L, Schrurs P, Manzano S (2017) Adherence to AHA guidelines when adapted for augmented reality glasses for assisted pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 19(5):e183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Sparacino F (2002) The museum wearable: real-time sensor-driven understanding of visitors’ interests for personalized visually-augmented museum experiences. In: Proceedings of museums and the web (MW2002)

  139. Sugiura A, Kitama T, Toyoura M, Mao X (2019) The use of augmented reality technology in medical specimen museum tours. Anat Sci Educ 12(5):561–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Sylaiou S, Mania K, Karoulis A, White M (2010) Exploring the relationship between presence and enjoyment in a virtual museum. Int J Hum Comput Stud 68(5):243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  141. Sylaiou S, Kasapakis V, Dzardanova E, Gavalas D (2018) Leveraging mixed reality technologies to enhance museum visitor experiences. Paper presented at the 2018 International conference on intelligent systems (IS)

  142. Sylaiou S, Kasapakis V, Dzardanova E, Gavalas D (2019) Assessment of virtual guides’ credibility in virtual museum environments. Paper presented at the International conference on augmented reality, virtual reality and computer graphics

  143. Tang YM, Au K, Lau HC, Ho GT, Wu C (2020) Evaluating the effectiveness of learning design with mixed reality (MR) in higher education. Virtual Real 24(4):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00427-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. Teo TS, Lim VK (1997) Usage patterns and perceptions of the internet: the gender gap. Equal Oppor Int 16(6/7):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. tom Dieck MC, Jung T, Han D-I, (2016) Mapping requirements for the wearable smart glasses augmented reality museum application. J Hosp Tour Technol 7(3):230–253

  146. Trunfio M, Campana S, Magnelli A (2020) Measuring the impact of functional and experiential mixed reality elements on a museum visit. Curr Issues Tour 23(16):1990–2008. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2019.1703914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Van Hage WR, Stash N, Wang Y, Aroyo L (2010) Finding your way through the rijksmuseum with an adaptive mobile museum guide. Paper presented at the Extended semantic web conference

  148. Vlahakis V, Karigiannis J, Tsotros M, Gounaris M, Almeida L, Stricker D, Ioannidis N (2001) Archeoguide: first results of an augmented reality, mobile computing system in cultural heritage sites. Virtual Real Archeol Cult Herit 9:584993–585015

    Google Scholar 

  149. Vlahakis V, Ioannidis N, Karigiannis J, Tsotros M, Gounaris M, Stricker D, Gleue T, Daehne P, Almeida L (2002) Archeoguide: an augmented reality guide for archaeological sites. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 22(5):52–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. Vo ML-H, Boettcher SE, Draschkow D (2019) Reading scenes: how scene grammar guides attention and aids perception in real-world environments. Curr Opin Psychol 29:205–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Wagner D (2007) Handheld augmented reality. Ph.D., Citeseer

  152. Wang N, Xia L (2019) Human–exhibition interaction (HEI) in designing exhibitions: a systematic literature review. Int J Hosp Manag 77:292–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  153. Warren T (2018) Acer’s new Windows mixed reality headset has a detachable modular design. Accessed from https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/29/17795120/acer-ojo-500-windows-mixed-reality-headset-features-price-release-date. Accessed 10 Jan 2018

  154. Weiler B, Black R (2015) Tour guiding research: insights, issues and implications, vol 62. Channel View Publications, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  155. Wojciechowski R, Cellary W (2013) Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Comput Educ 68:570–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  156. Wooldridge JM (2015) Introductory econometrics: a modern approach. Nelson Education, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  157. Xu Y, Stojanovic N, Stojanovic L, Cabrera A, Schuchert T (2012) An approach for using complex event processing for adaptive augmented reality in cultural heritage domain: experience report. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th ACM international conference on distributed event-based systems, Berlin, Germany

  158. Yalowitz SS, Bronnenkant K (2009) Timing and tracking: unlocking visitor behavior. Visit Stud 12(1):47–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Yilmaz RM (2016) Educational magic toys developed with augmented reality technology for early childhood education. Comput Hum Behav 54:240–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  160. Zhang HQ, Chow I (2004) Application of importance-performance model in tour guides’ performance: evidence from mainland Chinese outbound visitors in Hong Kong. Tour Manag 25(1):81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  161. Zuk T, Carpendale MST, Glanzman WD (2005) Visualizing temporal uncertainty in 3D virtual reconstructions. Paper presented at the VAST

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was constructed from a PhD thesis by the 1st author. We would like to thank the Egyptian museum in Cairo curators for their help and support. Also, we want to thank The Egyptian government for facilitating the experiment and getting all approvals requested.

Funding

This project was funded by Newton-Mosharafa scholarship which was managed by the British council in Egypt.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

This paper is constructed from my PhD thesis under title “Virtual Guidance using Mixed Reality in Historical Places and Museums” in 2019. The co-authors contributed as follows. MM is the PhD supervisor who actively contributed text and critical analysis of the work presented in this article. ZA-K is an expert in statistical analysis and he contributed by reviewing the PROCESS statistical method to demonstrate the quantitative results in a better form. CS is a computer programmer and he helped in the technical programing issues in the Mixed Reality system; in addition, he enhanced the clarity of discussion section of the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramy Hammady.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Consent for publication

This manuscript has not been published and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Ethics approval

The project was granted an ethics approval from Staffordshire university through an ethics committee as part of my PhD project in 2018. The ethics approval included revealing human figures who participated voluntarily in the study and signed the consent forms.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 12 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hammady, R., Ma, M., AL-Kalha, Z. et al. A framework for constructing and evaluating the role of MR as a holographic virtual guide in museums. Virtual Reality (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00497-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Mixed reality
  • Virtual guide
  • Museums
  • Holographic system
  • Microsoft HoloLens