Researching Knowledge Concerns in Virtual Historical Architecture

  • S. Münster
  • C. Kröber
  • H. Weller
  • N. Prechtel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10058)


3D reconstructions have always been an important medium for teaching, illustrating and researching historical facts and items, especially architecture. Virtual representation is often created by cross-disciplinary workgroups, addressing a wide and heterogeneous audience. The authors investigated knowledge-related phenomena in four stages, using qualitative and quantitative research methods. The first stage focuses on the scope and overall relevance of virtual architecture within the field of digital heritage, and the second investigates phenomena related to the creation of virtual architectural representations. A third stage examines how skills and competencies for creating virtual architectural representations evolve during a project and whether teaching facilitates their development. Finally, a fourth stage evaluates how to design virtual building representations to make them comprehensible to a lay audience.


Historic architecture Digital 3D reconstruction Cultural heritage Visual communication Knowledge representation Information sciences 



The Freiberger Dom educational project was funded by the Saxon Center for Higher Education in 2014 within the Learning in Transfer scheme. Research on Usability aspects was supported by Josefine Brödner and Katharina Hammel. The research activity described in this paper was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (no. 01UG1520).


  1. 1.
    Barceló, J.A.: Towards a True Automatic Archaeology: Integrating Technique and Theory. Universitätsbibliothek der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E., Converse, S.A.: Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In: Castellan Jr., N.J. (ed.) Individual and Group Decision Making: Current Issues, pp. 221–246. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arnheim, R.: Visual Thinking. Rütten & Loening, München (1969)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gooding, D.C.: Cognition, construction and culture. Visual theories in the sciences. J. Cogn. Cult. 4, 551–593 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Müller, M.G., Geise, S.: Grundlagen der visuellen Kommunikation: Theorieansätze und Analysemethoden. UVK Verlagsgesellschaft, Konstanz (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R.: Institutional ecology, ‘Translations’ and boundary objects. Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 1907–1939. Soc. Stud. Sci. 19(4), 387–420 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilson, R.A., Foglia, L.: Embodied cognition. In: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gerrig, R.J., Zimbardo, P.G.: Psychology and Life, 19th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Boston (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tversky, B.: Visuospatial reasoning. In: Holyoak, K., Morrison, R. (eds.) Handbook of Reasoning, pp. 209–249. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mahr, B.: Das Wissen im Modell. Technische Universität, Fakultät IV, Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stachowiak, H.: Allgemeine Modelltheorie. Springer, Wien (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Münster, S., Köhler, T., Hoppe, S.: 3D modeling technologies as tools for the reconstruction and visualization of historic items in humanities. A literature-based survey. In: Traviglia, A. (ed.) Across Space and Time, Papers from the 41st Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, Perth, 25–28 March 2013, pp. 430–441. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Repko, A.: Integrating interdisciplinarity. How the theories of common ground and cognitive interdisciplinarity are informing the debate on interdisciplinary integration. Issues Integr. Stud. 25, 1–31 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clark, H.H.: Using Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bromme, R.: Beyond one’s own perspective. The psychology of cognitive interdisciplinarity. In: Weingart, P., Stehr, N. (eds.) Practising Interdisciplinarity, pp. 115–133. University of Toronto Press, Toronto (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Galison, P.: Image & Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mintzberg, H., Westley, F.: Decision Making: It’s Not What You Think. In: Nutt, P.C., Wilson, D. (eds.) Handbook of Decision Making, pp. 73–82. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nelson, D.L.: Remembering pictures and words. Appearance, significance, and name. In: Cermak, L.S., Craik, F.I.M. (eds.) Levels of Processing in Human Memory, Mahwah, pp. 45–76 (1979)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bertin, J., Jensch, G.: Graphische Semiologie: Diagramme, Netze, Karten. de Gruyter, Berlin (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ch’ng, E.: Experiential archaeology: Is virtual time travel possible? J. Cult. Heritage 10(4), 458–470 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.culher.2009.02.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stock, W., Stock, M.: Handbook of Information Science. De Gruyter Saur, Berlin/Boston (2015)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mayring, P.: Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung 1(2), Art. 20 (2000)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Münster, S., Kröber, C., Weller, H., Prechtel, N.: Virtual reconstructions of historical architecture as media for visual knowledge representation. In: Ioannides, M., Magnenat-Thalmann, N., Papagiannakis, G. (eds.) Mixed Reality and Gamification for Cultural Heritage. LNCS. Springer, Cham (in print)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Münster, S.: The role of images for a virtual 3D reconstruction of historic artifacts. In: International Communication Association (ICA) Annual Meeting, 17–21 June 2013, London (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bryant, A., Charmaz, K.: The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory. SAGE, Thousand Oaks (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    De Francesco, G., D’Andrea, A.: Standards and guidelines for quality digital cultural three-dimensional content creation. In: Ioannides, M., Addison, A., Georgopoulos, A., Kalisperis, L. (eds.) Digital Heritage: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia, Project Papers, pp. 229–233. Archaeolingua, Budapest (2008)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hermon, S.: Reasoning in 3D. A critical appraisal of the role of 3D modelling and virtual reconstructions in archaeology. In: Frischer, B. (ed.) Beyond Illustration: 2D and 3D Digital Technologies as Tools for Discovery in Archaeology, vol. 1805, pp. 36–45. Tempus Reparatum, Oxford (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Münster, S.: Workflows and the role of images for a virtual 3D reconstruction of no longer extant historic objects. In: ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences (XXIV International CIPA Symposium), vol. II-5/W1, pp. 197–202 (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kröber, C., Münster, S.: Educational App creation for the Cathedral in Freiberg. In: Spector, J.M., Ifenthaler, D., Sampson, D.G., Isaias, P. (eds.) Competencies, Challenges, and Changes in Teaching Learning and Educational Leadership in the Digital Age. Springer, Switzerland (2016)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Collins, A., Brown, J.S., Newman, S.E.: Cognitive apprenticeship: teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics (Technical Report No. 403). University of Illinois, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hatcher, T., Hinton, B., Swartz, J.: Graduate student’s perceptions of university team-teaching. Coll. Student J. 30(3), 367–376 (1996)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wegner, D.M.: Transactive memory. A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In: Mullen, B., Goethals, G.R. (eds.) Theories of Group Behavior, pp. 185–208. Springer, New York (1986)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Argyris, C., Schön, D.A.: Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1978)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Knorr-Cetina, K.: Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences make Knowledge. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tsoukas, H.: Complex Knowledge. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Simon, H.A.: Theories of bounded rationality. In: McGuire, C.B., Radner, R. (eds.) Decision and Organization, pp. 161–176. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam (1972)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Paivio, A.: Dual coding theory and education (Draft). In: Pathways to Literacy Achievement for High Poverty Children. The University of Michigan School of Education, 29 September–1 October 2006Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gerth, B., Berndt, R., Havemann, S., Fellner, D.W.: 3D modeling for non-expert users with the castle construction kit v0.5. In: Mudge, M., Ryan, N., Scopigno, R. (eds.) 6th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage (VAST 2005), pp. 49–57. Eurographics Association, Pisa (2005)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sanders, D.H.: Virtual archaeology: yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In: Niccolucci, F., Hermon, S. (eds.) CAA 2004, Prato, 13–17 April 2004. p n.a.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fisher, C.R., Terras, M., Warwick, C.: Integrating new technologies into established systems: a case study from Roman Silchester. In: Computer Applications to Archaeology 2009, Williamsburg, Virginia, USA, 22–26 March 2009Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Flaten, A.: Ashes2Art: a pedagogical case study in digital humanities. In: CAA (2008)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ferrara, V., Macchia, A., Sapia, S.: Reusing cultural heritage digital resources in teaching. In: Digital Heritage International Congress (DigitalHeritage), 28 October–1 November 2013, pp. 409–412 (2013). doi: 10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2013.6744792
  43. 43.
    Gicquel, P.Y., Lenne, D., Moulin, C.: Design and use of CALM: an ubiquitous environment for mobile learning during Museum visit. In: Digital Heritage International Congress (DigitalHeritage), 28 October–1 November 2013, pp. 645–652 (2013). doi: 10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2013.6744831
  44. 44.
    Sahle, P.: Auf dem Weg zu einem Kern- und Referenzcurriculum der Digital Humanities. Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen (2013)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Liu, A.: Digital humanities and academic change. Engl. Lang. Notes 47, 17–35 (2009). Special Issue on Experimental Language EducationGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sprünker, J.: Educació patrimonial mitjançant recursos educatius en línia amb contingut de patrimoni cultural i xarxes d’aprenentatge, Ph.D. thesis, Barcelona (2011)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sprünker, J.: Making on-line cultural heritage visible for educational proposes. In: Digital Heritage International Congress (DigitalHeritage), 28 October–1 November 2013, pp. 405–408 (2013). doi: 10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2013.6744791
  48. 48.
    Torn, J.L.: The virtual cityscapes of rock star games. In: International Communication Association (ICA) Annual Meeting, London, 17–21 June 2013Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Krug, S.: Don’t Make Me Think! A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, 2nd edn. New Riders Pub, Berkeley (2006)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rubin, J., Chisnell, D.: Handbook of Usability TestingTesting, Second Edition: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct. Wiley Publishing Inc., Indianapolis (2008)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Weller, H.: Generalisierte 3D-Gebäuderepräsentation im Spannungsfeld von Primärinformation, Modellierungsaufwand und Wiedererkennbarkeit am Beispiel eines 3D-Stadtmodells von Dresdens um 1940 (Diploma thesis). TU Dresden, Dresden (2013)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pomaska, G.: Web-Visualisierung mit Open Source - Vom CAD-Modell zur Real-Time-Animation. Herbert Wichmann Verlag, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yaneva, A.: Scaling up and down. extraction trials in architectural design. Soc. Stud. Sci. 35(6), 867–894 (2005). doi: 10.1177/0306312705053053 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Prechtel, N., Münster, S.: Cultural heritage in a spatial context – towards an integrative, interoperable, and participatory data and information management. In: Münster, S., Pfarr-Harfst, M., Kuroczyński, P., Ioannides, M. (eds.) How to Manage Data and Knowledge Related to Interpretative Digital 3D Reconstructions of Cultural Heritage? Springer, Cham (in print)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Danielová, M.: Visual reconstruction of archaeological data of the Sanctuary of Diana at Nemi, Italy (Master thesis), Munich (2014)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Lengyel, D., Toulouse, C.: Darstellung von unscharfem Wissen in der Rekonstruktion historischer Bauten. In: Heine, K., Rheidt, K., Henze, F., Riedel, A. (eds.) Von Handaufmaß bis High Tech III. 3D in der historischen Bauforschung. Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Darmstadt, pp. 182–186 (2011)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Apollonio, F.I., Gaiani, M., Sun, Z.: 3D modeling and data enrichment in digital reconstruction of architectural heritage. In: International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XXIV International CIPA Symposium, 2–6 September 2013, Strasbourg, vol. XL-5/W2, pp. 43–48 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Münster
    • 1
  • C. Kröber
    • 1
  • H. Weller
    • 2
  • N. Prechtel
    • 2
  1. 1.Media CenterTU DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Institute for CartographyTU DresdenDresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations