Enhancing Digital Heritage Archives Using Gamified Annotations

Maina, Job King'Ori; Suleman, Hussein

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-27974-9_17

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, a considerable number of usability studies (13.2%, 7/53) are dealing only with user satisfaction from system use, which is referred in this paper as perceived usability. Perceived usability may be investigated with questionnaires and post-test interviews, usually after non-task-oriented use of the system; like for example in the work of Maina and Suleman (2015) who evaluate types of annotations (gamified or not) in digital collections of cultural heritage with questionnaires after system use.…”

Section: Methods Of Empirical Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notably, no system reported any connection to well-known CH repositories like the Google Arts and Culture Project 1 and Europeana 2 . However, there were a couple of systems that made use of other online collections like the work of Maina and Suleman (2015) who examined annotations of content of the digital Bleek and Lloyd collection 3 .…”

Section: Methods Of Empirical Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few systems (7.5% or 4/53) allow the user to generate content online, like tags (Arends et al 2012) or annotations (Maina and Suleman, 2015).…”

Section: Main Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

“…of publications Anagnostakis et al 2016;Andreoli et al 2016;Arends et al 2012;Bellotti et al 2012;Bellucci et al 2015;Callaway et al 2014;Chalvatzaras et al 2014;Coenen et al 2013;Correia et al 2014;Creed et al 2013;Di Franco et al 2015;. Diaz et al 2014;Duguleana et al 2016;Falvo, 2015;Floch and Jiang 2015;Froschauer et al 2013;Georgiadi et al 2016;Graf et al 2015;Han et al 2014;Huang et al 2013;Ijaz et al 2016;Jylhä et al 2015; Kassapakis et al 2016;Katsouri et al 2015;Kennedy et al 2013;Koutsabasis and Vosinakis, 2016;Loizides et al 2014;Lorenzini et al 2015; Madsen and Madsen, 2015;Maina and Suleman, 2015;Marshall et al 2016;Marton et al 2014;McCaffery et al 2015;O'Keefe and Benyon, 2015;O'Sullivan et al 2014;Panayiotou and Lanitis, 2016;Pietroni and Adami, 2014;Rennick-Egglestone et al 2016;Reunanen et a;2015;Rizvić and Skalonjić 2015; Rojas et al 2015;Rubino et al 2015;Shih et al 2015;…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Empirical Evaluations of Interactive Systems in Cultural Heritage

Koutsabasis

2017

International Journal of Computational Methods in Heritage Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasing number of interactive systems aim to enhance the user experience (UX) of visitors at museums, archaeological places and cultural sites. This paper presents a review of empirical evaluations of interactive systems in cultural heritage (CH) based on a systematically selected sample of 53 publications from 2012-2016. Empirical evaluations examine the degree an interactive system satisfies user goals and expectations and are inherently complex activities that require careful planning and selection of methods. The review reports on (a) interactive systems of CH in terms of: purpose, technology, cultural content and location of interaction and (b) methods of empirical evaluation in terms of: dimensions of UX, general approach, data collection and participants. The paper provides discussion, critique and outlook on issues including: extending the evaluation dimensions towards the cultural value and the essence of interactivity; placing more consideration on CH professionals; identifying new evaluation methods that balance qualitative results to evidence-based approaches.

show abstract

Section: Methods Of Empirical Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methods Of Empirical Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few systems (7.5% or 4/53) allow the user to generate content online, like tags (Arends et al 2012) or annotations (Maina and Suleman, 2015).…”

Section: Main Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Empirical Evaluations of Interactive Systems in Cultural Heritage

Koutsabasis

2017

International Journal of Computational Methods in Heritage Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A thorough survey through focus groups provides insights into research abilities, habits, needs and motivation, that is research questions and what researchers find useful (Krueger and Casey, 2014). Scholars emphasize the importance of adhering to scientific standards, thorough documentation through the supply of metadata and the potential for collaboration and interdisciplinary work (Bentkowska-Kafel et al, 2012;Maina and Suleman, 2015). Using focus groups is a method from marketing research and can easily be adapted to researchers proposes.…”

Section: Creating Targeted Tools For Image Repositoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban History in 4 Dimensions – Supporting Research and Education

Münster

Friedrichs

Kröber

et al. 2017

Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The new research group on the four-dimensional research and communication of urban history (Urban History 4D) aims to investigate and develop methods and technologies to access extensive repositories of historical media and their contextual information in a spatial model, with an additional temporal component. This will make content accessible to different target groups, researchers and the public, via a 4D browser. A location-dependent augmented-reality representation can be used as an information base, research tool, and means of communicating historical knowledge. The data resources for this research include extensive holdings of historical photographs of Dresden, which have documented the city over the decades, and digitized map collections from the Deutsche Fotothek (German photographic collection) platform. These will lay the foundation for a prototype model which will give users a virtual experience of historic parts of Dresden.

show abstract