reconstructed Villa in augustan age is a stage for storytelling where ancient characters are the leading actors who dialogue with the visitor. These characters are ...
LIVIA'S VILLA RELOADED VIRTUAL MUSEUM: USER EXPERIENCE EVALUATION Eva Pietroni1, Alfonsina Pagano1, Marco Amadei2, Federica Galiffa3 CNR ITABC, Rome, ITALY Università degli Studi Sassari, Sassari, ITALY 3 Università La Sapienza, Rome, ITALY 1
2
Abstract While experimentations in digital cultural heritage continue the run to the digital storytelling blending and the fusion with latest advanced technologies, the need for evaluations of such 3D installations is highly felt. The case study we present in this paper stands between a research and educational project, where the Livia’s Villa at Prima Porta, at the IX mile of ancient via Flaminia, in the north of Rome, has been reconstructed in 3D and told from different points of view, giving birth to a permanent installation located in a dedicated and secluded room at the National Roman Museum - Diocletian Baths since the begin of 2014. In this context of fruition, where the 3D application stands as a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), where behaviours and learning play the major roles, a massive evaluation was carried out in the summer of 2015, on a sample of 125 global participants. Results made clear that the attractiveness of a 3D interactive environment into an archaeological museum is crucial. Also the natural interaction modality and the freedom required by the system, made the user experience involving, intuitive and indeed natural - overcoming the common idea of technology as barrier towards learning units of culture. Keywords: Graphic User Interfaces (GUIs), User Experience (UX) evaluation, Virtual Learning Environments (VLE), 3D Applications, Links between Education and Research.
1
INTRODUCTION
If we deal with 3D applications for the Virtual Cultural Heritage domain, with communicative purposes, we cannot avoid talking about public experience, first person interaction, subjective feelings together with contextual fruition and contents display. All these aspects influence the sense of affection toward the cultural item, generating in the observer/ user the creation of (a) an emotional living memory and (b) a lived experience. Both involve the user’s mind in the elaboration of the event, its transformation into something significant in order to obtain a “new” piece of knowledge or, better, of memory. This process of meaning-making, made of predetermined steps and timing, is fundamental when we face Virtual Museums projects (www.v-must.net definition), especially the ones who foresee advanced technologies employed not only to simply access cultural information but with the purpose of leaving a learning and emotional experience in the user’s life. In semiotics, this process of “significance” is the act of producing the sign as an essential unit of meaning [14]. It is thus included in a time period where the user/observer gives meaning to objects while a situation is happening around him. It is indeed here, that Virtual Museum projects need to well characterize their contents while pushing at the best the G.U.I. and storytelling to let the cognitive processes to take place spontaneously, easily and with permanent effects.
The process of significance starts when emotions rise. This is the concept behind Nemech project, which studies museums as emotional bodies (http://nemech.unifi.it/portfolio-posts/musei-emotivi/). The recent philosophical debate on mind’s mechanisms [5], [13] sees perception, interpretation, consciousness, and knowledge as an unique apparatus, bringing back to life the concept of the individual nature of certain mental states that, as subjective and personal, remain fundamental in the human perceptual process. Psychologists, neuroscientists and philosophers have recently put in evidence the role of emotions in creative processes and intuitive human knowledge: the knowledge and fruition of something always requires the activation of an emotion. Emotions can motivate understanding, conceptual appropriation, self-identification, contributing to higher cognitive process of learning [9]. Therefore, the cognitive value that emotions have make us say that all the subjective experiences of Virtual Cultural Heritage are a primary source of knowledge. They characterize, at any level, the learning moment - acting as the fuel which starts up the car.
1
Hence 3D applications need to care about the assumption of the subjective value of making experience, creating a fertile context of fruition (inside the museum) and becoming Virtual Learning Environments (VLE). The latter have to be obviously inclusive (embracing as wide as possible the audience), involving and efficaciously structured, guided and including free activities/contents, in order to permit users to have an optimal situation of potential learning. But how to understand if the applications that developers and designers produced are functional to user’s expectations or capabilities? Does the user’s experience of such 3D products have any impact on his Culture? Evaluating the user experience, observing them or simply listening to the audience’s voice, is thus crucial (UX) [2]. The museums, and the virtual museums as well, increasingly need feedback from their direct interlocutors, in order to evolve a path of knowledge acquisition and cultural enrichment cut on their endusers, so to ensure their emotional involvement, the understanding of the content and the desire to return again. The case study we present in this paper stands between a research and an educational project, where the Livia’s Villa at Prima Porta, close to Rome, has been reconstructed in 3D and told from different points of view.
2
LIVIA'S VILLA RELOADED: A PERFORMATIVE SPACE
Livia's villa is a famous suburban roman villa owned by Livia Drusilla and her family since the late republican age. It is located on a hill near Prima Porta, at the IX mile of via Flaminia, in a dominating position along this important roman consular road and near the Tiber river. The archaeological remains have been digitally documented in 3D at high resolution and the villa has been virtually represented (today-observable archaeological landscape) [10]; beside, a 3D reconstruction has been proposed showing how it could have been in roman times (potential ancient landscape). Starting from this dataset, an innovative single user and gesture-based VR application has been realized, developed in Unity3D and using Kinect sensor for motion capture. It is intended to involve visitors in a multi-sensorial and emotional experience where perceptive aspects and storytelling play a fundamental role. Natural interaction pushes the visitors’ active participation, especially young people, used to game experiences, but also elders as the application does not require any technological skill. As no technological nor symbolic/linguistic barrier is supposed to exist between the artificial and the real space, the user feels spatially embodied in the system. The space of the installation becomes a “performative space” where the user is the main protagonist. The content and the interface have been already described in detail in occasion of the Digital Heritage 2015 Conference [3]. In the application we try to multiply the communicative registers in order to involve the public both at a conceptual and emotional levels. We explain the villa, its history and its architecture but also the life of the people living inside. The actual Livia's villa has an educative approach: contents are focused on the explanation of the site, its chronology, its topography, the functions of the different areas and rooms, the sources and the methodological approach followed in the reconstruction. On the contrary, the reconstructed Villa in augustan age is a stage for storytelling where ancient characters are the leading actors who dialogue with the visitor. These characters are real actors shot in front of a green screen and then integrated in the 3D scenarios. Because of the several rooms and corridors in the reconstructed villa, that make the space’s navigation very complex and articulated, we decided to guide visitors along an ideal path rather than to let them explore with total freedom - with the risk to make them lost or walking around for a too long time. For this reason the user follows a real time guided tour along a predefined path. In every moment during this path he can stop, look all around, access short information while, in specific points, narratives. The different functions are activated by three hotspots on the floor, among which the user is required to move: 1) hotspot "Menu", 2) hotspot "Go Forward", 3) hotspot "Stop and Rotate". The hotspot interface is doubled: it is indicated on the floor and also digitally, on the screen interface, where the user's position is visualized as a blue skeleton, moving among the hotspots. In this way, the visitor can immediately recognise his position and understand where he has to go (Fig.1) .
2
Fig. 1 Design interface of how the system works.
Fig. 2 3D scene in the application with icons.
In the top left of the screen some poses appear helping the user to understand which gestures are required to look around for himself in every direction. Basically the user has to point with his left arm the direction he wants to look at, and this requires 4 simple gestures in total (Fig. 2) . The room in which Livia’s Villa installation is located, is composed by a central interactive area, where one active user at a time can enter and interact, and an area for the public - of about 20 individuals - that can sit in a dark and intimate atmosphere. They can alternate in every moment during the experience: the Kinect sensor in fact immediately recognizes the user without need of calibration. In order to support the public, a panel and a short video tutorial have been located close to the interactive space, suggesting the main instructions to make the system work.
3
USER EXPERIENCE EVALUATION
User Experience (UX) studies are useful to understand how much individuals find value in what they are using, playing with, experiencing. In order to be perceived as a meaningful “moment”, a Virtual Museum application must be credible (well comparable with real life and background experience), desirable (images and other design elements are used to evoke emotion and appreciation), useful (content should be original and fulfil a real need) and usable [1], [7], [4]. Likewise, users have the chance to immerse themselves into a context of informal learning, where cognitive and sensory processes (i.e. attention, memorization, pattern recognition, enjoyment, performance, embodiment, emotional involvement etc.) take place [8] [12]. This research wanted indeed to examine such aspects according to Livia’s Villa Reloaded project, especially (a) the attractiveness of the 3D application inside the archaeological museum of Diocletian’s Thermal Baths, (b) the educational potential of the contents, (c) the consistency of individual’s participation once in front of the technology. A separated section of the study concerned the comprehensibility of the G.U.I. and the system’s usability, so to test developers’ choices and the public handling. The UX evaluation was quantitative-alike, taking note of user’s length of stay, system’s usability and type of fruition (active vs. passive users), but also qualitative-alike, by direct feedback, open questions and driven-scenario sessions. Specifically about the educational potential, it was examined by a likert scale, true-or-false questions and open questions. Finally, latest questions related to users’ identity and technological alphabetisation [11].
3.1
EVALUATIVE STRATEGY
Sensitive oral (and spontaneous) information provided by users are very useful to start reflecting on efficiency, efficacy and reliability of 3D applications inside museums; likewise, observations and taskdriven interviews allow us to go beyond, deepening understanding, feelings and experiential mechanisms.
For the Livia’s Villa Reloaded project the analysis was carried on during the summer of 2015 using three different techniques: ● Observation (made by external operator). It is one of the most used strategies at the beginning of each evaluation activity within the museum, [2].
3
●
Questionnaires. 37 questions were addressed to active users, 34 questions to passive spectators. The questionnaires are essential to profile and probe the background knowledge of each user [6]. They are anonymous and organized according to their final target, which has an influence on the choice of questions, modulation of sentences, level of language; ● Driven-scenario. It is a particular type of interview, where individuals are asked to perform specific tasks and their level of performance is then evaluated. The sequence of questions to be followed by the operator is predetermined and based on a growing level of difficulty - either on the usability or content recognition. Driven scenarios are very useful to understand if the user has the control of the system. Users were divided in two groups: active users, those who experienced the application in first person (performers); and passive users, who watched the performance from the seats behind the interactive area. We collected a total of 125 questionnaires, 63 of active users and 62 of passive ones. 38 of the active users were asked to complete a driven-scenario too. The observations were globally 104, 59 of to active users and 45 of passive ones. Such kind of multi-partitioned analysis was chosen, given the flexibility of the three methods to be put in comparison.In detail, the results of overlapping questions would have reinforced the authors’ assumptions or confuted them.
3.2
EVALUATION PROCEDURE
Observations were conducted by the operator, in a very discrete way having at his disposal a predetermined table to fill in, regarding behaviours and attitudes. The observation was made once the users entered the room (1), either if they would have interacted with the application or if they only would have watched it passively. Once the user entered the interactive area he was considered active user (2), having at his disposal the time to play with the installation; when he finished the performative experience he was asked to compile the active questionnaire (3); the same goes for the passive users, once the experience they were attending to finish, they were asked to fill in the passive questionnaire (4). The driven-scenario was proposed to random active users, after few minutes they were performing in the interactive area (5), without being influenced by their abilities, age or any other condition, in order to collect an heterogeneous sample. During the driven-scenario the operator remained neutral, without intervening with suggestions about gestures or comments.
4
RESULTS
The users interviewed during the research were mostly women 60%), between 40 and 60 years old (44%), a lower percentage was between 25 and 40 years (31%); the younger were much less (14%) as those ones over 60 (11%). Almost all respondents came from Europe and especially from Italy. The fact that both the questionnaire and the application were only in Italian and in English, discouraged many users not Italian or English speaking. Livia’s Villa Reloaded, after months of evaluation, resulted to be very well appreciated by 85% of the interviewed users who said that they would have returned to the museum or suggested the visit to friends or relatives. They were indeed moved towards discovering the real place reconstructed in the 3D application (74% of individuals from global questionnaires). 13% of active users versus 6% of passive ones affirmed to have already visited the real archaeological site. Also the length of stay in the application’s area is relevant: we observed and registered from 10 up to 20 minutes of interaction for each user (60% of observed individuals). Specifically, 74% of users between 20 and 40 years old, mostly women (21 female versus 8 male), spent such a long time; it follows people between 40 and 60 years old (again female wins with 13 versus 9 male) always from 10 to 20 minutes. That is promising, given the complexity and the wideness of the National Roman Museum and the relevance of its collections; likewise, if we consider the position of such 3D installation, that stands in a dark and secluded room, not well advertised inside the Museum and not publicized outside it. Storytelling mixed with cinema solutions (like real actors included in the 3D reconstructed scenarios) and dramatization were advised to be one of the main elements of attraction (49% of individuals from global questionnaires). Issues related to (a) the usability of the system and (b) the responsiveness of design were highlighted: out of global questionnaires resulted that 63% of users affirmed to have visited the 3D villa with difficulties at the beginning but then they succeeded, while the 21% explained to have been forced to focus on commands rather than on narrative and visual contents. Moreover, the interpretation of the virtual guide in
4
the application - which suggests users what to do and how to perform the exact gestures - was recognized by 75% of global users.
4.1
EXPERIENCING THE PHYSICAL SPACE OF THE INSTALLATION
Few accessories are present in the Livia's Villa Reloaded room: 1) panels at the entrance of the room and, inside, at the two sides of the interactive area, shortly explaining how to use the application; 2) a video tutorial showing how to play with the 3D application. It was proved the poor visibility of such panels and video, which were noticed by very few users (only 30% of the global questionnaires): specifically about the posters, almost no one put an eye on the one located in front of the opening curtains of the room, before entering. Also the posters inside the room are not read or noticed at all. The first consideration was that to overcome such visibility issue, which could make easier for the public to interact with the 3D Fig. 3 Livia's Villa set up at the Roman National Museum, application, it would be convenient to movewith indication of red lights on the floor, panels and all the panels in a better condition ofinformative video, and the interactive area. fruition, in a space closer to the public, where they can read them more easily. After a deeper analyses and comparisons with other case studies, what came out is that, given the powerful attraction of multimedia contents, no one is interested in reading panels, independently from their position and they are automatically skipped. Regarding the video, it is quite visible because the monitor is close to the interactive area, however people usually prefers to have a direct approach with the application, learning by doing, rather than switching to a mediate the experience given by the video-tutorial. Maybe an efficient solution could be to place the monitor at the centre of the room, closer to the active user, also to ensure a rapid check of the gestures to be performed while interacting with the 3D application.
4.2
EXPERIENCING THE VIRTUAL MUSEUM
4.2.1 General appreciation The room where the 3D application is located, is proved to be ideal for the users’ experience because it is a separate area from the museum tour. It grants the concentration and the perfect condition for the enjoyment of the application’s content. Most of the users, coming into the room, were clearly attracted by the interactive area (63% of individuals out of observations) and by the dark environment (from users’ comments), totally different from the other museum sections along the visit paths. 35% of global observed users conducted the interaction alone without any external help even if 26% wished to have explanations by assistant or a video-guide in the 3D application (20%); only 17% used panels and video present in the room to be guided during the navigation (Fig.4). Fig. 4 Graphic representing the percentage of Nevertheless, operators observed also that 52% of the users answering to the use of the application. active users were at the very beginning seated on the
5
chairs, waiting something to happen on the main screen. At the question “Why didn’t you not interact with the application?”, 55% of users replied that they wished to use the application but there was already someone else testing it; 19% admitted to be shy and 18% said that was not clear what to do. Specifically, users of 40-60 and more than 60 years old, were waiting for the interactive area to be free (59% and 87% of users), only 22% (40-60) and 13% (+60) admitted to have confusion in what to do; for younger, instead, together with 20-40 years old group, the situation is almost homogeneous among the answers. At this stage, operators theoretically divided the observed users into two categories: the ones that remained seated - passive users (43%) - and the ones that explored the 3D scenes - active users (56%). Interviewed individuals were not all observed (104 observed users versus 125 interviewed). Only a small group underwent to a more detailed evaluation with the driven-scenario (38 users). Of active users, 64% immediately understood how to interact with the application, followed by 19% which needed a couple of minutes to be in confidence with the system, while only 2% did not get what to do. 15% succeeded by with the help of the operator. 4.2.2 Usability About usability, results said that (a) graphic interface and (b) navigability of the system turned to be easy to understand and interact with, despite some initial difficulties. These data were collected both through questionnaires and driven-scenario, so the same actions were observed by operator and then performers were asked to rate the same elements by themselves. When asked about the recognition of interface elements, 77% of global users in the questionnaires admitted to have seen and understood the figure on the top left side of the screen, showing the possible gestures to perform, in order to interact with the system. 22%, instead, did not recognized it even if in the direct question “Which is the function of the figure?”, the 75% of the global users assigned the correct answer (“Showing the possible gestures I have at disposal to look around”). The three red lights positioned on the floor in the interactive area were understood by 36% of global users who immediately went onto them to activate the different interaction modes, while 30% took a while to understand how they worked and 29% needed external support by the operator to understand what to do. In parallel, in the questionnaires, 69% of global users said to have understood the function of the lights but after a while. The blue skeleton, mirroring the user’s movements, was recognized by 39% of individuals but after a while (from observations), while 29% immediately grabbed it and 22% was disappointing and did not succeeded in it. The 10% had been helped by operators (Fig.5). Regarding the three icon shapes in the bottom left side of the screen, questionnaires said that for 66% of individuals the function was clear but after a while, followed by 20% whom immediately was clear and 13% who did not Fig. 5 Detail of the 3D catch anything about it: 85% answered correctly to the direct question The function interface icons. of the icons are…” (“Activate the exploration modalities”). In order to investigate if the active users had the full control of the system, the operator asked them to perform specific tasks (driven-scenario). In practise, users’ main goal was to reach interested places in the 3D exploration, both in today archaeological landscape and its past reconstruction: they were asked to use the main menu to select the scenario; once inside they had to fly or walk into the 3D scene, then stop and use the gestures suggested by the blue figure to look around the scene. Once they had made these gestures, they needed to return to flight/walk icon to continue the exploration. Once performed all the actions, completing the sequence, they were asked to express a comment/vote on how they had felt in dealing with each single task. It was pointed out that, during the driven-scenario, the use of the body’s movements (not understood only by 2% of users) and, in particular, the ones referable to arms, are clearly understood by the users, after a short period of time (19% of users affirmed so) or even immediately (64%). It was further noticed that audience in the room often suggested what to do. In general, throughout driven-scenarios we noticed that performers seemed to gain more and more experience while visiting the various rooms of the villa and, at the same time, losing the embarrassment and probably the frustration felt in the early stages of the interaction. Between the first and the second tasks a general improvement was registered by the operator, in the understanding of the gestural indications to be accomplished (10% of value’s improvement between the first test and the second one) and the positioning in relation to icons and hotspots on the ground (again improvement of 13%). The comments of users revealed, for the first task, a common feeling of no confidence in performing certain gestures or failing in controlling the actions; likewise, in the second task, almost all users claimed to feel
6
better in doing the gestures because after the first test they understood what to do, thus moving the body in a satisfactory way. The increase of usability according to the time of use is also confirmed by direct questions asked to the users (questionnaires), that found (a) the system functions and the menu to be clear (48% said to understand it immediately, 43% find it easy to use, but not immediately), and (b) the exploration mode to be satisfactory by 43% of respondents, with 41% who would even liked a totally free tour, instead of a guided path. The figure 6 shows performers to be able to manage the application’s gestures, even though 63% said to have initial difficulties. During the 3D exploration, users not very frequently saw the two introductory videos on Livia’s Villa and Via Flaminia (16% of global questionnaires); nevertheless, they watched the two interactive sections almost every time they approached the interactive area. This means that interactive VR scenarios are preferred to the movies they are perceived innovative and engaging.
Fig. 6 Graphic representing the percentage of users answering about their movements.
Fig. 7 Graphic representing the percentage of users answering to cultural questions.
4.2.3 Educational potential From an educational point of view, we tried to investigate more on the proposed contents in order to understand if the 3D application is eligible to address historical and archaeological units of information to users in a informal learning environment. 8 questions in form of a challenge were proposed to the audience. They were based on the initial videos and on the characters’ stories in the reconstructed villa. Such questions were right or wrong, responding with a TRUE / FALSE / DON’T KNOW. Generally, a large percentage of global users avoided the responses (36% of evasion) (Fig. 7): this is explainable by saying that questions were based on all the contents of the application which not everyone had the possibility or the time to seen in their entirety or probably because users were too tired and not very inclined to answer questions requiring complex remembering or reasoning. Anyway, the few answers provided were mostly right (25% of global users), without differences between active and passive users - even if less concentration was expected by active users because they needed to control the system, thus not paying much attention at the content. This aspect was indeed rejected. 4.2.4 Contents The most liked scenario, as show figures 8 and 9, is the reconstructed villa during the Augustan age (48% of global users, with no significant difference between active and passive users): the choice can probably be related to a preference of the performers for the storytelling led by actors to enter in the virtual environment, with no significant difference between active and passive users. It follows the flight scenario (24%) dealing with more didactic contents. The most appreciated contents were the characters living in the reconstructed villa, telling users about the daily life during the Augustan age (49% of global users) (Figs. 10 and 11). The decision to include real actors in the 3D reconstructed scenes (green screen technique) that interrupted the 3D exploration was well seen by users: nearly a half of them preferred such narration to the more classical documentary style. It follows 31% who preferred educational videos
7
in the current villa; 10% of not interested people and 10% did not answered. For the target groups of 0-20 and over 60, the most voted contents were the educational videos (respectively 46% and 54%), while for the 20-40 and 40-60 the storytelling led by real actors succeeded at the best (with a percentage of 57% and 54%).
Fig. 8 3D scene of the reconstructed villa with informative video panel. Fig. 9 Graphic representing the percentage of users answering to their most favourite scene of the application. Audio and video contents (each one lasting between 1,5 and 2,5 minutes) were considered of good qualities and of the right length (60% of global users), followed by 26% who admitted the explanatory videos to be too long, while 7% said them to be too short and wished to have more information. Users wished to come back to visit again the Livia’s Villa multimedia room and admitted to want to suggest the virtual tour to others (85% of global users); 94% of them considered such kind of 3D application to be useful in museums. Open comments of participants were in general confirming that this type of application helps in understanding contents, improving and stimulating the interest towards the history of the depicted place. That seems to have effect also in the real life: 74% of users, indeed, said they want to visit the archaeological site, only 6% instead told that the multimedia experience was sufficient. The graphics and the overall atmosphere were the most voted items up to 60% of global users.
Fig. 10 3D reconstructed Livia's villa with real actor as Augustus.
Fig.11 Graphic representing the percentage of users answering to their favourite content of the application.
8
5
DISCUSSION
Strength points of Livia’s Villa Reloaded pertain the graphic interface (GUI), the user experience (UX) and the overall appreciation. About the G.U.I. for sure the visibility of icons on the floor is optimum, helping users to understand where to position themselves; the majority of them entered indeed the interactive area covering exactly the red icons illuminated. In general, lots of interface elements, especially in the screen, have been noticed like the blue skeleton, the red circles under the skeleton - a low percentage of users who did not understand the GUI was because of technical issues (many hours of Kinect activity). Likewise, UX revealed that 55% of users did not interact with the application because it was already occupied by others - so this tell us that interaction was something which rose curiosity into the audience rather than scare them; only 19% of them said to avoid the interaction because of shyness, so personal reasons, and 25% of them because did not understand what to do. Nevertheless, interaction with Kinect was pretty much appreciated by 64% of users and the intention of developers of creating a predefined guided path in order to mostly benefit from the virtual visit was accommodated by 43% of users - while the 41% preferred to have a free exploration. These data make us understand the importance for the users to be assisted and supported by the museum personnel in order to rapidly improve their experience with the system. Despite the developers’ effort to make the interface self-explaining, interaction always poses some problems for part of the public: interactive installation should not be left alone. Moreover, about the driven-scenario, the majority of users admitted to have performed better during the second task, so highlighting the importance of the making exercise and the chance to dedicate enough time to try the application: in fact, 42% of users said to be satisfied “on the average” during the first scenario, while in the second one, 45% of them said to have performed it “well”. About the overall appreciation, audience stayed in the application’s room between 10 and 20 minutes (60% of users) demonstrating their interest toward Livia’s Villa even if the performance was not always satisfactory. For sure, the graphics and the overall atmosphere were the most voted up to 60% even if the method through which this vote was done was not promising, given that the “relevance scale”, where user needed to assign a number of preference among a series of items failed: users did not do it, thus operator was obliged to assigned arbitrarily a value for each of them. About criticisms during the Livia’s Villa virtual experience, we can mention system’s issues related to the natural interaction device (Kinect): light in the room, dimension of users and their dresses sometimes badly influenced the interaction. About the contents, informative panels spread in the room were not so visible or interesting (57% of users said to have not noticed them), placed in arduous locations far from the interaction area; whereas, audios and videos of the application itself were considered too long by 26% of users; but the most interesting data pertain the educational potential section of the questionnaire: here 36% of users evaded to answer, probably because the questionnaire was too long (37 questions in total) and surely because not all users visited all the virtual scenes in the application (so they could not know how to answer). UX revealed some problems at the beginning of the Livia’s Villa experience given that 52% of users admitted to have sit down once entered the room waiting for something to happen in the screen: here some information or disclaimers would have helped. About demographics, there was a coherence between users’ groups and their interaction: for example, younger were the ones who preferred shorter audio-videos, while adults liked them as they were. Also the physical experiences of the application were different by observing them: younger again were the ones who felt shyness during the virtual exploration, behaving uncertainty in some case; adults instead were curious and tried for longer time Livia’s Villa application, even if they sometimes failed in performing the various tasks. By the end, we can say that the application can really fit a broad audience given its adaptability and the several needs it can address: curiosity, culture, play, challenge and fun.
6
CONCLUSIONS
In Livia’s Villa Reloaded the efforts have been oriented towards the creation of an emotional, multisensorial scenario. In the paper we have reported the methodology and the results coming from the multipartitioned user experience evaluation, based on a sample of 125 visitors. These results show that many factors contribute to create such an immersive learning environment: narrative plots and non–linear interactive storytelling, interaction design based on body movements, interface design, sense of presence, graphic and rendering quality, soundscapes. In our case, the emotional and physical involvement seems to be so strong that people are brought to skip additional supports, like panels or video tutorial, almost completely, even if the support of the museum’s staff would be very appreciated and useful by the public to start the experience. Together with the graphic quality of the scenes, that confirms
9
to be an essential factor for the public approaching applications on cultural heritage; storytelling is another point of strength, especially for adults: this aspect is enriched by the combination of VR paradigms and cinematographic/virtual set, like also the use of real actors in the virtual scenario, who have been very useful to understand the topic of the application. However, the application of gesture-based interaction in the heritage domain is still in an experimental phase. There are a lot of factors in "natural interaction" influencing the user's learning by a virtual setting: easiness and spontaneity of the gestures, physical stress, harmony and balance in the body, environmental conditions, responsiveness of the system, level of embodiment, etc. The survey has shown that technology imposes some constraints. Performing the right gestures is not so immediate for everyone, but luckily it is perceived as a challenge, as it happens in video games, and after few moments people understand how to control the system and their learning grows rapidly. Regarding the dynamics of fruition, the possibility for the public to decide if actively leading the system or remaining passive spectator, sitting backward, is another good solution. Their experience is quite long, mostly between 10 and 20 minutes, favoured by an immersive and secluded room without distractions, perfect for this installation. The crucial challenge for the future is the ability to establish more and more efficient relations and, therefore, communication between natural setting, content and artificial systems, relying upon the perceptive-sensorimotor dynamics, instead of symbolic codes: gestures, images, sounds. Most part of the visitors express the wish that museums can evolve in the future including such an approach to multimedia communication, abandoning the actual being static (users said “VMs integrate the comprehension of ancient artefacts; “it's much more exiting for visitors to learn in the active way”, “It's important to learn by playing also in museums”).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Livia's Villa Reloaded project has been possible thanks to the cooperation between CNR ITABC, the Roman National Museum, Diocletian's Bath, Soprintendenza Speciale ai Beni Archeologici di Roma, ARCUS S.p.a., E.V.O.CA. srl and V-Must.net. The evaluation has been made thanks to a formative programme established between the CONSORFORM, Teramo, and the CNR, Rome, which allowed two of the authors to attend an internship of 6 months working on this project.
REFERENCES [1] E. Barrett, “Sociomedia: Multimedia, Hypermedia, and the Social Construction of Knowledge”, Digital Communication series, The MIT Press, 1994. [2] E. Goodman, M. Kuniavsky, A. Moed, “Observing the User Experience. A Practitioner's Guide to User Research”, Morgan Kaufmann, 2012. [3] E. Pietroni, M. Forlani, C. Rufa, 2015. “Livia's Villa Reloaded: An Example of Re-use and Update of a Pre-existing Virtual Museum, Following a Novel Approach in Storytelling Inside Virtual Reality Environments”, in Proceedings of Digital Heritage International Congress 2015, IEEE, 2015. [4] F. Morganti, G. Riva, “Conoscenza, comunicazione e tecnologia. Aspetti cognitivi della realtà virtuale”, LED ed., 2006. [5] F. Varela, E. Thompson, E. Rosch, “The Embodied Mind. Cognitive Science and Human Experience”, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1991. [6] J. Garrett, “The Elements of User Experience: User-Centered Design for the Web”, Peachpit Press, 2002. [7] K. Kotsakis, F. Liarokapis, S. Sylaiou, P. Petros, “Virtual museums, a survey and some issues for consideration”, in Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 10, pp. 520-528, 2009. [8] L. Cohen, L. Manion, K Morrison, “Research Methods in Education”, Oxon, New York, 2007. [9] L.Elder, “Critical Thinking and Emotional Intelligence”, in Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, Winter, Vol. XVI, No. 2,1996. [10] M. Forte, “La Villa di Livia, un percorso di archeologia virtuale”, ed. Erma di Bretschneider, 2008. [11] N. Mack, C. Woodsong, K. M. Macqueen, G. Guest, E. Namey, “Qualitative Research Methods: a data collector’s field guide”, (FHI) Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 2005. [12] P. Corbetta, “Metodologia e tecniche della ricerca sociale”, Bologna, 1999. [13] S. McLeod, “Mind Body Debate”, http://www.simplypsychology.org/mindbodydebate.html, 2007. [14] X. Xian, “A Semiotic Approach to Dimensions of Meaning in Translation”, in Theory and Practice in Language Studies 6.3, 596, 2016.
10
