Section 1.

3
Interactive Design
User-centered design of a Virtual Museum
system: a case study

Loris BARBIERI1*, Fabio BRUNO1, Fabrizio MOLLO2 and Maurizio

MUZZUPAPPA1
1
Università della Calabria - Dipartimento di Meccanica, Energetica e Gestionale (DIMEG)
2
Università di Messina
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-0984-494976; fax: +39-0984-0494673. E-mail address:
loris.barbieri@unical.it

Abstract
The paper describes a user-centered design (UCD) approach that has been adopted
in order to develop and build a virtual museum (VM) system for the “Museum of
the Bruttians and the Sea” of Cetraro (Italy). The main goal of the system was to
enrich the museum with a virtual exhibition able to make the visitors enjoy an
immersive and attractive experience, allowing them to observe 3D archaeological
finds, in their original context. The paper deals with several technical and techno-
logical issues commonly related to the design of virtual museum exhibits. The
proposed solutions, based on an UCD approach, can be efficiently adopted as
guidelines for the development of similar VM systems, especially when very low
budget and little free space are unavoidable design requirements.

Keywords: User-centered design, user interfaces design, human-computer inter-

action, virtual museum systems.

1 Introduction

Nowadays, museums need to combine the educational purpose [1] with the capa-
bility to involve their visitors through emotions [2]. In order to achieve these goals
and overcome the old principles of traditional museology, growing emerging
technologies such as Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Web applications,
are increasingly popular in museums. This union has involved the development of
a large number of instruments and systems that allow users to enjoy a culturally
vivid and attractive experience. There are many examples of such systems that
have been efficiently applied to the museum field: projection systems that could
turn any surface into an interactive visual experience; multi-touch displays; devic-
es for gesture based experiences; Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) or 3D displays

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 157

B. Eynard et al. (eds.), Advances on Mechanics, Design Engineering
and Manufacturing, Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_17
158 L. Barbieri et al.

that turn the visit into an immersive and attractive experience; [3,4,5,6,7]. Even if
all these systems are appealing and really appreciated by their users, many devices
present some limitations due to their expensive installation or maintenance, the
large volume of work, or a poor user-system interaction caused by an incomplete
maturity of that specific technology in museum applications. Starting from these
considerations, and taking into account that 90% of museums are small-sized and
with low budgets, there is an unmet need in the development and design of more
affordable systems able to offer a fascinating and memorable experience to muse-
um visitors. Since Virtual Museum (VM) systems aim to be immediate and easy to
use, enjoyable and educative, these applications represent a typical case study that
needs to be addressed through a user-centered design (UCD) approach. This ap-
proach can be efficiently used in museums [8, 9], but there aren’t works concern-
ing specifically the UCD development of VM system.
Therefore, this paper represents a first attempt to describe a UCD approach car-
ried out for the development of low-cost VM systems that rely on off-the-shelf
technologies to create 3D immersive user experiences. The paper, furthermore,
gives some guidelines to choose the key technical devices and presents a case
study for the development of the Virtual Museum system installed in “the Mu-
seum of the Bruttians and of the Sea” of Cetraro (Italy).

2 Virtual Museum system design

Prior to the design phase, it is fundamental to take into account the requirements
that are often specified by museum directors and are generally related to budget
reasons. In fact, the great majority of museums are small, with less than 10˙000
visitors per annum, and can rely on a very low budget [10]. Then the economic
concerns severely affect the development and modernisation plans that, in the era
of “experience economy” [1], all the museums have to be competitive and to at-
tract more visitors. Starting from these considerations, there are two fundamental
requirements that must be achieved: low-cost and usability. Then, a VM system
should be designed to be cheap and, at the same time, to inspire the visitor.
For these reasons, on the one hand it is almost impossible to adopt very expen-
sive technologies such as HMD and CAVE (Cave Automatic Virtual Environ-
ment) for the visualization or wearable haptics and gesture recognition devices for
the interaction. On the other hand, usability, intended as both affordance and us-
ers’ satisfaction, should be the key quality of the system. In addition, museum cu-
rators usually dictate other requirements that could affect the overall dimensions
of the systems and their aesthetics. Once all these data have been acquired, the de-
sign process can start in accordance to the recommendations (ISO 13407) for a
UCD project, that can be summarized in the following flow chart (fig.1):
User-centered design of a Virtual Museum system: a case study 159

Fig. 1. Main steps of the VM system development process based on an UCD approach.

3 Guidelines for selecting the visualization and interaction

device

In this section some guidelines have been defined for selecting the hardware to be
adopted for the VM system, considering the economic reasons and the types of in-
formation we want to offer to the visitors.
Among the different commercial devices, projectors and high definition (HD)
monitors have been selected as an alternative for the visualization of the VM ex-
hibit. The HD monitors can perform a 4K resolution with high brightness and con-
trast, on the contrary, the projector can achieve a full HD resolution with higher
maintenance costs. Among the most commonly device controllers that can be in-
cluded in a cheap VM system trackballs, touch-screen consoles and gesture recog-
nition devices (i.e. MS Kinect or Leap Motion) have been analyzed. The table 1
shows the synthesis of our analysis.

Table 1. Device controllers.

Trackball/mouse Touch screen Gesture recognition devices

Costs low high medium
Quality of interaction unattractive very intuitive intuitive
Devices’ integration low medium high
Training required no no yes

About the touch-screen consoles there are two design solutions: the adoption of
a touch-screen console for controlling the objects and data that are visualized on a
HD monitor (fig.2a), or the adoption of a unique touch-screen monitor that can be
used both for the visualization and interaction of the virtual exhibit (fig.2b).
160 L. Barbieri et al.

The pros and cons of the two different solutions, depicted in figure 2, have
been analysed taking into account also some ergonomic requirements that are fun-
damental in an UCD approach, in order to define some guidelines. Our considera-
tions are that in order to get the optimum immersive visual HD experience, view-
ers should be located at the theoretical spot known as optimum HD monitor
viewing distance [11]. These requirements can be satisfied only in the first case
(fig.2a): in fact the viewers can stand at the distance that they prefer for their op-
timal viewing experience, thanks to the displacement of the controls. On the con-
trary, the adoption of a touch-screen monitor (fig.2b) implies a viewer distance
that depends by anthropometric measurements [12] and it is lower than the rec-
ommended viewing distance. Based on 3D industry professionals’ experience, the
optimum seating distance for 3D monitor sets does not appear to be much differ-
ent than the optimum range for regular HD monitors. But the viewing distance is
affected by the type of stereoscopic projection adopted. In fact, a 3D passive pro-
jection uses glasses that cut the 1080p resolution of the HD monitor in half (540p)
to each eye. This means that the optimum viewing distance increases so that
touch-screen monitors (fig.2b) result to be inappropriate for the visualization and
interaction with 3D scenarios.

Fig. 2. System composed by HD monitor and touch-screen controller (a); touch-screen monitor
based system (b).

To sum up, the adoption of a touch-screen for the visualization and interaction
of the 3D virtual exhibit (fg.2b) should be irrevocably excluded. A further consid-
eration is that the touch-screen remote control for the interaction with the VM sys-
tem could be a handheld device, i.e., tablet, or fixed in a specific position. The
first solution can usually be adopted when there is an operator that stands over the
system and gives the controls to the visitors that want to enjoy the virtual exhibit.
Instead, the second solution can be employed when the system is intended for un-
attended operation and, since the console cannot be moved, it is possible to in-
crease the screen size of the touchscreen in order to enhance its legibility.
User-centered design of a Virtual Museum system: a case study 161

4 The Case Study

The VM system described in this paper was intended to be installed in a small

archaeological museum, the “Museum of the Bruttians and the Sea”, hosted in the
beautiful setting of the Palazzo del Trono of Cetraro (Italy). The VM system will
be surrounded by archaeological pieces, found in a small group of necropolis, and
housing facilities that were built by the Bruttian people. Among the archaeological
finds there are bronze and iron weapons, ceremonial vases, drinking cups, eating
dishes, pins and jewellery.

4.1 First prototype

As clearly expressed by the ISO9241-210:2010 (standards for human-centred de-

sign for interactive systems), in a UCD approach the design and evaluation stages
should be preceded by the gathering of requirements and specifications to better
define the context of use and the user requirements.
The VM exhibition should allow users to engage into an educational and fun
experience. In particular, as requested by the museum director, the VM system
should permit its visitors to experience two different 3D scenarios that realistically
reproduce: a tomb belonging to the necropoli of Treselle discovered in the terri-
tory of Cetraro and an underwater archaeological deposit, located 20 km away
from Cetraro, a few meters from the shore 2/4 m deep. In the first scenario the
visitors should be able to visit the virtual tomb, with its Bruttian burials, and visu-
alize and manipulate its contents, such as bronze and iron weapons (bronze belts,
spearheads, javelin), pottery, drinking cups (skyphoi, kylikes, bowls, cups) and
eating dishes (plates, paterae). In the second scenario the visitors can interact with
some remains and fragments of amphorae dating back to the middle of the III cen-
tury BC.

4.2 Selection of the visualization and interaction device

The configuration with an HD monitor and a touch-screen remote control has cho-
sen in accordance to the volume that the VM system can occupy in the museum
and to the specifications described in the previous section.
The volume requirements guided us toward the individuation of a 46” HD
monitor, that, in accordance to THX [13] standards, has an optimum viewing dis-
tance range of 1.5-2.5 meters. The minimum viewing distance is set to approxi-
mate a 40° view angle (considering the average human vision, the upper limit for
maximum field of view is around 70°, which corresponds to the maximum field of
162 L. Barbieri et al.

view inclusive of peripheral vision) and the maximum viewing distance is set to
28° approx. This range allows us to satisfy both the constraints on the volume and
the minimum distance necessary to perceive the stereoscopic experience that is
commonly considered to be 1.5 meters. It is worth to notice that, due to many ob-
jective and subjective factors, the user experience provided by the virtual exhibit
changes from person to person [14,15]. For example, the age affects 3D percep-
tion: children have a lower ocular distance if compared with adults. This means
that, if placed at the same distance from the monitor, children have a more immer-
sive 3D viewing experience than adults.
In this case, since the presence of a supervisor is not always assured, we have
preferred to fix a 23” touch-screen console into a specific position.

4.3 System architecture development

Once the devices for user interaction and visualization of the virtual museum ex-
hibition have been defined, the following step was the definition of the position of
these devices in space. In particular, the relative positions and distances of the HD
monitor and the touch-screen console should be identified, trying to take into ac-
count the ergonomic standards for a better experience of the VM system.
Since the virtual exhibit is intended to be used by many different audiences,
such as middle and high school students, college students, tourists, etc., ergonomic
studies have been performed in order to find the optimal positioning of the visu-
alization device and its control system. Also the grade of the touch-screen console
has been studied. For a comfortable experience of the VM system, we tried to
keep users’ movements as natural as possible, with particular attention to the most
repetitive ones, i.e. the neck and shoulder extension movements. As detailed in the
previous section, a 46”HD monitor allows for an optimum viewing distance range
of 1.5-2.5 meters. Therefore, the touch-screen console has been placed at a dis-
tance of 1.5 meters from the HD monitor, in order to take advantage of the full
range and enjoy an optimal immersion and visualization of the 3D contents.
Once the relative positioning of the monitor and controller has been done, we
focused on the design of the structure. As depicted in figure 3a various design al-
ternatives have been evaluated. As recommended by UCD standards, various vir-
tual prototypes of the VM system architecture have been designed which differ in
their materials, dimensions, and aesthetics. These prototypes have been subjected
to an iterative design process that allowed us to improve each version, but also to
exclude those ones that were less performing in terms of ergonomic and technical
requirements. Figure 3b shows the final virtual prototype realized with white and
orange folded panels made of PPMA (Polymethyl methacrylate). Aluminium
builtin elements were adopted to support and fasten the monitors.
User-centered design of a Virtual Museum system: a case study 163

Fig. 3. Alternative design solutions and rendering in the context of use (a). Final virtual proto-
type of the VM system architecture (b).

4.4 User interfaces design

Since the VM system will be used by a large variety and different types of visitors
the user interfaces (UIs) should clearly communicate its purpose, so that users
with no experience with technological devices should be able to understand im-
mediately what they should do. For this reason, the UI design process was firstly
focused on the development of minimalistic design of UIs to make the layout and
graphic features of the VM system as simple as possible. In the composition of the
graphical elements as a whole, UIs should provide the users all the essential fea-
tures to manipulate virtual objects, but also to get access to a database of media
contents, such as images, texts and sounds, so that the interaction could also have
an educational value. This kind of approach allowed us to define a first low-
fidelity prototype (paper prototyping) of the UIs. Prior to proceed with the devel-
opment of a fully operational software for the management of the VM system, the
first UI prototypes should be submitted to a user-centered evaluation in order to
drive and refine their design. The evaluation has been performed by means of a
Cognitive Walkthrough (CW) [16] usability inspection method. According to the
CW standards and recommendations [17] a group of experts performed an UI in-
spection going through a set of tasks and evaluating UI understandability and ease
of learning.
The results of the UI design and CW analyses was a “three level” user inter-
face. In the first level there is the “home screen” (fig.4a) where visitors can choose
the preferred language, but most important, he/she can select the experience. Once
the user has selected the desired option, he/she accesses to the second level.
Depending on the selected scenario, the second interface that appears to users
could be the Tomb of Treselle (fig.4b) or the underwater environment (fig.4c). In
particular most of the screen area is reserved to the visualization of the 3D sce-
nario while the rest of the screen is organized as follows: on the left side some ba-
164 L. Barbieri et al.

sic informations explain to visitors how to navigate through the 3D environment

and manipulate its 3D contents; on the lower section of the screen there is a text
field that gives historical and cultural information about what the user is going to
experience. In particular, the tomb of Treselle (fig.4b) featured a Bruttian burial
dating back to the IV century BC and contains: weapons (bronze belts, iron spear-
heads and javelin); pottery, such as ceremonial vases, drinking cups (skyphoi, ky-
likes, bowls, cups) and eating dishes (plates, paterae); a lead set used in meat ban-
quets and consisting of skewers, a grill and a pair of andirons made of iron or lead.
While the underwater site (fig.4c) contains a residual archaeological deposit, con-
creted to the seabed and large rocky blocks, that consists of a merchant vessel car-
rying a load of transport amphorae of the MGS V and VI types, dating back to the
middle of the III century BC. When the user selects one of the virtual objects pre-
sent in the two environments, he/she enters in the third level (fig.4d) in which it is
possible to manipulate, zoom-in and get specific information about the artwork.

Fig. 4. First interface of the VM system (a). Second UI levels that allow users to experience a 3D
immersive reconstruction of the tomb of Treselle (b) or an underwater environment (c). 3D mod-
els accessible through the third UI levels (d).

4.5 VM system evaluation

The final stage of the UI development consists in their assessment in order to

evaluate their usability. The user studies carried out were very important for the
design of the final VM system because these allowed us to gain many information
related to the user-experience and the interaction with different alternatives of the
virtual exhibition. In particular, we noticed that when the monitor is controlled
through a touchscreen remote control, the users may get confused, inattentive and
User-centered design of a Virtual Museum system: a case study 165

annoyed due to the information arrangement between the two screens. Then we
tested two different solutions. In the first solution, both the HD monitor and the
touch-screen console display the same kind of information and contents. In the
second solution, the HD monitor visualizes only the 3D contents, while all the text
data and information are accessible only by the touch-screen console.
Traditional metrics, such as the time and the number of errors and question-
naires, that allow to catch cognitive aspects related to user experience, have been
used to interpret the outcomes of the user study. The results of the comparative
testing show that, even if from an objective point of view, there is not a statistical
significant difference between the two configurations but, from a subjective point
of view, the satisfaction questionnaires demonstrate a preference for the second
solution. In particular, when the touch-screen duplicates the information present
on the main monitor it reduces misunderstanding problems since it prevents the
user from inquiring both screens to find the desired information, but it also re-
duces the perceived user experience of the virtual exhibition. On the contrary, a
full-screen visualization of 3D contents on the main monitor where all the menus
and texts are on the touchscreen device, increases the user’s immersion and the
contents appear more pleasant and attractive from an aesthetic point of view.

Fig. 5. Visitors while experiencing the VM system.

On the basis of these results, we decided to adopt the second solution for the
VM system interaction, as shown in fig.5. While the main monitor is dedicated to
a 3D visualization of the archaeological finds, the touch-screen console is used to
control the 3D objects, but also to display information and educational contents.

5 Conclusions

In this paper a user-centered design approach has been adopted for the develop-
ment of a VM system that has been realized for the “Museum of the Bruttians and
the Sea” of Cetraro.
The paper gives many technical and technological advices and suggestions,
166 L. Barbieri et al.

which can be adopted to overcome several typical and recurrent problems related
to the development of VM systems, especially when low budgets and space con-
straints are among the design requirements.
The results of user testing and the opinions gathered by visitors demonstrated
that the adoption of an UCD approach can efficiently improve the VM system de-
velopment, and gives birth to a product that offers a more efficient, satisfying, and
user-friendly experience for the users.

References

1. Pine II B.J., Gilmore J.H. The Experience Economy: Work is Theatre & Every Business a
Stage. Harvard. 2000.
2. Vergo P. New Museology. Reaktion books. London. 1989.
3. Blanchard E.G., Zanciu A.N., Mahmoud H., and Molloy J.S. Enhancing In-Museum Informal
Learning by Augmenting Artworks with Gesture Interactions and AIED Paradigms. In Artifi-
cial Intelligence in Education (pp. 649-652). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 2013.
4. Pescarin S., Pietroni E., Rescic L., Wallergård M., Omar K., and Rufa C. NICH: a preliminary
theoretical study on Natural Interaction applied to Cultural Heritage contexts. Digital Herit-
age Inter. Congress, Marseille, V.2, p.355, 2013.
5. Wang C.S., Chiang D.J., Wei Y.C. Intuitional 3D Museum Navigation System Using Kinect.
In Information Technology Convergence, pp. 587-596. Springer Netherlands, 2013.
6. Bruno F., Bruno S., De Sensi G., Librandi C., Luchi M.L., Mancuso S., Muzzupappa M., Pina
M. MNEME: A transportable virtual exhibition system for Cultural Heritage. 36th Annual
Conf. on CAA 2008, Budapest, 2008.
7. Bruno F., Angilica A., Cosco F., Barbieri L., Muzzupappa M. Comparing Different Visuo-
Haptic Environments for Virtual Prototyping Applications. In ASME 2011 World Confer-
ence on Innovative Virtual Reality, pp. 183-191.
8. Barbieri L., Angilica A., Bruno F., Muzzupappa M. An Interactive Tool for the Participatory
Design of Product Interface. In IDETC/CIE 2012 Chicago (pp. 1437-1447). 2012.
9. Petrelli D., Not E. UCD of flexible hypermedia for a mobile guide: Reflections on the
HyperAudio experience. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 15(3-4), 303-338.
2005.
10. IFEL-Fondazione ANCI e Federculture. Le forme di PPP e il fondo per la progettualità in
campo culturale. 2013.
11. Craig J.C., Johnson K.O. The Two-Point Threshold Not a Measure of Tactile Spatial Resolu-
tion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(1), 29-32. 2000.
12. Woodson W.E., Tillman B., Tillman P. Human factors design handbook, 2nd Ed. Woodson,
1992.
13. http://www.thx.com/
14. Barbieri L., Bruno F., Cosco F., Muzzupappa M. Effects of device obtrusion and tool-hand
misalignment on user performance and stiffness perception in visuo-haptic mixed reality. In-
ternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 72(12), 846-859, 2014.
15. Barbieri L., Angilica A., Bruno F., Muzzupappa, M. Mixed prototyping with configurable
physical archetype for usability evaluation of product interfaces. Computers in Industry,
64(3), 310-323, 2013.
16. Lewis C., Polson P., Wharton C., Rieman J. Testing a walkthrough methodology for theory-
based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces. ACM CHI’90, Seattle, WA, 235-242, 1990.
17. Wharton C., Rieman J., Lewis C., Polson P. The cognitive walkthrough method: A practi-
tioner’s guide. Usability Inspection Methods, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 79-104, 1994.