Skip to content
1981
Volume 14, Issue 1-2
  • ISSN: 2397-9704
  • E-ISSN: 2397-9712

Abstract

This study introduces a new direction for promoting and preserving heritages through integrating virtual reality (VR) to enhance history, availability and visitor experience. The system developed also provides two virtual tours of the Le-Corbusier Museum in India, which are immersive and interactive. A total of 80 participants experienced the designed virtual tour of the museum using both mobile VR and the Oculus Quest VR. All participants were equally divided into two groups to analyse the effectiveness of the designed systems and compare the two VR systems using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Current research evaluates the use of technology using the TAM model in the context of VR platforms designed for cultural heritage. TAM constructs such as perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and behavioural intention were measured; this study aims to understand the factors influencing users’ acceptance of VR technology in promoting heritage sites. The results indicated that the Oculus VR group was more favourable than the mobile VR group. The overall mean score of the Oculus VR was = 4.03 (0.524), while the mobile group scored = 3.00 (0.292), which indicated a sizeable significant difference between the groups in terms of technology used by the participants. Additionally, -tests and reliability analyses were performed to evaluate the developed VR tours’ effectiveness. The score for Cronbach’s alpha is (0.842), indicating high reliability. The findings highlight that the developed Oculus VR system provided more uses for the TAM model in heritage sites than the mobile VR group.

© 2024 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00089_1
2025-08-18
2026-04-20

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abusaada, H. and Elshater, A. (2024), ‘Stimulating architects’ mental imagery reaching innovation: Lessons from urban history in using analogies and metaphors’, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 15:9, p. 102933, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2024.102933.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aiello, D., Fai, S. and Santagati, C. (2019), ‘Virtual museums as a means for promotion and enhancement of cultural heritage’, The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42:2/W15, pp. 33–40, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-2-w15-33-2019.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Alsamydai, M. J. (2014), ‘Adaptation of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to the use of mobile banking services’, International Review of Management and Business Research 3:4, pp. 2016–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Alshawaaf, N. and Lee, S. H. (2021), ‘Business model innovation through digitisation in social purpose organisations: A comparative analysis of Tate Modern and Pompidou Centre’, Journal of Business Research, 125, pp. 597–608, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.02.045.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Angra, S. (2023), ‘Interactivity development using Unity 3D software and C #’, 14th International Conference on Computing Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT), Delhi, 6–8 July, New York: IEEE, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCNT56998.2023.10308030.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Atchariyachanvanich, K., Okada, H. and Uesugi, S. (2011), ‘The technology acceptance model’, Inter-Organizational Information Systems and Business Management, 1:17, pp. 234–50, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-768-5.ch015.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Augello, A., Infantino, I., Pilato, G. and Vitale, G. (2021), ‘Site experience enhancement and perspective in cultural heritage fruition: A survey on new technologies and methodologies based on a “four-pillars” approach’, Future Internet, 13:4, p. 92, https://doi.org/10.3390/fi13040092.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Boeykens, S., Santana Quintero, M., Neuckermans, H., Ioannides, M., Addison, A., Georgopoulos, A. and Kalisperis, L. (2008), ‘Improving architectural design analysis using 3D modeling and visualization techniques’, Digital Heritage: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia, Limassol, Cyprus, 20–25 October, Budapest: Archeolingua, pp. 67–73, https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/202384. Accessed 25 September 2024.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Carre, A. L., Dubois, A., Partarakis, N., Zabulis, X., Patsiouras, N., Mantinaki, E., Zidianakis, E., Cadi, N., Baka, E., Thalmann, N. M., Makrygiannis, D., Glushkova, A. and Manitsaris, S. (2022), ‘Mixed-reality demonstration and training of glassblowing’, Heritage, 5:1, pp. 103–28, https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage5010006.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Carrozzino, M., and Bergamasco, M. (2010), ‘Beyond virtual museums: Experiencing immersive virtual reality in real museums’, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 11:4, pp. 452–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2010.04.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Castagnetti, C., Giannini, M. and Rivola, R. (2017), ‘Image-based virtual tours and 3D modeling of past and current ages for the enhancement of archaeological parks: The VisualVersilia 3D project’, International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42:5W1, pp. 639–45, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-Archives-XLII-5-W1-639-2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, Y. and Hua, M. (2024), ‘VR headset vs. PC screen as virtual learning tour interface for Chinese architecture heritage investigation’, Proceedings of the Design Society, 4, pp. 2825–34, https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2024.286.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen, Y., Wang, X., Le, B. and Wang, L. (2024), ‘Why people use augmented reality in heritage museums: a socio-technical perspective’, Heritage Science, 12:108, pp. 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-024-01217-1.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Chiang, K.-C., Weng, C., Rathinasabapathi, A., Chen, H., Su, J.-H. (2023), ‘Augmented reality supported learning for cultural heritage of Taiwan in on-site and off-site environments: The case of a Daxi Old Street’, Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 16:3, pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1145/3589231.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Chittaro, L., Ieronutti, L. and Ranon, R. (2004), ‘Navigating 3D virtual environments by following embodied agents: A proposal and its informal evaluation on a virtual museum application’, PsychNology Journal, 2:1, pp. 24–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Corrales-Serrano, M., Merchán, P., Merchán, M. J. and Pérez, E. (2024), ‘Virtual reality applied to heritage in higher education: Validation of a questionnaire to evaluate usability, learning, and emotions’, Heritage, 7:6, pp. 2792–810, https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7060132.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Davis, F. D. and Venkatesh, V. (1996), ‘A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: Three experiments’, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 45:1, pp. 19–45, https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1996.0040.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Errichiello, L., Micera, R., Atzeni, M. and Chiappa, G. D. (2019), ‘Exploring the implications of wearable virtual reality technology for museum visitors’ experience: A cluster analysis’, International Journal of Tourism Research, 21:5, pp. 590–605, https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2283.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gong, Q., Zou, N., Yang, W., Zheng, Q. and Chen, P. (2024), ‘User experience model and design strategies for virtual reality-based cultural heritage exhibition’, Virtual Reality, 28:2, pp. 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-024-00942-z.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Hammady, R., Ma, M. and Strathearn, C. (2020), ‘Ambient information visualisation and visitors technology acceptance of mixed reality in museums’, Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 13:2, pp. 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1145/3359590.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Handa, M., Aul, E. G. and Bajaj, S. (2012), ‘Immersive technology: Uses, challenges and opportunities’, International Journal of Computing & Business Research, 6:2, pp. 2229–6166.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Ivanshchuk, O. A., Dunaeva, V. A. and Goncharova, I. I. (2024), ‘Development of an information system for modeling and visualization of crops growth and development under climate change conditions using 3D modeling and VR/AR technologies’, 2024 International Russian Smart Industry Conference, Sochi, Russia, 25–29 March, New York: IEEE, pp. 161–66, https://doi.org/10.1109/SmartIndustryCon61328.2024.10515474.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Jung, T. H., Lee, H. and Chung, N. (2018), ‘Cross-cultural differences in adopting mobile augmented reality at cultural heritage tourism sites’, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30:3, pp. 1621–45, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-02-2017-0084.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kalving, M., Paananen, S., Seppälä, J., Colley, A. and Häkkilä, J. (2022), ‘Comparing VR and desktop 360 video museum tours’, ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 1:1, pp. 282–84, https://doi.org/10.1145/3568444.3570596.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Kara, M. and Çakıcı Alp, N. (2024), ‘Assessing the adoption of the Yavuz Battleship application in the mixed reality environment using the Technology Acceptance Model’, Multimedia Systems, 30:2, pp. 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00530-024-01277-0.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Kim, S. H. (2014), ‘A study on adoption factors of Korean smartphone users: A focus on TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) and UTAUT (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology)’, Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 57, pp. 27–30, https://doi.org/10.14257/astl.2014.57.07.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Koeva, M., Luleva, M. and Maldjanski, P. (2017), ‘Integrating spherical panoramas and maps for visualization of cultural heritage objects using virtual reality technology’, Sensors, 17:4, pp. 1–15, https://doi.org/10.3390/s17040829.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Kucera, E., Haffner, O. and Kozak, S. (2018), ‘Connection between 3D engine unity and microcontroller Arduino: A virtual smart house’, 2018 Cybernetics & Informatics (K&I), Lazy pod Makytou, Slovakia, 31 January–3 February, New York: IEEE, https://doi.org/10.1109/CYBERI.2018.8337531.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lee, H., Jung, T. H., tom Dieck, M. C. and Chung, N. (2020), ‘Experiencing immersive virtual reality in museums’, Information and Management, 57:5, p. 103229, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103229.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, J. and Lv, C. (2024), ‘Exploring user acceptance of online virtual reality exhibition technologies: A case study of Liangzhu Museum’, PLoS ONE, 19:8, pp. 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308267.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Manni, A., Oriti, D., Sanna, A., Pace, F. D. and Manuri, F. (2021), ‘Snap2cad: 3D indoor environment reconstruction for AR/VR applications using a smartphone device’, Computers and Graphics, 100, pp. 116–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2021.07.014.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Marasco, A. (2020), ‘Beyond virtual cultural tourism: history-living experiences with cinematic virtual reality’, Tourism and Heritage Journal, 2, pp. 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1344/thj.2020.2.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Martí-Testón, A., Muñoz, A., Gracia, L. and Solanes, J. E. (2023), ‘Using WebXR metaverse platforms to create touristic services and cultural promotion’, Applied Sciences, 13:14, https://doi.org/10.3390/app13148544.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Marto, A., Gonçalves, A., Melo, M., Bessa, M. and Silva, R. (2023), ‘ARAM: A technology acceptance model to ascertain the behavioural intention to use augmented reality’, Journal of Imaging, 9:3, https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging9030073.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Mohd Latip, H. F., Omar, A. H., Jing, T. M. and Shahrom, A. (2017), ‘A questionnaire-based approach on Technology Acceptance Model for integrated multiple ankle technology device on patient psychology’, Sains Humanika, 9:3–2, pp. 9–14, https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n3-2.1267.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Momani, A. M. (2020), ‘The unified Theory of Acceptance and use of technology: A new approach in technology acceptance’, International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development, 12:3, pp. 79–98, https://doi.org/10.4018/ijskd.2020070105.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Monaco, D., Pellegrino, M. A., Scarano, V. and Vicidomini, L. (2022), ‘Linked open data in authoring virtual exhibitions’, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 53, pp. 127–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2021.11.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Nisiotis, L., Alboul, L. and Beer, M. (2020), ‘A prototype that fuses virtual reality, robots, and social networks to create a new cyber-physical-social eco-society system for cultural heritage’, Sustainability, 12:2, pp. 1–15, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020645.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Nofal, E., Elhanafi, A. M., Hameeuw, H. and Moere, A. V. (2018), ‘Architectural contextualization of heritage museum artifacts using augmented reality’, Studies in Digital Heritage, 2:1, pp. 42–67, https://doi.org/10.14434/sdh.v2i1.24500.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Pratisto, E. H., Thompson, N. and Potdar, V. (2022), Immersive Technologies for Tourism: A Systematic Review, Information Technology & Tourism, New York: Springer Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Riches, S, Azevedo, L., Bird, L., Pisani, S. and Valmaggia, L. (2021), ‘Virtual reality relaxation for the general population: A systematic review’, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 56:10, pp. 1707–27, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-021-02110-z.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Rondan-Cataluña, F. J., Arenas-Gaitán, J. and Ramírez-Correa, P. E. (2015), ‘A comparison of the different versions of popular technology acceptance models: A non-linear perspective’, Kybernetes, 44:5, pp. 788–805, https://doi.org/10.1108/K-09-2014-0184.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Rosado, A. (2021), ‘Le Corbusier’s urban planning as a cultural legacy: An approach to the case of Chandigarh’, MDPI, 5:3, p. 44, https://doi.org/10.3390/designs5030044.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Selmanović, E., Rizvic, S., Harvey, C., Boskovic, D., Hulusic, V., Chahin, M. and Sljivo, S. (2020), ‘Improving accessibility to intangible cultural heritage preservation using virtual reality’, Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 13:2, https://doi.org/10.1145/3377143.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Sendai, S. (2018), ‘Realization of natural order through Le Corbusier’s museum prototype in Chandigarh’, Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 16:1, pp. 23–30, https://doi.org/10.3130/jaabe.16.23.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Siekański, P., Bunsch, E. and Sitnik, R. (2018), ‘Seeing the past: An augmented reality application for visualization the previous state of cultural heritage locations’, Proceedings of the IS&T International Symposium on Electronic Imaging: The Engineering Reality of Virtual Reality, Burlingame, CA, 28 January–1 February, Springfield, VA: IS&T, pp. 452-1–452-4, https://doi.org/10.2352/ISSN.2470-1173.2018.03.ERVR-452.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Suh, A. and Prophet, J. (2018), ‘The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis’, Computers in Human Behavior, 86, pp. 77–90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Sylaiou, S., Mania, K., Karoulis, A. and White, M. (2010), ‘Exploring the relationship between presence and enjoyment in a virtual museum’, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 68:5, pp. 243–53, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.11.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Tian, F., Li, K., Huang, X., Zhang, X., Wang, N., Song, Y., Zhu, Q. and Li, Y. (2024), ‘An empirical study of virtual museum based on dual-mode mixed visualization: The Sanxingdui bronzes’, Heritage Science, 12:1, pp. 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-024-01241-1.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Wang, S., Sun, W., Liu, J., Nah, K., Yan, W. and Tan, S. (2024), ‘The influence of AR on purchase intentions of cultural heritage products: The TAM and flow-based study’, Applied Sciences, 14:16, https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167169.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Yung, R., Khoo-Lattimore, C. and Potter, L. E. (2021), ‘VR the world: Experimenting with emotion and presence for tourism marketing’, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 46, pp. 160–71, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.11.009.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Zheng, H., Chen, L., Hu, H., Wang, Y. and Wei, Y. (2024), ‘Research on the digital preservation of architectural heritage based on virtual reality technology’, Buildings, 14:5, p. 1436, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14051436.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00089_1
Loading
Evaluating the technology acceptance model for virtual reality systems in cultural heritage: Promoting heritage sites through virtual reality
Virtual Creativity 14, 123 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1386/vcr_00089_1
/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00089_1
/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00089_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): effectiveness; interactivity; Oculus Quest; technology use; user experience; virtual reality; virtual tour

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test