Co-progettazione di esperienze del patrimonio culturale per tutti con la realtà virtuale: un approccio di progettazione basato su scenari
10.6092/issn.2532-8816/13686
L'applicazione delle tecnologie digitali per l'accessibilità dei siti culturali costituisce un'area emergente di ricerca che presenta rilevanti sfide per la progettazione. In quest’ambito viene crescentemente evidenziato il potenziale della realtà virtuale (RV) per garantire il diritto universale alla fruizione del patrimonio culturale per i visitatori con diverse esigenze di accessibilità. Il presente lavoro fornisce un contributo per l’avanzamento delle conoscenze e della pratica in quest’area, presentando il processo di design e i risultati di un progetto di ricerca finalizzato a sviluppare una soluzione compensativa con la RV per migliorare l'accessibilità dei siti culturali per i visitatori con disabilità motorie. La ricerca impiega il metodo dello Scenario-Based Design (SBD) nell’ambito di un approccio di User-Centered Design per identificare i requisiti degli utenti per lo sviluppo dell'interfaccia di RV. Attraverso questo metodo, diversi personas e i corrispondenti scenari sono progettati per rappresentare i bisogni, le motivazioni e i comportamenti dei principali gruppi di utenti dell’applicazione tecnologica. Tale metodo è inoltre utilizzato nella fase di prototipazione come strumento per l'attività di co-design, che ha coinvolto utenti con specifiche esigenze di accessibilità, designer e altri stakeholder per identificare i requisiti dell’applicazione. L'articolo presenta i risultati del co-design relativi ai requisiti funzionali ed esperienziali e discute le implicazioni metodologiche e pratiche a supporto dell'uso di questo approccio per lo sviluppo di soluzioni digitali per l'accessibilità del patrimonio culturale.
text/html
2532-8816
13686
11
en
Alessandra Marasco
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Umanistica Digitale
Human-computer Interaction
Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality: a Scenario-Based Design approach 
Text.Serial.Journal
https://umanisticadigitale.unibo.it/
Dossier
2022-01-25
2021-10-20
2022-01-25
2022-01-25
71-98
Um. Dig.
Alessandra Marasco
2021
10.6092/issn.2532-8816/13686
71
Iriss, consiglio nazionale delle ricerche, CNR
2532-8816
11
Human-computer Interaction
en
98
Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality: a Scenario-Based Design approach 
https://umanisticadigitale.unibo.it/article/view/13686/13769
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021
B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality
DOI: http://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2532-8816/13686


     Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with
       Virtual Reality: a Scenario-Based Design approach

                                1
                                 Barbara Balbi, 2Alessandra Marasco

        1
         Soprintendenza archeologia, belle arti e paesaggio per il comune di Napoli, MIC, Italia
 2
  Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Ricerca su Innovazione e Servizi per lo Sviluppo, Italia
                               1barbara.balbi@beniculturali.it
                                     2a.marasco@iriss.cnr.it




       Abstract

The use of digital technologies for enhancing the accessibility of cultural heritage sites is an
emerging field of research with relevant design challenges. Research in this field highlights the
potential of virtual reality (VR) to guarantee access to and enjoyment of cultural heritage to
visitors with disabilities. This paper aims to advance knowledge on the design of visitor-centric
VR solutions for enhancing cultural heritage accessibility, presenting the process, tools and
findings of a user experience design research for the development of a compensatory VR solution
for visitors with mobility impairments. For this research, the Scenario-Based Design method
(SBD) is applied within a User-Centered Design approach to identify user requirements of the
VR solution. Based on this method, different personas and corresponding scenarios are designed
to represent the needs, motivations and behaviors of the main user groups of the digital solution.
Further, the SBD is used in the prototyping phase as a tool for the co-design activity, which
involved users, designers and other stakeholders to identify the experiential and functional
requirements for the VR solution. The paper presents the findings of the co-design process and
discusses the implications of the use of SBD for developing digital solutions for cultural heritage
accessibility.
L’uso delle tecnologie digitali per migliorare l’accessibilità dei luoghi della cultura è un campo di
ricerca emergente che presenta rilevanti sfide di design. La ricerca in questo campo evidenzia il
potenziale della realtà virtuale (RV) per garantire l’accesso e la fruizione del patrimonio culturale
ai visitatori con disabilità. Il presente lavoro intende contribuire all’avanzamento delle
conoscenze sul design di soluzioni RV visitor-centric per migliorare l’accessibilità del patrimonio
culturale, presentando il processo, gli strumenti e i risultati di una ricerca di user experience
design finalizzata allo sviluppo di una soluzione compensativa per i visitatori con disabilità
motorie. La ricerca impiega il metodo dello Scenario-Based Design (SBD) nell’ambito di un
approccio di User-Centered Design per identificare i requisiti utili allo sviluppo della soluzione
RV. Attraverso questo metodo, diversi personas e i corrispondenti scenari sono stati progettati per
rappresentare bisogni, motivazioni e comportamenti dei principali gruppi di utenti. Lo SBD è
stato inoltre utilizzato nella fase di prototipazione come strumento per l’attività di co-design che
                                                   71
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


ha coinvolto utenti, designer e altri stakeholder allo scopo di identificare i requisiti esperienziali
e funzionali per l’efficace sviluppo della soluzione. L’articolo presenta i risultati del co-design e
discute le implicazioni dell’uso di questo approccio per lo sviluppo di soluzioni digitali per
l’accessibilità del patrimonio culturale.



       Introduction

According to the World Health Organization, about 15% of the world’s population (over 1
billion people) is estimated to experience disability and this number is growing due to increases
in chronic health conditions and population ageing, among other causes ([44]). Making cultural
heritage accessible to people with disabilities is an imperative for the development of inclusive
societies and accessible tourism for all ([45]). Promoting accessibility represents a crucial aspect
of contemporary management of cultural heritage to create participative and inclusive spaces
where culture is collectively created through the experiences of the audience ([32]).
The accessibility of cultural heritage sites is a complex challenge that needs to be addressed in
relation to all aspects of the visitor experience ([36]) and to every stage of the tourist journey,
starting from travel planning and decision making ([30]). The concept of accessibility of cultural
heritage is multi-dimensional and refers to the tangible, intangible and digital barriers that can
represent an obstacle to the fruition based on individual interactions and /or context ([10]). In
recent years, several projects in the cultural heritage context have been aimed at removing
physical, sensorial and intellectual barriers to achieve pilot schemes for a “Universal Accessibility”
in line with universal design principles ([32];[9]).
The application of digital technologies in relation to cultural heritage accessibility is a primary
issue of investigation, also in the light of the growing application of augmented and virtual reality
technologies for enhancing cultural visitors’ experiences ([7];[21];[6]). On one hand, research is
concerned with making augmented and virtual contents and interaction accessible to all
([18];[31]); on the other hand, projects address the potential of technologies to compensate full
or partial inaccessibility of heritage sites providing access to the broadest audience of visitors
([1];[2]).
In the last years, several cultural sites around the world have been virtually reconstructed through
VR technologies for improved accessibility ([19];[13];[34];[35]). Among the most renowned VR
applications is the virtual tour created for the fragile site of the Lascaux Caves in France, which
were permanently closed to the public in 1963 for conservation issues: the alternative experience
with VR allows visitors to be immersed in the original caves to admire the masterpiece of the
Upper Paleolithic and interact with other visitors with avatars. In 2018, the National Gallery of
Prague launched the VR experience ‘Touching Masterpieces’ that allows visually impaired
visitors to touch through haptic gloves the 3D models of some famous sculptures, such is the
bust of Nefertiti (in the Neue Museum, Berlin) and Michelangelo’s David (in the Gallerie
dell’Accademia, Florence) ([16]). VR technologies have been increasingly used to provide access
to archaeological sites or museums that are not fully accessible to people with reduced mobility
due to physical barriers that cannot be eliminated ([19];[25]). Pérez et al. ([37]) developed a VR
application for one of the most important archaeological sites in Spanish Protohistory to provide
                                                   72
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

people in wheelchairs with the most realistic sensations while virtually touring the site. VR was
used at the UNESCO World heritage site of Geevor Tin Mine Museum (UK) to provide an
accessible experience for visitors who cannot access the underground mines ([24]). The analysis
of elderly visitors’ perceptions of this VR experience of the museum by tom Dieck et al. ([42])
provided evidence of the positive impact of VR on these visitors’ experiences. Overall, previous
research highlighted the potential role of VR for cultural heritage accessibility from an
experiential perspective in relation to: visitors’ better understanding of the cultural value
according to a broad meaning of accessibility beyond physical and perceptual barriers ([1];[35]);
development of a personal, emotional connection with cultural assets ([1];[2]); avoiding
marginalizing situations through a single support for all ([2]); enhancing the sensory experience
of heritage ([37]) and the social experience during the visit with family and companions ([42]).
 Notwithstanding the significant progress on the use of immersive VR technologies in the
cultural heritage sector, several design challenges remain in the development of VR solutions for
providing universally accessible heritage experiences, including:
•   designing for cultural experiences, which relates to the need to take fully into account the
    different motivations of cultural visitors ([1];[12]);
•   designing for user empowerment that concerns the need to go beyond design for
    accessibility and pursue “the strongest form of human-centered design” ([26]);
•   designing for customer-centric visitor experiences, which implies the need to fully
    understand the needs along the different stages of the visitor journey to design meaningful
    experiences with VR ([21]);
•   designing for personalized cross – domain assistive solutions to address the accessibility and
    usability needs of people with disabilities ([36]).
In the light of these design challenges, this paper aims to contribute to advance knowledge on
the design of visitor-centric VR solutions for enhancing the accessibility of cultural heritage. It
presents the process and findings of a design research aimed to develop a VR solution for
improving cultural heritage accessibility for visitors with mobility impairments. The research is
conducted through User-Centered Design (UCD) ([23]) in line with the foundations of tourism
experience design ([43]) and the principles of Design for All. Specifically, the paper provides
insights into the application of the Scenario Based Design (SBD) method to identify user
requirements for the VR solution through the involvement of users in the design cycle, from the
concept generation to the prototype design.



       Background

Research supports UCD as a preferred approach for the development of immersive solutions for
cultural heritage ([4];[5];[40]), in line with the principles of Design for All ([2];[17]) in the
context of the pervasive use of ubiquitous computing to mediate and support cultural heritage
experiences. This approach is also at the basis of design for user empowerment ([26]), where
users with disabilities are engaged in every stage of the design cycle.


                                                73
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


Among the UCD methods, SBD ([38]) is useful to engage users, designers and other stakeholders
in collaborative design processes, as an effective bridge between designers and the end users
([29]). It allows to visualize a case of use in a narrative (i.e., a storyboard) of a typical situation
in which the end user interacts with the digital solution: this facilitates the user to imagine
possible difficulties or advantages in using the digital application and designers to adequately
consider the contextual and social factors for its sustainability. In this sense the scenario becomes
a ‘design object’ ([29]) that can be modified, enriched, extended in the co-designing activities in
parallel to the technological implementation.
Described by Carrol ([8]) as a method for envisaging and developing new technology-based
systems for work or leisure, SBD is used in cooperative design and the application of ethnography
for system design. Recently, it has been used in the design and development of new technological
systems in different domains, including technology-enabled experiences of embodied computer
games ([41]). In these experiences, scenarios are effective tools for users, stakeholders and
designers to visualize a real situation in interacting with technologies and SBD offers a significant
and unique approach to address some of the most typical and difficult challenges in design. The
possibility to represent a real situation with all the potential social and technical constraints and
informed with needs, goals, activities and context is for both designers and users a great resource
to understand the real application of a new digital solution. Together with scenarios, personas
are the tools borrowed from UCD to make visible and personalized a typical situation. Personas,
as fictional users that encapsulate distinct sets of behavior patterns ([14]), are used in all the
studies we refer to in the present project.
Recent research supports the use of SBD in design processes of digital solutions in tourism and
cultural heritage. For instance, McCabe et al. ([29]) use SBD to engage diverse city stakeholders
in developing innovative, technology-based tourism services with scenarios. In the cultural
heritage context, Hall and Bannon ([20]) highlight the usefulness of SBD in the process for the
creation of successful interactive museum exhibitions for children. The work by Ciasullo et al.
([11]) supports the use of SBD as an effective methodology in the development of customized
technologies to improve the experience for museum visitors from an interdisciplinary perspective.
The study by Nigay et al. ([33]) focuses on the domain of archaeology to improve the work of
archaeologists considering two fundamental aspects: field studies and SBD. The SBD is used to
get a concrete view of the current and future activities of the users. In this work, scenarios have
proved to be very useful in the design of augmented reality (AR) systems. In particular, they
allow to visualize how AR devices would affect the way professional users perform their individual
and collective activities. In the work of Nigay et al. ([33]) the method is organized into two steps:
1) design scenarios based on an analysis of the real task (explanation by the end-users of her/his
relevant work phases, away from the work setting); 2) design scenarios based on an analysis of
the activity (observation and video recording of the activity of the end-users on site).In this case,
the SBD is a tool in the hand of designers to obtain a guide for the requirements of the AR
solution in which the users are a fundamental part of scenario, but are not involved in an effective
co-design process.
For the purpose of our research, the interesting issue is the identification of the functional
advantages of scenarios in the design of interactive systems, including simplicity and accessibility
for all actors involved in the design process; the possibility to share a common language in the
                                                  74
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

design process; the enhancement of including various needs and extending creativity; and the
real opportunity to develop the design solution at all stages from brief to release.
In relation to the accessibility of cultural heritage and the application of UCD principles therein,
SBD is an appropriate approach to gain an in-depth understanding of the interaction of users
with different accessibility needs to improve accessibility by digital solutions. In the study by
Partarakis et al. ([36]), the interaction of different users with digital solutions for exhibitions is
represented through indicative scenarios. In this study, scenarios and personas are tools to better
understand a typical situation where different skill levels are involved in the interaction with
digital exhibits. The use of scenarios, in this case, is aimed to describe in a more practical way an
ordinary situation at the museum in relation to different types of user needs. The purpose of the
research is to focus on the elements that allow the visit to be enjoyable and satisfying. As in our
case, with the premise that the provision of universally accessible multimodal solutions for
cultural heritage is critical to providing equal access to cultural resources for all citizens including
the elderly and people with disabilities, the authors highlighted with the help of designed
scenarios the following Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) challenges to be addressed in order
to achieve accessibility to cultural heritage:
•     new paradigms of interaction;
•     new forms of user interface adaptation;
•     new interaction techniques for accessibility, designed for everyone;
•     alternative means of displaying information;
•     mechanisms for personalized retrieval;
•     intelligent assistive solutions customized for all domains.
To address these requirements, they finally propose an architecture that integrates every
component needed to solve the proposed issues.
Despite the fact that projects using SBD are on the rise, there is a lack of research focusing on
the use of this approach to support the identification of the requirements for an effective
interaction with a VR solution in the context of cultural heritage accessibility. Moreover, to the
best of our knowledge, SBD has never been used as an actual co-design tool; most commonly,
scenarios have been created for users’ evaluation to improve the proposed solutions. In our
project, SBD is used as a tool in the hands of the end users in a co-design process aimed to
develop a digital solution from a Design for All perspective. For the purpose of this research, the
proposal by Yanagida et al. ([46]), for a structured SBD method in HCI, focused on ubiquitous
computing and represented in Figure 1, is adopted as a reference.




                                                  75
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021




Figure 1: Basic model for the Structured Scenario-based Design Method. Source Yanagida et al (2009).


Following this method, a persona, reassuming needs, values, values offered by business, is used
as input information. In this work, the information is useful to develop three different scenarios,
service, activity, and interaction to obtain the systems/product specifications. The scope of the
proposal by Yanagida et al. ([46]) is to provide a framework for the SBD allowing users’ intrinsic
needs and values to be considered throughout every stage of the systems/products development,
through the specification stage. The input requirements are users’ intrinsic needs and values and
values offered by business identified by collecting user-related data such as questionnaires as a
quantitative approach, or photo diaries, photo essays interviews, or observations as a qualitative
approach. In order to develop a service scenario into an activity scenario and an interaction
scenario, persona synthesized from data collected from users are used to help better articulate
users’ behaviors and emotions in scenarios. As described in the next section, this approach was
adapted to the present research to include users with different accessibility needs in the design
process of a compensatory VR solution to support a visit to a partially accessible archaeological
site.



       Materials and Methods

According to Carrol ([8]), SBD changes the object of design from an artifact or system in the
world to a series of actions and experiences in human activity, and the previous review of
literature showed how it is a helpful tool to better understand the real needs of a larger audience
of visitors with different levels of accessibility needs in order to design for all. For this reason,
this approach is used in this research to support the identification of the functional and
experiential requirements of the digital solution from the users’ point of view, according to the
holistic perspective proposed by Hassenzhal ([22]) and in line with the requirements suggested
by Bekele and Champion ([3]) in relation to immersive reality technologies and interaction
methods for heritage experiences. To this end, this study engaged users, mainly with permanent
mobility impairments, in all the stages of the design cycle through UCD, which is depicted in
Figure 2. In line with the principles of Design for All, users have been involved in order to take
into account every possible instance in relation to different accessibility needs.


                                                  76
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

The co-design process was carried out in collaboration with three associations of disabled people
and accessible tourism. It is organized in four main phases:
1) Concept generation with users;
2) Personas design;
3) Preliminary scenarios design;
4) Prototype design with users and system development.
In the first phase, a multidisciplinary approach blending tourism experience design, HCI,
accessibility of cultural heritage has been applied for the explorative research aimed at identifying
the core elements of accessible heritage experience with VR and the target groups for developing
personas through an online survey, a focus group and in-depth interviews ([28]). Then, personas
have been developed on the profile features of the main target groups for the VR experience, in
relation to three features: 1) accessibility needs ([39]), 2) engagement with cultural heritage, 3)
attitude and use of technologies in tourism, including VR (the designed personas are reported in
Figures 3-6). In the design of preliminary scenarios, the four personas represent the protagonists
of four corresponding preliminary scenarios. Each scenario was matched with three elements, as
detailed in Table 1: a) level of accessibility of the site; b) users’ motivation for visiting the heritage
site and c) expertise or attitude in use of technology. Table 1 described all the possible scenarios
for a person with total or temporary impairments about to visit a cultural heritage site; they are
presented in the form of “open ended” scenarios, so as to be completed directly by users and
designers in the following co-design activity. As an example, in the first scenario Alfonso, a man
with permanent mobility impairment, has to define the annual recreative program for his
association, in which a cultural visit is planned: the scenario (Figures 8-13) describes the reactions
and problems that can arise in this typical situation. In the last phase, the SBD co-design activity
has been carried out: the design concept, the software simulation and the prototypes have been
developed for the creation of the digital solution, which subsequently have been used in the final
stages to design a last scenario with a low-fidelity prototype to be evaluated by the same users
involved in the design cycle.

        Tha co-design activity
The activity was structured in two sections: the first outlined objectives and methodology and
included general reflections, the second focused on the co-creation of the scenarios with users to
contextualize the elements relating to technology applications and provide design elements to be
satisfactorily designed. The overarching aim of the activity was to obtain the guidelines for the
development of the VR solution, for both the experiential and functional users’ requirements.




                                                   77
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021




Figure 2: The UCD Cycle for the research project.


The core of the co-design activity was the identification of functional and experiential
requirements useful for the implementation of the VR solution. The participation of users,
stakeholders and designers provided points of view and information on the specific needs of
users, with particular reference to those with mobility impairments, regarding some pragmatic
elements and contextual indications useful for the sustainability of the application. The specific
goal is the extrapolation of the design drivers for the release of mockups, i.e. prototypes that
precede the development of the low-fi application.
The activity has been articulated in two sections aimed at:
•    obtaining general background information on the cultural visit experience;
•    understanding the users' needs more closely tied to the hedonic-experiential dimension;
•    imagining the specific moments of the overall experience that the VR solution could
     support to improve accessibility;
•    obtaining some specific elements on the usability and the user interface of the solution;
•    obtaining drivers for the narrative modes of the virtual experience;
•    understanding the needs to satisfy through envisioned solution.

       Participants
Participants were chosen from the individuals who represented the requirements derived from
the preliminary analysis:
1. President of an association of people with disabilities, user with motor disability;
2. User with motor disability;
3. User with partial motor disability;

                                                    78
   B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

4. Stakeholder from tourism accessibility;
5. Hardware developer;
6. UI Designer;
7. Experience Designer;
8. Experience Designer;
9. UX Designer;
10. Accessible tourism expert.
The group included also one auditor, notably a manager from the IT company developing VR
solutions for Cultural Heritage. In the co-design session, the number of participants was even as
the activity was conducted in pairs alternating between moments of group reflection and design.




                                               79
Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021




                                       80
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality




Figures 3-6: Description of the personas.


                          Personas’
Preliminary
            Accessibility motivation and
scenarios                                        Scenarios’ Storyboard
            of the site   attitude towards
(P.S.)
                          technology
                                                 Persona 1 is a man, Alfonso, with a permanent
                              Persona 1:         mobility impairment, a member of an
                              Medium             association for people with disabilities, and he is
                              motivation,        looking for a cultural site for the annual
              Partially
P.S. 1                        medium attitude recreation program. The scenario describes a
              accessible
                              to use technology, typical situation in which he must find an
                              low experience     agreement among members by proposing a site
                              with VR.           to visit. He eventually finds an interesting, but
                                                 partially accessible site.
                                                Persona 2 is a young woman, Maria, with a
                           Persona 2:           permanent motor disability who would like to
                                                go on a cultural tour and a friend suggests her to
                           High motivation visit an extraordinary church that unfortunately
              Totally      to visit heritage, is totally inaccessible. The scenario shows
P.S. 2
              inaccessible high attitude to use
                                                Maria’s need to escape her comfortable but
                           technology           boring situation and consistently with her
                           (included VR)        character, her desire to visit and learn about
                                                cultural heritage that is often inaccessible.



                                                 81
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


                                                 Persona 3 is a young boy with a broken leg,
                              Persona 3:         Lorenzo, who is visiting a site with his
               Partially      Low motivation, classroom, but he is very bored and the partial
P.S.3                         high attitude in accessibility of the site is a barrier for him. It is
               accessible
                              use of technology, not rare for teenagers to find cultural visits
                              included VR.       uninteresting, although this problem is not
                                                 generally linked to momentary impairments.
                                               Persona 4 is Marina, an elderly woman with a
                              Persona 4:       great desire to visit a cultural site with her
                            Medium             granddaughter, but her mobility is limited, and
               Totally or
P.S.4          partially    motivation, low the site is not fully accessible. The proposed
                                               scenarios is devoted to the difficulties of older
               inaccessible attitude in use of
                            technologies, no age groups in sharing cultural visits with
                            VR experience.     younger relatives or friends, thus addressing the
                                               need of truly cross-cultural designs.


Table 1: The design features for preliminary scenarios.




                                                    82
B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality




                                           83
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021




Figures 7-13: Preliminary Scenario 1. Foto IlSistemone, CC BY-SA 4.0


The two sections of the activity were as follows: the first outlined objectives and methodology
and included general reflections, while the latter focused on the co-creation of the scenarios. The
presented preparatory tools have been used in the participatory design activities. The methods
encompassed, as illustrated in Table 2, both traditional methods (brainstorming) and creative
scenario design activities that facilitated subsequent readiness to provide insights into the
storytelling modality for the VR solution.


 Goals                     Activities                           Methods
 Empathy                   Know each other                      Introduction to the research
                                                                project
                                                                Self-presentation     of      the
                                                                participants
 Specific skills on key    Gathering information on the         Presentation of the accessibility
 issues.                   level of involvement and             issues by means of videos,
                           expertise on the proposed            examples, etc.
                           topics from users' and
                                                                Brainstorming on the proposed
                           stakeholders' perspective:
                                                                topics.
                           Accessibility
                                                                Using different VR solutions, by
                           Cultural Heritage                    Oculus, Cardboard, Web.
                           Use of technologies

                                                 84
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

 Presentation of Co-         Sharing of design tools;          Video sharing and description of
 Design       Activity,                                        the scenarios.
                             Scenario presentation
 Scenario
 Development
 Co-Design activity,         Co-design        for        the   Storytelling        development
 scenario development        implementation of scenarios       activities in pairs, using the
                             aimed at envisioning the          collage technique. Designers and
 VR           Experience
                             experience with the VR            users were provided with the
 Design
                             solution and co-design of some    frameworks of the chosen
                             of the pragmatic requirements     scenarios and images with pre-
                             of the VR solution.               structured vignettes to continue
                                                               the stories.
Table 2: Synthesis of co-design activity methods.


The activity was conducted during a Focus Group organized in a single day at the headquarters
of an association of people with disabilities. It was divided into three moments:
1) the empathize phase: participants' self-presenting and get to know each other;
2) evaluation of different digital solutions for the cultural visit: in order to provide everyone
with the necessary tools to carry out the activity feeling at ease, some preliminary moments of
presentation of the contents and of the participants were carried out. An initial phase of
brainstorming on the accessibility of cultural heritage and the actual technologies preceded a
phase of direct experience of different VR solutions for cultural heritage visits designed for
different devices:
a) web-based: a 3D model desktop base visit of an ancient cathedral;
b) for Oculus visor: a test of Oculus RIFT device with a VR cinematic experience of cultural site;
c) for smartphone+cardboard: an app for the virtual guided tour of a museum with smartphone
and cardboard.
The examples served not only the purpose of imagining more accurately the solution that the
project wanted to develop, but also of entrusting the meaning of functional requirements to
concrete examples, so that users were comfortable in the subsequent activity.
3) co-design of scenarios (combination of pairs users/designers, introduction of preliminary
scenarios structured as storyboards, co-design). The pairs worked together imagining the role of
VR as a trigger and compensative solution to visit the inaccessible cultural site, using the
preliminary scenarios as tools to implement and visualize a personalized story. The sharing of all
the preliminary scenarios has happened through video, after which the relating materials have
been supplied to the pairs consisting in sheets, images, balloon, and all would have facilitated the
process of imagining the continuation of the chosen scenario. This choice was adopted in order
to allow the designers to deeply understand the users’ desiderata, letting them imagine exactly a
situation in which they had repeatedly found themselves and in which the VR solution could be
an advantage if designed according to the preferred requirements. Each pair chose one of the

                                                    85
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


preliminary scenarios and with the collage technique designed the sequel of the story visualizing
the VR experience in relation to both experiential and functional requirements. An example of a
scenario designed by the user with the designer during the activity is provided in Figure 14: the
experiential requirements are underlined with a red line (“the Oculus must allow me to see what
is on the upper floor”) and the functional requirements with a yellow line (“I may need some of
these commands”).




Figure 14: An excerpt of a scenario co-created by user during the co-design activity.



        Findings

The findings of the co-design activity provided the requirements and their translation in practical
terms to inform the design of the VR experience. In particular, the findings include users’
requirements from both an experiential and technological perspective of the use of immersive
reality for cultural heritage, in line with Hassenzahl ([22]) and Bekele and Champion ([3]).
The experiential (ER) and functional (FR) requirements are described as follows (the quotations
reported in relation to the requirements are gathered from the comments of the participants
during the co-design activity).




                                                    86
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

       Experiential requirements
ER1. Universal Solution - The VR solution is expected to be implemented as a single experience
for all the potential visitors onsite rather than as a separated experience dedicated to users with
mobility impairments. Dedicated solutions for visitors with disabilities are negatively perceived
as marginalizing experiences.
ER2. Cultural engagement - Curiosity for the cultural experience is the driving force of every
imagined scenario, independently from the level of cultural motivation. This also implies the
importance of promoting offsite the possibility of an enhanced experience through VR in the
pre-visit stage as a trigger to live an innovative heritage experience and engage potential visitors.
For example, in relation to the P.S. 4 the participants have added a pre-visit narrative, in which
Persona 4 wants to visit again a museum that she remembers not being fully accessible at the
time of her last visit; she wonders if at the present time the site has been made accessible and
after a search on the web, she finds out that a novel Oculus solution is available at the site.
ER3. Connectedness - The possibility to share the experience with other visitors emerges a
fundamental experiential element in line with tom Dieck et al. ([42]). This is imagined by users
also as the possibility to share the experience with others offsite (“Being able to share what I'm
seeing with others- at the site or not”) and it is further indicated in relation to the possibility to
share related contents (e.g., pictures).
ER4. Intellectual stimulation - The virtual experience is a trigger to arouse the interest and
motivation of users to acquire knowledge about the site, in line with a broad meaning of
accessibility, including perceptual and cultural dimensions beyond physical accessibility
([37];[15]), as mentioned by a participant “true accessibility is in the information”. In this regard,
it also aligns with the role of VR to enable the understanding of cultural value of the heritage
experience as outlined by Arenghi and Agostiano ([2]) and Paladini et al. ([35]).
ER5. Storytelling– The narrative modality emerges as an important element; the involvement
through an engaging storytelling is requested by users, as previously found by tom Dieck et al.
([42]), especially in the initial moments of the on-site visit. As one participant noted, “what leads
me to visit a place is its story and beauty rather than what I can explore”.
ER6. Autonomy – this requirement emerged in relation to users’ possibility of choosing an
autonomous virtual exploration of the site next to a guided tour. The VR is expected to enable
users to “deepen the aspects that most interest” of the heritage site. Further, it relates to the
preference for personal smartphone over head-mounted displays in relation to the possibility to
use the device more autonomously. For VR devices human assistance is requested by users (“the
operator will assist me”). If the navigation has an immersive modality, it must include at least an
interactive independent part through smartphone or a screen display (“The app system comes to
you through your smartphone”).

       Functional requirements
FR1. Multimodal interaction - Narrative modalities of contents are strictly linked with the
devices’ functional requirements: for a more immersive visit with the possibility to explore many


                                                 87
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


details, multimodal interaction and the use of different device is preferred; in the designed
scenarios participants imagined immersive systems through oculus but also smartphones.
FR2. Minimal action/Minimalist design - The immersive modality is requested in the first
moment of the visit, but aim to autonomous use, the users need an interface menu useful to
navigate in all directions and zoom on details of site through basic controls.
FR3. Capacity of immersion/Use of diegetic and extradiegetic sound - In relation to the point of
view, generally it is described as very close to artifacts, even “from the inside”, e.g., the visitor
wants to be immersed into the scenes of a painting. In addition, sharing the point of view of
those who are not in the same part of the site via streaming. During the co-design activity, users
provided indications for a storytelling performed by an ‘expert’ character not necessarily being
visible to visitors (e.g., voice over).
FR4. Capacity of immersion/user participation – For improved accessibility, the functional
requirement should provide for details of the site, such as the presence of inaccessible areas as
well as details regarding impediments and difficulties (floors, ceilings) in the areas that the user
can visit; during the co-design activity the point of view is described as being very close to the
works of art and this is also related to the ER6.
FR5. Application Access - No profiling is preferred, but just automatic link when the visitor is
onsite through personal devices. This functional requirement is closely related to the experiential
one concerning autonomy in the experience (ER6). “The app system comes to you through your
smartphone”, which implies the automatic activation of the content without the need for
profiling, for an increased autonomy in the interaction with the solution.
FR6. Ease of use - Headsets/headphones are not preferred as they could not be handled
independently.
FR7. Co-located collaboration/ Remote collaboration - The designed scenario includes the
sharing of the experience through various modalities: posting photographs after the visit through
the application, during the visit via chat (i.e. in the form of call out), through a form of
interaction like multiplayer, in line with the ER3.
The requirements obtained with SBD method have been integrated into a design model that
establishes a correspondence between experiential and functional requirements (Figure 15).
The model links the experiential requirements corresponding to the users’ needs (on the left)
obtained during the explorative research phase ([28]) to the functional requirements of the VR
(on the right), which were designed by users and designers during the co-design activity, through
the core drivers of the accessible heritage experience enabled by VR that were gathered from
literature and confirmed through the first stage of the research. It thus establishes a
correspondence between experiential and functional requirements obtained during the co-design
activity to ensure that the solution meets the core experiential drivers, notably feeling part of a
cultural community, living a social fulfilling experience, being intellectually stimulated and
empowered to live an autonomous experience.
The requirements informed the design of a final scenario, depicted in Figures 16-27, which
supports the development of the low-fi prototype of the VR solution. In this final scenario, the

                                                 88
    B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

whole visitor journey is considered from the pre-visit stage to illustrate the case of use of the VR
solution for providing enhanced accessibility to the archeological site chosen for the project. In
relation to the onsite stage, it depicts the different requirements for the VR-enabled heritage
experience, including the choice between autonomous and guided tour.




Figure 15: A framework of correspondence between functional and experiential elements of VR -enabled
accessible visit.



       Conclusions

This study provides insights into the process, tools and outcomes of a user experience design
based on SBD illustrating how this method can be deployed to support the development of a
digital solution as compensatory tool for cultural heritage accessibility through the identification
of the requirements of users with disabilities, with specific regard to mobility impairments. For
the possibility it offers to visualize the context and the visitor interaction therein, this method
enables potential users to actively co-create the VR solution in relation to their expected
experience along their visitor journey. Based on SBD, the research allowed to identify the
experiential and functional requirements of the VR solution in relation to three different cultural
heritage sites characterized by different level of accessibility. These findings were useful for VR
designers to imagine a specific user to design for. In particular, the contribution of the co-design
activity has been integrated in the development of the solution by proposing multimodal access
to all the contents using personal devices and in all the stages of the experience taking into
account the different needs for accessibility. This method is useful also in relation to the
difficulties stressed by literature of evaluating the applications during the all iterative UCD cycle
before a prototype is evaluated. In this sense, the SBD approach is useful for a continuous
refinement of the interfaces that then will be evaluated imagining their use in specific contexts.

                                                 89
    Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


The study illustrates how SBD can be usefully applied for effectively involving users with
accessibility needs in the whole UCD process, and not just only in the final stages of testing of
the solutions. In this way, it provides a methodological contribution to address relevant design
challenges in the specific context under investigation, in line with design for empowerment
([26];[27]). Notwithstanding the increased emphasis on user engagement to address the
challenge of accessibility from a design for all perspective, research on the tools and methods for
the co-creation and co-design of digital solutions for user empowerment is still in its infancy.
The contribution also corroborates the usefulness of this method for tourism experience design
([43];[29]), by taking into account users’ perspectives as humans (and not just consumers) within
a holistic experience along the visitor journey. It finally supported its relevant role in facilitating
interdisciplinary collaboration ([11]) in a context where collaborative interdisciplinary work is
key to address the design challenge for accessibility ([27]).




                                                  90
B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality




                                           91
Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021




                                       92
   B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality




                            Figures 16-27: An excerpt of final scenario.



       Acknowledgements

This study is supported by the Campania Region (POR FESR CAMPANIA 2014/2020) -
Project #In-Heritage - Integrated Technology System for Accessing In-Visible Heritage.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaboration with Disabled Peoples’ International
(Comitato Territoriale della Campania), ItaliAccessibile, Unione Italiana Lotta alla Distrofia
Muscolare (sezione di Caserta), the Superintendence of the Archeological Park of Campi Flegrei
and thank all the participants for their invaluable contribution to this research.



       References

[1] Agostiano, Maria. 2016. “Enjoyment of Cultural Heritage and "Compensatory
    Solutions" for an Alternative Accessibility”. In Accessibility as a key enabling knowledge for
    enhancement of cultural heritage, edited by Alberto Arenghi, Ilaria Garofalo, and
    Oddbjorn Sormoen, 131-147, Franco Angeli, Milano.
[2] Arenghi, Alberto, and Maria, Agostiano. 2016. “Cultural Heritage and Disability: Can
    ICT Be the ‘Missing Piece’ to Face Cultural Heritage Accessibility Problems?”. In Smart
    Objects and Technologies for Social Good. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer
    Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, edited by Ombretta
    Gaggi, Pietro Manzoni, Claudio Palazzi, Armir Bujari, and Johann M. Marquez-Barja,
    70-77, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61949-
                                                93
   Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


[3] Bekele, Mafkereseb Kassahun, and Erik Champion. 2019. “A comparison of immersive
     realities and interactions methods: cultural learning in virtual heritage”. Frontiers in
     Robotics and AI 6:91. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.0009
[4] Beltrán, Maria Eugenia, Ursa, Yolanda, de los Rios, Silvia, Cabrera-Umpiérrez,
     María Fernanda, Arredondo, María Teresa, Páramo, Miguel, Prados, Belén,
     and Lucía María Pérez. 2014. “Engaging people with cultural heritage: Users’
     perspective”. In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Universal Access to
     Information and Knowledge edited by Constantine Stephanidis, Margherita Antona, 639-
     649, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07440-5_58
[5] Bettelli, Alice, Orso, Valeria, Pluchino, Patrik, and Luciano Gamberini. 2019. “An
     enriched visit to the botanical garden: co-designing tools and contents”. In Proceedings of
     the 13th Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI Chapter: Designing the next
     interaction, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351995.3352034
[6] Bozzelli, Guido, Raia, Antonio, Ricciardi, Stefano, De Nino, Maurizio, Barile, Nicola,
     Perrella, Marco, Tramontano, Marco, Pagano, Alfonsina, and Augusto Palombini. 2019.
     “An integrated VR/AR framework for user-centric interactive experience of cultural
     heritage: The ArkaeVision project”. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural
     Heritage 15: e00124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2019.e00124
[7] Buonincontri, Piera, and Alessandra Marasco. 2017. “Enhancing cultural heritage
     experiences with smart technologies: An integrated experiential framework”. European
     Journal of Tourism Research 17: 83-101. https://doi.org/10.54055/ejtr.v17i.295
[8] Carroll, John M. 2001. "Scenario-based design: A brief history and rationale." In Design
     knowing and learning: cognition in design education, edited by Charles M. Eastman, W.
     Michael McCracken and Wendy C. Newstetter, 241-268, Elsevier Science.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008043868-9/50011-5
[9] Cetorelli, Gabriella, and Manuel R. Guido. 2017. Il Patrimonio Culturale per tutti.
     Fruibilità, riconoscibilità, accessibilità. Quaderni della valorizzazione – NS. 4, Direzione
     Generale Musei, Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali e del Turismo.
[10] Cetorelli, Gabriella. 2017. “Anno Europeo del Patrimonio Culturale. Celebrare,
     nell’identità comune, la diversità umana, il dialogo interculturale, la coesione sociale.
     Idee, azioni e prospettive di futuro per il superamento delle barriere tangibili, intangibili e
     digitali nei luoghi della cultura italiani”. In Il Patrimonio culturale per tutti. Fruibilità,
     riconoscibilità, accessibilità, edited by Gabriella Cetorelli and Manuel R. Guido, 17-34.
     Quaderni della valorizzazione – NS. 4. Direzione Generale Musei, Ministero dei Beni e
     delle Attività Culturali e del Turismo.
[11] Ciasullo, Maria Vincenza Ciasullo, Gaeta, Angelo, Gaeta, Matteo, and Giulia Monetta.
     2016. “New modalities for enhancing cultural heritage experience. The enabling role of
     digital technologies”. Sinergie Italian Journal of Management 34 (Jan-Apr): 119-139.
     https://doi.org/10.7433/s99.2016.08
[12] Coccia, Flavia. 2017. “Per un turismo culturale di qualità occorre maggiore accessibilità”.
     In Il Patrimonio culturale per tutti. Fruibilità, riconoscibilità, accessibilità, edited by

                                                94
   B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

     Gabriella Cetorelli and Manuel R. Guido, Quaderni della valorizzazione – NS. 4,
     Direzione Generale Musei, Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali e del Turismo.
[13] Comes, Radu, Neamțu, Calin, Buna, Zsolt Levente, Bodi, Ștefan, Popescu, Daniela,
     Tompa, Vasile, Ghinea, Rares, and Liliana Mateescu-Suciu. 2020. “Enhancing
     accessibility to cultural heritage through digital content and virtual reality: a case study of
     the Sarmizegetusa Regia Unesco site”. Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology 7(3):
     124-139. https://doi.org/10.14795/j.v7i3.561
[14] Cooper, Alan, Reimann, Robert, Cronin, David, and Christofer Noessel. 2014. About
     face: the essentials of interaction design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
[15] Deffner, Alex, Psatha, Eva, Bogiantzidis, Nicolaos, Mantas, Neoklis, Vlachaki, Elena, and
     Polyxeni Ntaflouka. 2015. “Accessibility to Culture and Heritage: Designing for All”. In
     Proceedings of the AESOP 2015 Conference ‘Definite space—Fuzzy responsibility’, Prague,
     Czech Republic, 13–16 July 2015.
[16] Enns, David.2018. “Museum uses Virtual Reality to allow blind people to ‘see’ famous
     sculptures”. Museum Next, 28 March, 2018,
     https://www.museumnext.com/article/museum-uses-virtual-reality-to-allow-blind-people-
     to-see-famous-sculptures/
[17] Fogli, Daniela, and Alberto Arenghi. 2018. “'Design for All' versus' One-Size-Fits-All':
     The Case of Cultural Heritage”. In Proceedings of Fifth International Workshop on
     Cultures of Participation in the Digital Age - CoPDA@ AVI. 89-96.
[18] Fogli, Daniela, Sansoni, Davide, Trivella, Emanuele, Arenghi, Alberto, and Ivana
     Passamani. 2017. “Advanced interaction technologies for accessible and engaging cultural
     heritage”. In Smart Objects and Technologies for Social Good. Lecture Notes of the Institute
     for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, edited
     by Barbara Guidi, Laura Ricci, Carlos Calafate, Ombretta Gaggi, Johann Marquez-Barja,
     364-373, Springer, Cham.
[19] Guttentag, Daniel A. 2010. “Virtual reality: Applications and implications for tourism”.
     Tourism Management 31(5): 637-651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.07.003
[20] Hall, Tony, and Liam J. Bannon. 2005. “Co-operative design of children’s interaction in
     museums: a case studying the Hunt Museum”. CoDesign 1(3): 187-218.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880512331392362
[21] Han, Dai-In Danny, Weber, Jessika, Bastiaansen, Marcel, Mitas, Ondrej, and Xander
     Lub. 2019. “Virtual and augmented reality technologies to enhance the visitor experience
     in cultural tourism”. In Augmented reality and virtual reality. The Power of AR and VR for
     Business, edited by M. Claudia tom Dieck and Timothy Jung, 113-128, Springer, Cham.
[22] Hassenzahl, Marc. 2003. “The Thing and I: Understanding the Relationship Between
     User and Product”, In Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment, edited by Mark A. Blythe,
     Kees Overbeeke, Andrew F. Monk, and Peter C. Wright, 31-42, Dordrect: Kluwer
     Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2967-5_4
[23] ISO, 9241-210: 2010. 2010.“Ergonomics of human system interaction-Part 210:
     Human-centred design for interactive systems”. International Standardization
     Organization (ISO), Switzerland.
                                                   95
   Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


[24] Jung, Timothy, and M. Claudia tom Dieck. 2017.“Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality
     and 3D Printing for Co-Creation of Value for Visitor Experience at Cultural Heritage
     Places”. Journal of Place Management and Development 10(2): 140-
     151. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-07-2016-0045
[25] Kosmas, Panagiotis, Galanakis, George, Constantinou, Vaso, Drossis, Giannis, Christofi,
     Maria, Klironomos, Iosif, Panayiotis, Zaphiris, Antona, Margherita, and Constantine
     Stephanidis. 2020. “Enhancing accessibility in cultural heritage environments:
     considerations for social computing”. Universal Access in the Information Society 19(2):
     471-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-019-00651-4
[26] Ladner, Richard E. 2015. “Design for user empowerment”. Interactions 22(2): 24-29.
     https://doi.org/10.1145/2723869
[27] Laurìa, Antonio. 2016. “Accessibility to cultural heritage as a design challenge”. In
     Accessibility as a key enabling knowledge for enhancement of cultural heritage, edited by
     Alberto Arenghi, Ilaria Garofalo, and Oddbjorn Sormoen, 90-104, Franco Angeli,
     Milano.
[28] Marasco, Alessandra, and Barbara Balbi. 2019. “Designing Accessible Experiences for
     Heritage Visitors Through Virtual Reality”. e-Review of Tourism Research 17(3): 426-443.
[29] McCabe, Scott, Sharples, Mike, and Clare Foster. 2012. Stakeholder engagement in the
     design of scenarios of technology-enhanced tourism services. Tourism Management
     Perspectives 4: 36-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2012.04.007
[30] Michopoulou, Eleni, Darcy, Simon, Ambrose, Ivor, and Dimitrios Buhalis. 2015.
     “Accessible tourism futures: the world we dream to live in and the opportunities we hope
     to have”. Journal of Tourism Futures 1 (3): 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-08-
     2015-0043
[31] Montagud, Mario, Orero, Pilar, and Anna Matamala. 2020. “Culture 4 all: accessibility-
     enabled cultural experiences through immersive VR360 content”. Personal and
     Ubiquitous Computing 24(6): 887-905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-019-01357-3
[32] Muscarà, Marinella, and Chiara Sani. 2019. “Accessibility to Cultural Heritage, some
     project outcomes”. Education Sciences & Society-Open Access 10(1): 244-280
[33] Nigay, Laurence, Salembier, Pascal, Marchand, T., Renevier, P., and L. Pasqualetti.
     2002. “Mobile and collaborative augmented reality: A scenario based design approach”.
     In Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
     edited by Fabio Paternò, 241-255. Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-
     45756-9_19
[34] Njerekai, Cleopas. 2020. “An application of the virtual reality 360° concept to the Great
     Zimbabwe monument”. Journal of Heritage Tourism 15(5):567-579.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2019.1696808
[35] Paladini, Alice, Dhanda, Abhijit, Reina Ortiz, Miquel, Weigert, Adam, Nofal, Eslam,
     Min, A, Gyi, M, Su, S, Van Balen, Koen, and Mario Santana Quintero. 2019. “Impact of
     virtual reality experience on accessibility of cultural heritage”. The International Archives


                                               96
   B. Balbi, A. Marasco – Co-designing Cultural Heritage Experiences for All with Virtual Reality

     of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42: 929-936,
     https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W11-929-2019
[36] Partarakis, Nikolaos, Klironomos, Iosif, Antona, Margherita, Margetis, George,
     Grammenos, Dimitris, and Costantine Stephanidis. 2016. “Accessibility of cultural
     heritage exhibits”. In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Interaction
     Techniques and Environments, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, edited by Margherita
     Antona, Costantine Stephanidis, 444-455. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
     3-319-40244-4_43
[37] Pérez, Emiliano, Merchán, Pilar, Merchán, Maria J., and Santiago Salamanca. 2020.
     “Virtual reality to foster social integration by allowing wheelchair users to tour complex
     archaeological sites realistically”. Remote Sensing 12(3):
     419. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030419
[38] Rosson, Mary Beth and John M. Carroll. 2009. “Scenario based design”. In Human‐
     Computer Interaction – Development process, edited by Andrew Sears, Julie A. Jacko, 145-
     162, Boca Raton: CRC Press.
[39] Schulz, Trenton, and Kristin Skeide Fuglerud. 2012. “Creating personas with
     disabilities”. In Computers Helping People with Special Needs. Lecture Notes in
     Computer Science, edited by Miesenberger K., Karshmer A., Penaz P., Zagler W., 145-
     152, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31534-3_2
[40] Southall, Helen, Marmion, Maeve, and Andrew Davies. 2019. “Adapting Jake Knapp’s
     design sprint approach for AR/VR applications in digital heritage”. In Augmented reality
     and virtual reality. The Power of AR and VR for Business, edited by M. Claudia tom Dieck
     and Timothy Jung, 59-70, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06246-
     0_5
[41] Strömberg, Hanna, Väätänen, Antti, and Veli-Pekka Räty. 2002. “A group game played
     in interactive virtual space: design and evaluation”. In Proceedings of the 4th conference on
     Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, 56-63, New York:
     ACM Press.
[42] tom Dieck, M. Claudia, Jung, Timothy, and Eleni Michopoulou. 2019. “Experiencing
     virtual reality in heritage attractions: Perceptions of elderly users”. In Augmented reality
     and virtual reality. The Power of AR and VR for Business, edited by M. Claudia tom Dieck
     and Timothy Jung, 89-98, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06246-
     0_7
[43] Tussyadiah, Iis. P. 2014. “Toward a theoretical foundation for experience design in
     tourism”. Journal of Travel Research 53(5): 543-564.
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513513172
[44] World Health Organization. 2021. “Disability and Health”, WTO Fact sheets, November
     24, 2021. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health
[45] World Tourism Organization.2013. Recommendations on Accessible Tourism,
     Madrid:UNWTO.
     https://www.accessibletourism.org/resources/accesibilityen_2013_unwto.pdf

                                               97
  Umanistica Digitale – ISSN: 2532-8816 – n. 11, 2021


[46] Yanagida, Koji, Ueda, Yoshihiro, Go, Kentaro, Takahashi, Katsumi, Hayakawa, Seiji, and
     Kazuhiko Yamazaki. 2002. “Structured scenario-based design method”. In Human
     Centered Design. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, edited by Masaaki Kurosu 374-
     380, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9_43




                                           98
