Next Article in Journal
Compatibility of Polycarboxylate Ethers with Cementitious Systems Containing Fly Ash: Effect of Molecular Weight and Structure
Previous Article in Journal
Predicting the Effects of Nano Additives and Elevated Temperatures on Concrete Compressive Strength Utilizing Machine Learning
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Buildings
Volume 15
Issue 18
10.3390/buildings15183350
buildings-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Embodied Cognition and Built Heritage Education: A Case Study of Macau’s Historical Architecture

by
Junyi Zhao
,
Mengshun Lee
* and
Xinyu Li
Faculty of Innovation and Design, City University of Macau, Macau 999078, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2025, 15(18), 3350; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15183350
Submission received: 11 August 2025 / Revised: 12 September 2025 / Accepted: 13 September 2025 / Published: 16 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Architectural Design, Urban Science, and Real Estate)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Applying embodied cognition theory is essential for the conservation and revitalization of architectural heritage. This paper examines how embodied cognition, architectural design, and local historical resources impact the conservation and revitalization of architectural heritage. Analysis of 435 valid questionnaires through structural equation modeling reveals that embodied experience, immersive environments, architectural atmosphere, and the utilization of historical resourceSSs play critical roles in the conservation and revitalization of heritage, with the utilization of historical resources having the most significant effect. This research demonstrates that embodied cognition theory can effectively integrate historical heritage resources by promoting multi-sensory engagement and spatial experience, facilitating the sustainable use and regeneration of architectural heritage. Based on these findings, the paper further discusses the potential and strategies for applying embodied cognition in the conservation and revitalization of historical heritage resources.

1. Introduction

In recent years, due to the modernization process, climate change, and insufficient understanding of cultural heritage, many historical buildings worldwide have faced significant challenges, with many suffering damage or even disappearing as a result [1]. Scholars have proposed integrating embodied cognition theory with cultural heritage resources to address the challenge of resource utilization. This innovative approach not only contributes to the protection and revitalization of historical buildings but also offers a fresh perspective on heritage regeneration [2]. The goal is to deepen the public’s understanding of cultural heritage by integrating cognitive science theories with historical resources.
However, the application of embodied cognition theory to the protection of architectural heritage is still in the exploratory stage. Embodied cognition theory posits that cognition arises from the dynamic interaction between the body and the environment. This concept can be traced back to the phenomenological tradition of the early twentieth century. It has been argued by philosophers such as Edmund Husserl and Maurice Merleau-Ponty that perception and consciousness are closely linked to the existence of the body, and that understanding the body presupposes an understanding of experience. This philosophical framework is employed as the theoretical basis in the present study for applying cognitive approaches to the protection of architectural heritage [3]. Every meaningful architectural experience is multi-sensory, with matter, space, and scale perceived together through the eyes, ears, nose, skin, bones, and muscles. Cultural heritage encompasses more than just old buildings; it also embodies passed-down culture, values, and traditions that reflect the identity of a group [4]. Currently, the integration of multi-sensory experiences faces multiple challenges, including how to effectively incorporate heritage buildings into practical applications and academic courses, how to balance cultural values and environmental sustainability in the process of material preservation, and how to ensure that historical buildings can smoothly integrate into contemporary urban life after restoration.
Macao, with its unique status of Sino-Portuguese cultural heritage and its role as an economic hub, as well as the government’s active support for heritage education, has provided experimental soil for addressing the above-mentioned issues. In addition, the current revival of historical buildings in Macao is confronted with three major challenges: excessive commercialization, the disconnection between material and intangible protection, and the contradiction between tourists’ experience demands and traditional display methods [5]. During the rapid development of cities, high-rise buildings are gradually obscuring historical landmarks and threatening the integrity of cultural heritage. These issues highlight the significant role of innovative educational strategies in raising public awareness of the value of heritage [6]. The early norms in international heritage protection serve as the historical basis for this article’s research. For instance, the 1931 “Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historical Monuments” advocated the removal of intrusions such as billboards and power poles from the landscapes surrounding historical monuments. Moreover, the 1964 “Venice Charter” further emphasized that monuments are inseparable from their historical settings and broadened protection from individual structures to their wider environments. These early conventions established the principle that memorial buildings should be protected along with their historical environments, providing important guidance for contemporary cultural heritage education and regeneration [7].
The primary objective of this research is to examine whether the innovative revitalization model based on embodied cognition can promote the protection and sustainable reuse of historical buildings while supporting the development of cultural tourism in Macao. To this end, three research questions are proposed: (1) How do physical participation and immersive classrooms influence learning satisfaction and outcomes? (2) To what extent do architectural design and spatial atmosphere influence learning satisfaction and outcomes? (3) How does the utilization of historical resources (including the acquisition of professional knowledge, integration of culture and tourism, and heritage protection) influence learning satisfaction and outcomes? How do physical participation, architectural design, and historical resources compare in terms of their influence on learning satisfaction and outcomes?
This study uses Macao as a case to investigate integration strategies for immersive experiences and local historical heritage resources through questionnaire surveys and structural equation models. The study aims to determine whether an innovative revitalization model based on embodied cognition can promote the protection and sustainable reuse of historical buildings while supporting the development of cultural tourism in Macao. The findings indicate that integrating immersive experiences with local historical heritage resources effectively safeguards and revitalizes historical buildings, expands historical and cultural knowledge, enhances public awareness of heritage protection, and promotes cross-cultural exchanges, thereby opening new avenues for the sustainable utilization of cultural heritage.

2. Literature Review and Research Hypothesis

2.1. Embodied Cognition Theory and Heritage Perception

Within the embodied cognition framework, cognition is understood as emerging from bodily interactions with the environment, a perspective that has attracted considerable attention across education, psychology, neuroscience, and heritage studies [8]. According to this framework, cognition, the body, and the environment are interdependent. They form relational bonds that create a “sense of place” by connecting people with spatial settings and fostering attachment and belonging [9]. The body serves as the medium for consciousness and the mind, providing both the content and the processes essential for cognitive functions. Architecture mediates between individuals and the world through the senses, and spaces are experienced as multi-sensory lived environments [10]. In the context of architectural heritage conservation and revitalization, embodied cognition theory emphasizes multi-sensory bodily engagement with heritage spaces; interacting with materials, light, sound, and scent deepens perception and fosters emotional resonance and identity [11]. Such engagement enhances perceptual abilities and strengthens emotional resonance, enabling participants to appreciate and preserve historic buildings, while heritage education programs reaffirm identity and promote mutual respect and diversity. As shown in Figure 1, architecture affects human thoughts, physical health, and behavior by shaping experiences [12].
Simultaneously, multi-sensory perception and environmental interaction reduce cognitive load, allowing individuals to acquire experiential knowledge and develop cognitive skills through embodied movement and direct spatial experiences rather than relying on decontextualized knowledge [13]. This article integrates phenomenology and local attachment theory, emphasizing multi-sensory engagement and social significance. This perspective aligns with the concept of embodied cognition, which emphasizes the interaction between the body and the environment, thereby providing an educational foundation for the design of immersive classrooms in this study. This study is designed to examine how embodied experiences, architectural atmosphere, and the utilization of historical resources influence learning satisfaction and outcomes among students and professionals in architecture and heritage disciplines, thereby informing the conservation and revitalization of architectural heritage. To achieve these aims, the following hypotheses posit that embodied perception and immersive environments positively influence learning satisfaction and academic outcomes in heritage education:
H1a: 
Body perception and immersive classrooms positively influence learning satisfaction.
H1b: 
Body perception and immersive classrooms positively influence learning effectiveness.

2.2. Embodied Cognition in Architectural Design and Atmosphere

Architecture functions as a medium that provides individuals with feeling, identity, and spatial orientation, creating a sense of place that strengthens attachment and belonging [14]. Research on place attachment indicates that individuals’ emotional connection to a place arises from the interaction among social, cultural, and material environments. On this basis, it is emphasized by scholars that localities are products of the relationships between mobility and rights and involve the construction of individual experiences and collective memory [15,16]. The bodily experience of architectural space is inherently multi-sensory and constitutes embodied cognition, not merely a personal sensation. Studies of embodied cognition indicate that schemata embedded in bodily experience enhance our understanding of architectural space; by integrating philosophical insights and cognitive science, the embodied mind actively constructs meaning within spatial settings [17,18]. Spatial experience integrates environmental stimuli, kinesthetic sensations and synesthetic responses, enabling perceivers to actively resonate with their surroundings [19,20]. This integration aligns architectural imagery with human emotions and atmosphere, underscoring that space is experienced holistically rather than through isolated visual cues. It is argued by Pallasmaa in The Eyes of the Skin that architecture should be understood as a fundamentally multi-sensory medium, and that meaningful encounters with place are shaped by the interplay of all senses rather than by vision alone [21]. Architects enable experiencers to explore the potential of space through multi-sensory design strategies that engage materials, light, sound, smell, and tactility; such design enhances the embodied quality of contemporary architecture [22]. Immersive, multi-sensory environments allow individuals to internalize the designer’s intentions, fostering deeper comprehension of spatial narratives and values. Employing bodily metaphors within architectural settings helps designers anticipate interactive behaviors, bridging abstract concepts and tangible experiences [23]. At the same time, as shown in Figure 2, using bodily metaphors in the architectural environment effectively allows architects to understand interactive behaviors [24].
Multimodal actions of the human body, including gestures and tactile interactions, play a crucial role in enabling designers to create a conceptual experience model that reflects future spatial and aesthetic characteristics. Certain abstract features inherent to architecture are activated by human physiological traits [25,26]. In the realm of architectural heritage, the physical characteristics of a space significantly influence the way individuals interact with and understand its cultural context. Students’ satisfaction and learning effectiveness are also impacted by the spatial atmosphere of heritage buildings, as the integration of historical value with modern functionality offers a unique perspective for learning and interaction [27]. When designing a curriculum, the spatial atmosphere of the teaching environment can effectively enhance the physical perception and emotional engagement of both students and teachers. This enhancement is likely to result in targeted professional satisfaction and improved learning effectiveness. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:
H2a: 
Architectural design and spatial atmosphere positively influence students’ satisfaction with heritage experiences.
H2b: 
Architectural design and spatial atmosphere positively influence students’ learning effectiveness related to architectural heritage.

2.3. Historical Architectural Resources and Education

In the context of architectural heritage, students often rely on textual materials, which can limit their tactile engagement with the physical space. Early reliance on academic authority may also diminish their confidence in developing personal perspectives and theories. While modern technology offers multimedia resources, physical spaces, particularly those related to architectural heritage, provide an invaluable experience that supports student development and prepares them for future careers [28]. Future architectural heritage education should integrate digital technology skills and incorporate local historical building conservation and utilization practices into the curriculum [29]. This approach enables sustainable practices and ensures that modern heritage restoration projects are planned and implemented within defined constraints and under supervision. Such initiatives typically require collaboration among multidisciplinary professionals. Course designs based on real heritage cases can ensure the practical value of the curriculum, serve as a bridge between students and history, and enhance students’ understanding of cultural heritage [30,31]. In Macao, the local government has leveraged the advantages of its World Heritage status and multicultural heritage to actively promote education on the protection of historical architectural. It has signed a cooperation agreement with the Portuguese Architectural Heritage Bureau to enhance efforts in the protection, improvement, and maintenance of architectural heritage. Additionally, academic research grants have been established to foster studies of local culture through historical architectural heritage [32]. The conservation and application of historical and cultural heritage not only involve safeguarding the physical structures but also conserving and planning for the cultural traces embedded within them and the organic integration of the surrounding environment [33]. Education driven by historical heritage resources and focused on relational processes and heritage-making behaviors embodies a symbiotic approach to global integration. This form of heritage education not only fosters respect for cultural diversity but also enhances students’ self-identity and intercultural competence [34]. Within the framework of utilizing historical heritage resources, increased student engagement with the course content correlates positively with enhanced learning satisfaction and improved educational outcomes. Consequently, we formulate the following hypothesis:
H3a: 
The role of historical resources positively influences learning satisfaction.
H3b: 
The role of historical resources positively influences learning effectiveness.

2.4. Research Theory Model

Based on the above analysis, this study constructed a relationship model among embodied immersion, architectural design, historical resources, learning satisfaction, and learning effectiveness (Figure 3).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Area

This study focuses on the Historic Centre of Macao as the research area. This region, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, has witnessed the convergence of Eastern and Western aesthetics, cultures, architectures, and technologies. With over five hundred years of cross-cultural exchanges, Macao continues to retain Portuguese as its official language and preserves its unique mixed-cultural identity since its return in 1999 [35]. The Macao Special Administrative Region Government has classified cultural heritage into multiple categories through legislation, emphasizing the protection of individual buildings while preserving the city’s overall layout and maintaining the spirit of place through cultural activities. The integration of architectural heritage with urban development and cultural tourism is in line with the economic diversification of Macao and the development goals of The Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area [36]. However, rapid urban development, excessive commercialization, and high-rise construction pose significant threats to the integrity of heritage sites, with many historical buildings left in disrepair due to limited funding. Although the government has strengthened promotional and educational efforts to raise public awareness of heritage protection, numerous challenges remain. This rich cultural background, policy framework, and current pressures provide an ideal context for this study to explore the integration of embodied cognition theory with heritage education.

3.2. Data Collection and Participants

The respondents of this study primarily include students and teachers majoring in architectural design, environmental design, fine arts, cultural heritage protection and restoration, and other related fields, along with a few professionals engaged in design practice or heritage management. Data were collected through an online questionnaire on WenJuanXing. A total of 463 questionnaires were collected, with 28 invalid responses excluded, resulting in 435 valid responses. All measurement items were assessed using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree. The questionnaire consisted of 39 questions, designed to explore the role of immersive classrooms in the context of embodied cognition and the utilization of Macao’s historical heritage resources in architectural design practices.
Initially, the questionnaire assessed the acceptance of immersive classrooms by participants. Subsequently, it explored the application of embodied cognition theory within fields such as architectural design, focusing particularly on the integration of local historical and natural resources in Macao. This provided a deeper understanding of how historical heritage is incorporated into the design process and how embodied cognition might enhance spatial experiences related to architectural conservation and revitalization.
Before presenting the measurement indicators, we will briefly describe the theoretical foundation of each dimension of the questionnaire:
The dimension of embodied immersion: physical participation and immersive classroom projects are based on Li et al.’s research on educational travel and deep learning assessment scales, emphasizing physical participation, flexible environments, and multi-sensory engagement [37,38].
Architectural design dimension: based on research in architectural psychology and spatial perception, particularly the influence of body–environment interaction and multi-sensory experience on spatial cognition [26,39].
The dimension of historical resources: a comprehensive body of literature integrating heritage education, professional knowledge acquisition, and cultural tourism, emphasizing the equal importance of protection and education [33].
Dimensions of learning satisfaction and learning effectiveness: drawing from research on educational tourism and online learning effectiveness, focusing on the integration of theory and practice, the teacher–student relationship, and the enhancement of skills [40]. The literature foundation outlined above supports the establishment of each dimension and measurement index in Table 1.

3.3. Analysis of the Survey Questionnaire Results

As shown in Table 2 of the results of this questionnaire survey, the gender distribution is relatively balanced, with male respondents accounting for 51.26% and female respondents accounting for 48.74%. The target population for this questionnaire survey primarily comprises students and faculty members in education institutions. In terms of age distribution, the majority of respondents fall within the 18–25 and 26–35 age groups, accounting for 37.7% and 38.39%, respectively. Regarding educational background, the largest proportion of respondents hold Associate or Bachelor’s degrees, representing 56.78%. Additionally, a significant number of respondents are postgraduate students (27.13%) and doctoral students (11.49%). In terms of professional fields, the predominant areas are design studies (29.43%), environmental design (24.37%), and fine arts (13.56%). Additionally, cultural heritage protection and restoration account for 10.34%, while education represents 13.79% of respondents. The sample data exhibit a certain degree of representativeness in terms of gender, age, and educational attainment. Concurrently, the diversity of professional fields and the data outcomes offer valuable references and abundant data support for the subsequent analysis of the disciplinary application of embodied cognition theory in the design major.

3.4. Model Verification and Results

Reliability and Validity Analysis

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using SPSS 27.0 to evaluate the stability and suitability of the data for factor analysis. The sample data were assessed using the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s test of sphericity. The results indicated a highly significant p-value of 0.000 (p < 0.001), confirming the adequacy of the data for factor analysis, with a KMO value of 0.976, which is well above the recommended threshold. As shown in Table 3, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the five latent variables ranged from 0.817 to 0.949, indicating satisfactory internal consistency. The overall questionnaire reliability was 0.973, further confirming the robustness of the measurement model. Principal component analysis extracted five factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, accounting for a cumulative explained variance of 72.881%. This suggests that the extracted factors effectively capture the majority of the information in the original dataset. Therefore, the questionnaire’s high internal consistency, stability, and reliability confirm its suitability for empirical analysis.

3.5. Structural Equation Analysis

3.5.1. Structural Equation Model Fit Test

The AMOS 26.0 software was used to conduct the fit and test of the structural equation model, yielding the overall fit test results. The results of the initial model simulation are presented in Figure 4. The modification indices (MIs) between the latent variables of embodied immersion, architectural design, and historical resources are notably high, suggesting the necessity to introduce additional paths to improve model fit. Furthermore, a residual covariance path between e15 and e16 was added. After these adjustments, the corrected model exhibits satisfactory fit indices, achieving optimal levels. Figure 5 illustrates the causal relationships among the latent variables and observed indicators following the model corrections [43,53]. The overall fit indices of the structural equation model meet standard criteria for adequate fit, confirming that the model fits the data well and passes the fit test.

3.5.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

The purpose of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is to evaluate the accuracy and validity of the measurement model, including assessing goodness-of-fit and construct validity. The goodness-of-fit indices for the measurement model are as follows: X2 = 121.820, df = 67 (p < 0.01), and X2/df = 1.818, which falls within the ideal range of 1 to 3. Absolute fit indices indicate a good model fit: GFI = 0.963 (>0.9), AGFI = 0.942 (>0.9), RMSEA = 0.043 (<0.08), and RMR = 0.023 (<0.05). Incremental fit indices also support this conclusion: CFI = 0.991, NFI = 0.980, and TLI = 0.987. Parsimony fit indices PGFI = 0.615 and PNFI = 0.721 further confirm the model’s adequacy. Collectively, these results suggest that the measurement model demonstrates an acceptable level of fit [54].

3.5.3. Convergent Validity

In terms of convergent validity, the standardized factor loadings for each measurement item, as presented in Table 4, range from 0.743 to 0.951, exceeding the threshold of 0.7. These loadings suggest that the measurement items effectively capture the underlying constructs and exhibit high reliability. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE) values for all latent variables range from 0.601 to 0.886, surpassing the recommended threshold of 0.5. These results collectively indicate that the model demonstrates adequate convergent validity.

3.5.4. Discriminant Validity

In terms of discriminant validity, the square roots of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each latent variable, as presented in Table 5, range from 0.775 to 0.941. For most dimensions, the square roots of AVE exceed the correlation coefficients between the latent variables, indicating that these dimensions possess strong discriminant ability and confirming excellent discriminant validity.

4. Results

To thoroughly investigate the relationship between the independent and dependent variables, this study employed AMOS 26.0 software to conduct a standardized regression analysis. The results are presented in Table 6. Specifically, embodied cognition and immersive experience exert a significant positive influence on learning satisfaction, with a path coefficient β of 0.280, a t-value of 7.412, and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating that this effect is highly statistically significant. This finding not only confirms the critical role of embodied cognition and immersive experience in enhancing learning satisfaction but also provides robust empirical support for Hypothesis H1a. Architectural design exerts a significant positive influence on learning satisfaction (β = 0.369, T = 8.653, p < 0.01). This result underscores the pivotal role of learning environment design in enhancing student satisfaction, thereby providing robust empirical support for Hypothesis H2a. The positive impact of historical resources on learning satisfaction is notably significant, as evidenced by a path coefficient β of 0.411, a t-value of 9.665, and a p-value less than 0.01. This finding demonstrates the substantial role of historical resources in enhancing learning satisfaction, while providing empirical confirmation for Hypothesis H3a.
Regarding learning effectiveness, embodied cognition and immersive experiences exhibited a significant positive effect (β = 0.260, t = 6.418, p < 0.01). This finding highlights that enriching students’ sensory experiences and emotional involvement can substantially enhance learning effectiveness, providing empirical support for Hypothesis H1b. The positive impact of architectural design on learning effectiveness is more significant, with a path coefficient β of 0.402, a t-value of 8.141, and a p-value less than 0.01. This result further highlights the importance of learning environment design in promoting students’ cognitive development and enhancing learning effectiveness, thereby confirming the validity of Hypothesis H2b. The application of historical resources demonstrates a statistically significant positive effect on learning effectiveness (β = 0.384, t = 7.872, p < 0.01). This empirical evidence substantiates that the integration of historical resources contributes to content enrichment and motivational enhancement in learning processes, providing substantial support for the validation of Hypothesis H3b.

5. Discussion

5.1. Review of Research Results

The empirical analysis conducted in this study demonstrates that learning satisfaction and outcomes are significantly influenced by embodied cognition, architectural design, and historical resources. Physical, spatial, and sensory experiences interact within heritage education in ways that cannot be fully captured by a single quantitative model. When spatial perception is integrated with bodily perception and architectural content is understood through body movements, students’ enthusiasm for exploring professional knowledge increases significantly. Their understanding of architectural design and conservation deepens, leading to improved results.

5.2. Measurement Model Evaluation

Figure 6 indicates that each observed indicator’s outer loading on its latent construct exceeds 0.7, confirming the structural validity of the measurement model. Among the dimensions of learning satisfaction, the loadings for “Teacher–student relationship” and “Sense of achievement” are the highest, indicating that supportive interpersonal relationships and emotional satisfaction are the primary factors influencing students’ satisfaction. By comparison, the loadings for “Theory–Practice Link” and “Student Engagement” are lower, suggesting that these aspects require further improvement. Overall, the scale used in this study effectively captures key aspects such as embodied immersion, architectural design, and historical resources; however, some items still require refinement.
Within the learning effectiveness dimension, the loadings for “Ability Enhancement” and “Increase Knowledge” are relatively high, whereas the loading for “Alleviating Anxiety” is relatively low; this indicates that the scale performs well in capturing cognitive and skill improvements but is insufficient in measuring emotional states. According to Heckel and Ringeisen [50], varying levels of anxiety can affect learning satisfaction in different ways. Previous research shows that anxiety can reduce academic self-efficacy and limit participation. Self-efficacy has been identified as a potential mediator between anxiety and satisfaction. Therefore, future research should integrate the measurement of self-efficacy and emotion regulation to more comprehensively examine the impact of anxiety on learning effectiveness in heritage education.
Although the composite reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) for learning satisfaction and learning effectiveness have reached acceptable levels, the high correlation between these constructs indicates conceptual overlap; therefore, further clarification of their theoretical boundaries and the inclusion of differentiating indicators are necessary. In contrast, the background dimensions of historical resources, architectural design, and embodied immersion exhibit good discriminant validity, indicating that they represent distinct characteristics of heritage education.

5.3. Structural Model Analysis

The structural model results presented in Table 6 indicate that each latent variable exhibits very high factor loadings, demonstrating that the observed variables accurately represent their underlying constructs and thereby supporting the validity and robustness of the model. The positive path coefficient from embodied immersion to learning satisfaction and learning effectiveness was found to be consistent with theoretical expectations derived from experiential learning. Sensory experience and emotional investment are enhanced by immersive participation, thereby deepening the understanding of architectural heritage and promoting its protection and renewal. It is posited by embodied cognition theory that cognitive participation arises through interaction between the body and the environment; thus, educators are required to move away from the traditional “bystander” model and adopt a body-centered experiential approach. This perspective highlights a symbiotic relationship between learners and historical spaces and advocates for an experiential shift in heritage education. These results align with the findings reported by scholars such as Luck, Skrzypczak, and Li and Liang [26,38,55]. Architectural design has been described as a continuous process of concept creation, and subtle bodily movements are believed to influence the aesthetic evolution of architectural forms. A significant correlation has been observed between physical participation, immersion, and effective learning. Overall, the integration of embodied education into the core of architectural practice is recommended to effectively support heritage preservation and revitalization.

5.4. The Role of Architectural Design and Historical Resources

As can be seen from Figure 7, the significant positive effects of architectural design and historical resources on learning satisfaction and learning effectiveness indicate that behavioral and cognitive experiences are jointly shaped by the physical environment and cultural narratives. Appropriate spatial arrangements, material choices, and historical narratives can stimulate learners’ sensory responses and enhance their sense of immersion and emotional connection. These results are consistent with case studies from East Asian universities, which found that preserving campus architectural heritage not only maintains historical authenticity but also enhances campus character and spatial experience. Heritage spaces are regarded as experiential media, and a balance between commemorative significance and contemporary value is required [56]. Heritage-oriented courses and activities introducing multiple sensory elements can stimulate learners’ interest in heritage protection and comprehension. By deepening connections with the space, students and visitors can better understand the historical significance of architectural and design concepts, thereby enhancing learning satisfaction and deepening mastery of abstract concepts [57]. Heritage encompasses not only tangible architectural structures but also the shared history and identity of the community. Its value derives from society’s collective choices about what is remembered. Integrating local history, traditional craftsmanship, and intangible practices into teaching cultivates an emotional sense of belonging and identification with the local area.
Comparative studies have shown that emphasizing situational stories and embodied exploration helps enhance learners’ identification with and appreciation of heritage [58]. After analyzing the model results, this study further explored the interaction mechanisms among various factors and found that real historical contexts, cultural narratives, and the values they embody can stimulate a stronger sense of identity and mission among learners; at the same time, optimizing the spatial atmosphere and strengthening physical participation are equally important for stimulating learning interest. Only by integrating multi-sensory experiences with historical narratives can the synergy between education and heritage protection be maximized.

5.5. Implications of Educational Practice

The research also points out that fully utilizing Macao’s rich cultural heritage resources has great value for architectural practice and preservation. Integrating these resources into architectural design and heritage courses allows students and professionals to gain a better understanding of their cultural significance while fostering deeper engagement with the field and the broader concept of heritage protection. Among the dimensions of learning satisfaction, the integration of theory and practice holds the greatest significance. Within the learning effectiveness dimension, “ability enhancement” and “knowledge growth” are key indicators, suggesting that integrating conceptual understanding with embodied practice is an effective educational strategy. At the same time, supportive teacher–student relationships provide a safe foundation for learning. Previous studies have also confirmed that close and mutually respectful relationships promote academic and psychological growth.
Overall, embodied immersion, architectural design, and historical resources are interrelated factors in understanding and protecting architectural heritage and in shaping place attachment and cultural identity. Future research should further clarify the conceptual boundaries between learning satisfaction and learning effectiveness, incorporate mediating variables such as self-efficacy and emotional states into the model, and test the structure proposed in this study in multicultural and environmental contexts to enhance its universality and theoretical depth.

6. Conclusions

Through empirical analysis, the application of embodied cognition theory to the integration of Macao’s historical architectural resources into education was explored, and its positive impact on learning satisfaction and learning effectiveness was verified. Learners’ sense of presence is significantly enhanced by the implementation of a real-world environment teaching method compared with traditional teaching methods. Development across emotional, cognitive, and volitional domains is promoted by this teaching strategy, which also provides real case studies that confirm curricular diversity and teaching complexity. By integrating historical resources into teaching, students’ understanding and application of professional knowledge are enhanced, their cultural identity is strengthened, respect for cultural heritage is inspired, and awareness of heritage protection is increased. Cultural heritage serves as the cornerstone of cross-cultural dialogue and social cohesion. Exposing students to the diversity of local cultures fosters appreciation of tangible historical resources, a prerequisite for training professionals who possess both an international perspective and a deep connection with local traditions.
Embodied cognition theory provides a valuable scientific framework for disciplines such as design and art. Interactions between individuals and their environment play a crucial role in shaping spatial understanding and emotional investment. By allowing learners to experience and interact with historical spaces in a meaningful way, a deep connection with architectural heritage can be established, thereby providing an effective approach to revitalizing the cultural industry in heritage areas. Combining the preservation of architectural heritage with the integration of contemporary design practices helps achieve sustainable cultural development in these regions.
A structural equation model was employed in this study to reveal the interaction mechanisms among body, space, and culture, thereby filling the research gap in the application of embodied cognition theory in architectural heritage education and providing a reference for subsequent quantitative research. The results indicate that teacher support and students’ self-efficacy have partial mediating effects between experience and learning effectiveness. Future research may introduce other psychological variables to enhance the explanatory power of the model. Strengthening professional understanding and enriching practical experience open new avenues for collaboration among educational institutions, cultural tourism, and heritage protection. The combination of theory and practice helps bridge the gap between heritage protection and contemporary design and establishes a mutually beneficial model that supports cultural sustainability and economic development.
In conclusion, this study proposes a specific and feasible heritage education model that integrates local historical resources, multi-sensory experiences, and appropriate spatial design to enhance students’ learning satisfaction and professional abilities. The model supports the coordinated development of heritage protection and cultural tourism and may provide a reference for policymakers.

7. Future Research

The present study has several limitations. First, data were primarily collected through questionnaires, and samples were predominantly drawn from Macao, limiting the geographic representativeness of the results. Future research should expand the sample sources, particularly across different cultural and environmental contexts, to enhance the generalizability of the conclusions. Second, although the structural equation model verified the adaptability of the model, there remain potentially complex interrelationships among the variables. Subsequent research can incorporate mediating variables, such as self-efficacy and emotion regulation, to further explore their roles in learning effectiveness within the embodied cognition framework.
In addition, this study focuses mainly on the historical resources of Macao. In the future, the scope should be expanded to include other types of historical sites—such as museums, heritage restoration centers, and theme parks—to provide a more comprehensive undestanding of the application of embodied cognition theory in diverse historical contexts. Moreover, the research did not fully examine the long-term impact of environmental factors on the learning experience. Longitudinal research designs could therefore be adopted to explore the long-term interactive effects of historical building spaces. Finally, it is recommended to verify the universality of this model in cross-cultural contexts and explore other possibilities of multi-sensory experiences under technological intervention, in order to promote the sustainable protection and innovative use of architectural heritage.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft, J.Z.; Writing—review & editing, X.L.; Supervision, M.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mohamed, B.; Marzouk, M. Bibliometric Analysis and Visualisation of Heritage Buildings Preservation. Herit. Sci. 2023, 11, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Orphanidou, Y.; Efthymiou, L.; Panayiotou, G. Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Education Amidst Digitalisation. Sustainability 2024, 16, 1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Malinin, L.H. Creative Practices Embodied, Embedded, and Enacted in Architectural Settings: Toward an Ecological Model of Creativity. Front. Psychol. 2016, 6, 1978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Feld, S. Waterfalls of Song. An Acoustemology of Place Resounding in Bosavi, Papua New Guinea. In Senses of Place; Feld, S., Basso, K.H., Eds.; School of American Research: Santa Fé, NM, USA, 1996; pp. 91–135. [Google Scholar]
  5. Wang, P.; Li, C.; Liu, J. Research on Tourist Satisfaction Evaluation of Macau’s Built Heritage Space Under the Genius Loci. Buildings 2025, 15, 1701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kalla, M.; Metaxas, T. Cultural and Heritage Tourism, Urban Resilience, and Sustainable Development. Comparative Analysis of the Strategies of Athens and Rome. J. Sustain. Res. 2024, 6, e240073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Liang, W.; Ahmad, Y.; Mohidin, H.H.B. The Development of the Concept of Architectural Heritage Conservation and Its Inspiration. Built Herit. 2023, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Varela, F.J.; Thompson, E.; Rosch, E. The Embodied Mind, Revised Edition: Cognitive Science and Human Experience; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; ISBN 978-0-262-33550-8. [Google Scholar]
  9. Ye, H.-S. Embodied Cognition: A New Approach in Cognitive Psychology. Adv. Psychol. Sci. 2010, 18, 705. [Google Scholar]
  10. Spence, C. Senses of Place: Architectural Design for the Multisensory Mind. Cogn. Res. 2020, 5, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Abuhassan, L.B.; Malhis, S.R. Modes of Embodiment for an Immersed Experience in Museums: The Royal Tank Museum. PLoS ONE 2025, 20, e0317402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jelić, A.; Tieri, G.; De Matteis, F.; Babiloni, F.; Vecchiato, G. The Enactive Approach to Architectural Experience: A Neurophysiological Perspective on Embodiment, Motivation, and Affordances. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pouw, W.T.J.L.; van Gog, T.; Paas, F. An Embedded and Embodied Cognition Review of Instructional Manipulatives. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2014, 26, 51–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bloomer, K.C.; Moore, C.W. Body, Memory, and Architecture; Yale University Press: London, UK, 1977; ISBN 978-0-300-02142-4. [Google Scholar]
  15. Massey, D. A Global Sense of Place. In The Cultural Geography Reader; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2008; ISBN 978-0-203-93195-0. [Google Scholar]
  16. Low, S.M.; Altman, I. Place Attachment. In Place Attachment; Altman, I., Low, S.M., Eds.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1992; pp. 1–12. ISBN 978-1-4684-8755-8. [Google Scholar]
  17. Basu, M. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Complicity 2004, 1, 101–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bunt, S. Progression of Designer Behavior When Exploring Digital Building Design Spaces. Ph.D. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kwon, J.; Iedema, A. Body and the Senses in Spatial Experience: The Implications of Kinesthetic and Synesthetic Perceptions for Design Thinking. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 864009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mandik, P. Action-Oriented Representation. In Cognition and the Brain: The Philosophy and Neuroscience Movement; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2005; pp. 284–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lee, K. The Interior Experience of Architecture: An Emotional Connection between Space and the Body. Buildings 2022, 12, 326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Fei, T.; Zhang, Z. Embodied cognition and contemporary architectural design thinking. Urban. Archit. 2018, 102–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, A.; Zhai, H. On the Expression of Body in Modern Architecture from the Perspective of Embodied Cognition. Inter. Des. Decor. 2023, 11, 120–121. [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee, S. Sustainable Embodied Experience in the Built Environment: Reinterpreting Architectural History through Embodied Cognition. Archnet-IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res. 2022, 16, 620–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Alaçam, S. Exploring the Role of Bodily Experience in Spatial Thinking during the Architectural Design Process. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, Association for Computing Machinery. New York, NY, USA, 16 February 2014; Volume 25, pp. 313–316. [Google Scholar]
  26. Luck, R. Seeing Architecture in Action: Designing, Evoking, and Depicting Space and Form in Embodied Interaction. Int. J. Des. Creat. Innov. 2014, 2, 165–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hegazi, Y.S.; Tahoon, D.; Abdel-Fattah, N.A.; El-Alfi, M.F. Socio-Spatial Vulnerability Assessment of Heritage Buildings through Using Space Syntax. Heliyon 2022, 8, e09133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Behr, C.; Nevin, S. The Roehampton Campus Project: Using Campus, Collections and Memories of the University as a Learning and Teaching Resource for Humanities Students. Arts Humanit. High. Educ. 2019, 18, 395–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jadresin Milic, R.; McPherson, P.; McConchie, G.; Reutlinger, T.; Singh, S. Architectural History and Sustainable Architectural Heritage Education: Digitalisation of Heritage in New Zealand. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Delegou, E.T.; Mourgi, G.; Tsilimantou, E.; Ioannidis, C.; Moropoulou, A. A Multidisciplinary Approach for Historic Buildings Diagnosis: The Case Study of the Kaisariani Monastery. Heritage 2019, 2, 1211–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lee, J.; Miri, M.; Newberry, M.; Peacock, N.; Ladkin, A.; González-Zamar, M.-D.; Jiménez, L.O.; Ayala, A.S.; Martínez Rodríguez, M.; Fontal Merillas, O. Dealing with Heritage as Curricular Content in Spain’s Primary Education. Curric. J. 2020, 31, 77–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Liang, R. Protection of Macau’s Historic Architectural Heritage. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Architecture: Heritage, Traditions and Innovations (AHTI 2019), Moscow, Russia, 25–27 February 2019; Atlantis Press: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 474–479. [Google Scholar]
  33. Carbone, F.; Oosterbeek, L.; Costa, C.; Ferreira, A.M. Extending and Adapting the Concept of Quality Management for Museums and Cultural Heritage Attractions: A Comparative Study of Southern European Cultural Heritage Managers’ Perceptions. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2020, 35, 100698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Fontal, O.; Gómez-Redondo, C. Heritage Education and Heritagization Processes: SHEO Metodology for Educational Programs Evaluation. Interchange 2016, 47, 65–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. UNESCO. World Heritage Centre Historic Centre of Macao. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1110/ (accessed on 31 August 2025).
  36. Yang, Z.; Wu, Y.; Wang, F.; Chen, A.; Wang, Y. Spatial-Temporal Differences and Influencing Factors of Coupling Coordination between Urban Quality and Technology Innovation in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0289988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Alfadil, M. Immersive Virtual Reality: A Novel Approach to Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition in K-12 Education. Sensors 2024, 24, 7185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Li, P.; Liang, H. Factors Influencing Learning Effectiveness of Educational Travel: A Case Study in China. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2020, 42, 141–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lin, X.; Li, R.; Chen, Z.; Xiong, J. Design Strategies for VR Science and Education Games from an Embodied Cognition Perspective: A Literature-Based Meta-Analysis. Front. Psychol. 2024, 14, 1292110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Liaw, S.-S. Investigating Students’ Perceived Satisfaction, Behavioral Intention, and Effectiveness of e-Learning: A Case Study of the Blackboard System. Comput. Educ. 2008, 51, 864–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Li, Z.; Li, S.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, C. Design and Verification of College Students’ Deep Learning Evaluation Scale under Embodied Cognition Environment. Res. Audio-Vis. Educ. 2020, 41, 92–98. [Google Scholar]
  42. Feng, L. Research on the Presence of Architecture and Body in Phenomenology of Perception. Ph.D. Dissertation, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  43. Liu, X. Research on Museum Audience Behavior Experience Design Based on Embodied Cognition. Master’s Thesis, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  44. Gregory Trafton, J.; Harrison, A.M. Embodied Spatial Cognition. Top. Cogn. Sci. 2011, 3, 686–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bizzotto, L. Cognición Encarnada. El Dibujo Sensible Como Técnica de Reconocimiento Del Espacio Arquitectónico. Estoa 2022, 11, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Moosavian, S. Explaining a Conceptual Model of Components Affecting Aesthetic Experience of Architecture in Cognitive Sciences. Mon. Sci. J. Bagh-E Nazar 2022, 19, 41–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Achille, C.; Fiorillo, F. Teaching and Learning of Cultural Heritage: Engaging Education, Professional Training, and Experimental Activities. Heritage 2022, 5, 2565–2593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zakharova, G. Integration of Emerging Technologies in Architectural Education. AIP Conf. Proc. 2022, 2657, 020008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Tomasi, S.; Paviotti, G.; Cavicchi, A. Educational Tourism and Local Development: The Role of Universities. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Van Boxtel, C.; Grever, M.; Klein, S. Introduction: The Appeal of Heritage Education. In Sensitive Pasts. Questioning Heritage Education; Berghahn Books: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  51. Cooper, C.; Shepherd, R. The Relationship Between Tourism Education and The Tourism Industry: Implications for Tourism Education. Tour. Recreat. Res. 1997, 22, 34–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Shen, Z.; Wu, D. A Study on the Influencing Factors of Online Learning Effectiveness and Satisfaction of College Student: Empirical Analysis Based on Structural Equation Model. Educ. Dev. Res. 2020, 40, 25–36, 59. [Google Scholar]
  53. Wen, Z.; Hau, K.-T.; Marsh, H.W. Structural Equation Model Testing: Cutoff Criteria for Goodness of Fit Indices and Chi-Square Test. Acta Psychol. Sin. 2004, 36, 186. [Google Scholar]
  54. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Skrzypczak, W. Principles of Somatic Movement Education for Architectural Design. Dimensions J. Archit. Knowl. 2021, 1, 51–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hong, Y. Influence of Architectural Heritage on the Identity and Present-Day Value of American-Designed Universities’ Campuses in Asia. Built Herit. 2020, 4, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Li, M.; Lv, Y.; Pu, Y.; Wu, M. Design and Evaluation of Children’s Education Interactive Learning System Based on Human Computer Interaction Technology. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 6135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Chen, W.; Li, T.; Zhang, Y. Embodied Cognition Model for Museum Gamification Cultural Heritage Communication a Grounded Theory Study. npj Herit. Sci. 2025, 13, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Buildings 15 03350 g001
Figure 1. Connection between neuroscience and architecture. (Redrawn based on the literature).
Figure 1. Connection between neuroscience and architecture. (Redrawn based on the literature).
Buildings 15 03350 g001
Buildings 15 03350 g002
Figure 2. Sustainable model of embodied experience. (Redrawn based on the literature).
Figure 2. Sustainable model of embodied experience. (Redrawn based on the literature).
Buildings 15 03350 g002
Buildings 15 03350 g003
Figure 3. Research model framework.
Figure 3. Research model framework.
Buildings 15 03350 g003
Buildings 15 03350 g004
Figure 4. Path diagram of standardized parameter estimates of the model.
Figure 4. Path diagram of standardized parameter estimates of the model.
Buildings 15 03350 g004
Buildings 15 03350 g005
Figure 5. Path diagram of standardized parameter estimates for model modification.
Figure 5. Path diagram of standardized parameter estimates for model modification.
Buildings 15 03350 g005
Buildings 15 03350 g006
Figure 6. Standardized factor loading of observed indicators.
Figure 6. Standardized factor loading of observed indicators.
Buildings 15 03350 g006
Buildings 15 03350 g007
Figure 7. T-values for hypothesis testing.
Figure 7. T-values for hypothesis testing.
Buildings 15 03350 g007
Table 1. Measurement items of the constructs.
Table 1. Measurement items of the constructs.
Variable DimensionsMeasurement ItemsSources
Embodied Immersion (EI)Physical InvolvementPI1 You think you can actively participate in the course activities.[38,41]
PI2 Your surroundings can affect your positive thinking while learning.
PI3 You believe that the flexible layout of the learning environment will make learning more diverse.
PI4 You think that all the senses of the body will be fully mobilized in an immersive classroom.
PI5 You think the immersion class will give full physical and mental freedom.
Immersive ClassroomIP1 You think it is fun to participate in an immersive class.[24,26,42]
IP2 You think that engaging in immersive classes improves the quality of your learning.
IP3 You think time flies when you are in an immersive class.
IP4 You think you can concentrate on your work when you participate in an immersive class.
Architectural Design (AD)Human Behavior in ArchitectureHBA1 You think that the perception of the human body will have a positive impact on architectural design.[24,26,42]
HBA2 You think there is an interaction between human behavior and architectural function.
HBA3 You believe considering human body movements positively influences architectural design innovation.
Physical and Architectural SpacePAS1 You believe varying building spaces enhance spatial perception.[43,44,45,46]
PAS2 You think era-specific spaces positively affect human experience through environmental factors.
PAS3 You think architecture impacts people’s perception based on their personal history, culture, and interests.
PAS4 You think the awareness of architectural space can be improved by the use of high technology.
PAS5 You believe multimedia aids in better remembering knowledge across disciplines like architecture.
PAS6 You think multi-sensory interactions help people better understand the historical background and functions of buildings.
Historical Resources (HRs)Professional Knowledge AcquisitionPKA1 You think incorporating Macao’s historical resources into courses improves students’ grasp of professional knowledge.[30,47,48]
PKA2 You believe integrating heritage resources into teaching fosters interdisciplinary development.
PKA3 You think combining new tech with heritage resources expands students’ professional and practical skills for deeper learning.
Integration of Culture and TourismICT1 You believe using Macao’s heritage in education is crucial for cultural and economic growth.[49,50,51]
ICT2 You think that the teaching interaction with Macao’s historical heritage resources can promote students’ sense of identity
ICT3 You believe combining heritage resources with college education can offer new ideas for Macao’s tourism development.
Heritage ConservationHC1 You believe there is a constant conflict between conserving Macao’s heritage and promoting tourism.[29]
HC2 You think teaching with heritage resources teaches designers about conservation importance.
HC3 You believe using heritage in teaching strengthens students’ connection to preserving Macao’s heritage.
Learning Satisfaction (LS)Theory–Practice LinkTPL You think the immersion class has a positive role in theory and practice[38,40]
Student EngagementSE You think the immersion class has a positive effect on student participation
Teacher–Student RelationshipTSR You think the immersion class can promote teacher–student relationships
Sense of AchievementSA You think you can enhance the sense of achievement in the immersive class
Learning Effectiveness (LEE)Ability EnhancementAE You think that immersive class will help to improve students’ comprehensive ability[38,52]
Alleviating AnxietyAA You think the immersive class alleviates the anxiety and pressure in the study
Increase KnowledgeIK You think the extended immersion class deepens your knowledge and experience
Table 2. Questionnaire survey results.
Table 2. Questionnaire survey results.
CharacteristicsFrequencyPercentageCharacteristicsFrequencyPercentage
Gender Educational background
Male22351.26%High school and below204.6%
Female21248.74%Junior college and undergraduate degrees24756.78%
Age Master’s degree candidate11827.13%
Under 18 years old81.84%doctoral candidate5011.49%
18–25 years old16437.7%Field of study/work
26–35 years old16738.39%Environmental Design (including architecture, urban planning, landscape or landscape architecture, etc.)10624.37%
36–45 years old7016.09%Design (visual communication, product design, etc.)12829.43%
46 years old and above265.98%Fine arts (including painting, sculpture, photography, etc.)5913.56%
Identity Protection and restoration of cultural heritage4510.34%
College students17640.46%Pedagogy6013.79%
College educators16036.78%Other378.51%
Design practitioner8218.85%
Other173.91%
Table 3. Exploratory factor analysis.
Table 3. Exploratory factor analysis.
Latent VariablePrimary index Cronbach’s αCronbach’s α
Embodied Immersion0.9440.973
Learning Satisfaction0.894
Learning Effectiveness0.817
Architectural Design0.949
Historical Resources0.948
Table 4. Measurement model results.
Table 4. Measurement model results.
DimensionObserved IndicatorT-ValuepFactor LoadingSMCCRAVE
Embodied ImmersionPhysical Involvement ***0.9360.8760.9390.886
Immersive Classroom30.200***0.9460.894
Architectural DesignHuman Behavior in Architecture29.189***0.9380.8800.9240.860
Physical and Architectural Space 0.9160.839
Historical ResourcesProfessional Knowledge Acquisition 0.9510.9040.9500.863
Integration of Culture and Tourism38.182***0.9310.867
Heritage Conservation34.443***0.9040.817
Learning SatisfactionTheory–Practice Link 0.8370.7010.8940.678
Student Engagement20.628***0.8020.643
Teacher–Student Relationship21.896***0.8320.692
Sense of Achievement21.499***0.8230.677
Learning EffectivenessAbility Enhancement 0.7880.6200.8190.601
Alleviating Anxiety17.505***0.7430.552
Increase Knowledge19.069***0.7940.630
*** indicates p < 0.001 (double tail).
Table 5. Discriminant validity.
Table 5. Discriminant validity.
Convergent
Validity		Historical
Resources		Architectural
Design		Embodied
Immersion		Learning
Effectiveness		Learning
Satisfaction
Historical
Resources		0.8630.929
Architectural
Design		0.8600.6980.927
Embodied
Immersion		0.8860.6300.6170.941
Learning
Effectiveness		0.6010.8400.8420.7690.775
Learning
Satisfaction		0.6780.8450.8290.7671.0510.823
Note: The bold diagonal elements are the squared root of AVE for each construct.
Table 6. Summary of hypothesis testing results.
Table 6. Summary of hypothesis testing results.
Hypothesis PathPath Coefficient (β)CR (T-Value)pResults
H1a: EI→LS0.2807.412***Supported
H2a: AD→LS0.3698.653***Supported
H3a: HR→LS0.4119.665***Supported
H1b: EI→LEE0.2606.418***Supported
H2b: AD→LEE0.4028.141***Supported
H3b: HR→LEE0.3847.872***Supported
*** indicates p < 0.001 (double tail). EI: embodied immersion, AD: architectural design, HR: historical resources, LS: learning satisfaction, LEE: learning effectiveness.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhao, J.; Lee, M.; Li, X. Embodied Cognition and Built Heritage Education: A Case Study of Macau’s Historical Architecture. Buildings 2025, 15, 3350. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15183350

AMA Style

Zhao J, Lee M, Li X. Embodied Cognition and Built Heritage Education: A Case Study of Macau’s Historical Architecture. Buildings. 2025; 15(18):3350. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15183350

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhao, Junyi, Mengshun Lee, and Xinyu Li. 2025. "Embodied Cognition and Built Heritage Education: A Case Study of Macau’s Historical Architecture" Buildings 15, no. 18: 3350. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15183350

APA Style

Zhao, J., Lee, M., & Li, X. (2025). Embodied Cognition and Built Heritage Education: A Case Study of Macau’s Historical Architecture. Buildings, 15(18), 3350. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15183350

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop