Next Article in Journal
Heritage for Sale! The Role of Museums in Promoting Metal Detecting and Looting in Romania
Previous Article in Journal
Archaeological Restoration and Heritage Actions in Ollantaytambo
Article Menu
Issue 2 (December) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Heritage 2018, 1(2), 414-436; https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage1020028

The Role of Tangible Interaction to Communicate Tacit Knowledge of Built Heritage

1
Research[x]Design, Department of Architecture, KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 1, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
2
Department of Architecture, Assiut University, Assiut 71516, Egypt
3
Antiquity Department, Royal Museums of Art and History, Jubelpark 10, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
4
Department of Archaeology, UGent, Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 33, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
5
Research Unit Ancient History, KU Leuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 6 November 2018 / Revised: 2 December 2018 / Accepted: 3 December 2018 / Published: 5 December 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [3472 KB, uploaded 7 December 2018]   |  

Abstract

Meanings and values of built heritage vary from factual and explicit meanings which are relatively easy to present, to more tacit knowledge, which is typically more challenging to communicate due to its implicit and often abstract character. In this paper, we investigate how tangible interaction influences the communication of this tacit knowledge of built heritage, and howit affects the experience of visitors. Through a between-group comparative study in a real-world museum context, we examined howthe tangible characteristics of an interactive prototypemuseuminstallation influence how visitors perceive a particular story containing tacit heritage knowledge. The communicated story relates a historical journey in ancient Egypt to the physical and architectural characteristics of the entrance colonnade at the Djoser Complex in Saqqara. Our experimental conditions consisted of an interactive navigation (input) and a passive representation (output) components, ranging from traditional digital displays to fully tangible means of interaction. We report on our findings, which showed various differences and commonalities between our three experimental conditions. We conclude with a number of discussion points and design recommendations: (a) to strive for balance between navigation and representation modalities in terms of affordance and the required cognitive effort; (b) to take advantage of physical representation and grasping, such as conveying particular physical details and characteristics; and (c) to consider design aspects of embodiment, physical abstraction and materiality for future research or potential further development of communicating the meanings and values of heritage. View Full-Text
Keywords: tangible interaction; tacit knowledge; built heritage; communication; physical affordance; embodiment; Saqqara; museum studies tangible interaction; tacit knowledge; built heritage; communication; physical affordance; embodiment; Saqqara; museum studies
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Nofal, E.; Reffat, R.M.; Boschloos, V.; Hameeuw, H.; Moere, A.V. The Role of Tangible Interaction to Communicate Tacit Knowledge of Built Heritage. Heritage 2018, 1, 414-436.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Heritage EISSN 2571-9408 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top