1. Introduction
Nowadays, a plethora of technological breakthroughs appears daily in our lives shaping the communities of today and tomorrow. The development and domination of technologies in various areas, from energy and housing to entertainment and interpersonal communication, threatens to leave behind other important aspects of human life like active social participation. Cultural heritage as an aggregation of tangible (buildings, monuments, landscapes, books, works of art and artefacts) and intangible elements (folklore, traditions, language and knowledge), comes in aid of contemporary people as units and societies as groups [
1]. Usually, cultural heritage gives individuals and societies a sense of connection and cohesion with the past and reshapes strong bonds between individuals of various ages and the society they belong to [
1,
2], even though considerations have been recorded about social exclusion phenomena deriving from the misconception of the meaning and scope of cultural heritage [
3].
In order to adjust in a volatile environment, cultural heritage has incorporated throughout the last decades various technological applications as a means to document, preserve, store, disseminate and exploit cultural heritage content [
4,
5,
6,
7,
8]. Digitization and storing of cultural heritage content, creation of online collections, dissemination of cultural content through the Internet, eMuseums, interactive storytelling, cultural heritage mobile applications, augmented and virtual reality applications, 3D reconstructions of cultural heritage elements and serious games are only some of the aspects of digital cultural heritage.
As cultural heritage and technology are becoming more and more intertwined, new research questions arise. How can we measure the personal and social acceptance or the usability of a platform that manages digital cultural heritage resources? Which axes should we use to extract a user’s opinion about acceptance and usability? Could we formulate a model that explains and predicts the adoption and success of a participatory digital platform for cultural heritage?
The term acceptance describes the users’ attitude towards a digital platform, whether the users would adopt the platform and use it or reject it as irrelevant. If a user accepts a platform then she/he is more likely to use the platform now or in the future. Andrew Dillon in Reference [
9] defines user acceptance of information technology as “the demonstrable willingness within a user group to employ information technology for the tasks it is designed to support.” Dillon states that “acceptance theorists are less concerned with unintended uses or non-discretionary use of technologies and more interested in understanding the factors influencing the adoption of technologies as planned by users who have some degree of choice. By developing and testing models of the forces shaping user acceptance, human factors researchers seek to influence the process of design and implementation in a manner that will minimize the risk of resistance or rejection by users.”
The idea of active user participation in generating, collecting and contributing personal content is not new to digital cultural heritage [
10,
11,
12,
13]. Mia Ridge in Reference [
14] states that “crowdsourcing in cultural heritage is more than a framework for creating content: as a form of engagement with the collections and research of memory institutions, it benefits both audiences and institutions.” In a participatory digital environment, many users contribute small portions of information, thus resulting in a system that stores vast amounts of content. The idea is extremely successful in another popular application type of the modern era: social media. In participatory platforms, users generate their own content, share it with the community or read and review other users’ contributions. This interaction leads to the formation of a vivid online community that, in the case of cultural heritage digital platforms, focuses on cultural heritage. Online communities share a series of common characteristics like the increased user engagement and the increased number of content contributions, characteristics that are desirable in any modern online platform.
Cultural Heritage as a sector that comes from and shapes humans and human societies has always been open in adopting and adjusting ideas from proven theories of other scientific fields like economic studies or social studies. Previous research efforts have shown that the successful use of active user participation in digital cultural heritage platforms depends on the psychological factors that influence users’ to use such information tools for their benefit and for contributing in the highlight of the society (local, national, global) they belong to [
15,
16]. Within the context of active user participation in cultural heritage digital platforms, various well-known theories from economic, social and information technology studies can help us to examine the factors that influence end users personally and socially. Examples of such theories are the Social Identity Theory (SIT) [
17,
18,
19], the Customer Loyalty Theory (CLT) [
20,
21,
22], the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) [
23,
24,
25] and the Radical Collaborative Approach (RCA) [
26]. However, research regarding the factors which contribute to personal and social acceptance from using participatory platforms in cultural heritage domain is still limited. One such example is the study introduced in Reference [
27]. Authors investigated the social and personal impact and effect of a digital platform called CLIO in fields like participation and engagement, belonging and social interaction and intergenerational dialogue but they did not investigate the evaluation of the users’ personal and social responsibility or the dissemination and exploitation potential of their platform from its users.
In this work, we propose a new research model that gives a first answer to the aforementioned research questions and a mixed type evaluation methodology. The proposed research model develops a series of research hypotheses that derive from the key features of the SIT, the CLT, the SCT and the RCA. More specifically, in our research model we propose a set of factors that influence user acceptance of a participatory digital platform for cultural heritage. We categorize those factors as personal and social. A user accepts the platform’s existence and is willing to use it for personal reasons because she/he can exploit its content and services (exploitation), she/he wants to participate actively in a digital community (participation) and she/he wants to convince other people (peers or others) to become a part of that digital community (dissemination). On the other hand, a user accepts the platform’s existence and is willing to use it for social reasons, concerning her/his relationship with the society she/he lives in, because through the platform the user can get in touch with her/his roots (belonging), can help in the preservation and promotion of the cultural heritage capital of the society she/he lives in (responsibility) and can associate with the older generations (intergenerational dialogue). The proposed research model is applied in a specific participatory cultural heritage management platform to measure its usability along with personal and social acceptance. We believe that this research model is a first step towards the development of an evaluation framework of the acceptance of participatory digital platforms for cultural heritage. The evaluation methodology uses a combination of scientifically accepted assessment tools (questionnaires, personal interviews, usage statistics) in order to assess the usability and personal and social acceptance of a participatory cultural heritage digital platform. For our experiments, we use as a testbed Culture Gate
1 [
28,
29], an online trustworthy participatory platform for cultural heritage that manages cultural heritage digital content in various ways, designed and implemented by the authors of this paper. The platform invites its users (scientists, artists, the public etc.) to contribute small portions of cultural information in digital form. User-generated cultural content is stored, organized and then presented to platform visitors in user-friendly ways. Evaluation procedure takes place in three different stages and focuses on seven axes: user participation in an online community via contributing cultural content and forming an online community, likelihood of platform dissemination to peers and others, user engagement with the platform, platform exploitation (content and services additional value), emotional impact and sense of belonging to a society, promotion of personal and social responsibility and supporting intergenerational dialogue deriving from platform usage. Google Analytics
2 (GA) web metrics tool is used throughout the evaluation process in order to collect and analyse usage statistics in each of the three experimental stages. Since the tracking is collected by Google rather than the individual website, this gives us a completer and more objective picture of user behaviour [
30].
The analysis of the results from questionnaires, personal interviews and platform usage statistics suggested that the platform could promote active user participation and lead to the formation of an active online community of individuals that work on or love cultural heritage. Moreover, users show great interest in disseminating the platform not only to their peers but also to the broad public. User engagement to the platform is rather satisfying, an indication that platform content and services could be interesting, modern and up-to-date. Furthermore, evaluation results suggest that the platform offers a user-friendly, attractive and easy-to-use environment for users to spend their time searching for or contributing cultural content. Results analysis suggested that users could use the platform in their professional life (since all users where current or future professionals of cultural heritage) generating value from both the platform content and specific services. Additionally, the platform contributes in instilling into a person a sense of belonging to a society. Alongside, analysis of the results suggests that the platform boosts user intention to be responsible towards the platform’s online community and the society in matters of cultural heritage preservation. Finally, our results provide a first glimpse about the positive influence that the platform in particular and cultural heritage in general could have on society’s continuity and cohesion by promoting the intergenerational dialogue bringing together different generations of users, thus helping in the bridging of the unavoidable generation gap.
2. Related Work
Cultural heritage has always been a pioneer field in incorporating new technologies and capabilities. Therefore, many excellent digital platforms, repositories, systems, environments and applications that offer services and manage content related to cultural heritage have been introduced to the scientific community and the public until today [
4,
5,
6,
7,
8]. Each platform has its own unique impact on both the local, national and international society and on each individual that loves or works within the field of cultural heritage. EUROPEANA
3, a flagship project funded by the European Union, is an online cultural heritage platform that interconnects more than 3700 libraries, archives, museums, galleries and audio-visual collections across Europe providing access to over 53 million cultural heritage items like image, text, sound, video and 3D material. The KORA platform is an open source cultural heritage digital repository addressing mainly to archaeologists and museum curators [
4]. The CHESS is a research prototype system that offers personalized, interactive digital storytelling experiences to enhance museum visits, demonstrating the authoring and visiting experiences [
5]. The “Gossip at Palace” application is a location-based mobile game that integrates a storytelling approach used primarily in museums [
6]. The “Ghost Detector” mobile application is an educational location-based museum game for children [
7]. SNOPS is a smart city environment for cultural heritage applications [
8].
Several cultural heritage digital platforms, systems and applications have included the idea of active user participation as a core or complementary service in their design and implementation [
10,
11,
12,
13]. Participatory cultural heritage digital platforms offer individuals the capability to become active parts in generating, collecting, exploring and notifying cultural heritage knowledge. The “stedr” cultural heritage mobile application is a social storytelling application that narrates stories about the history of an outdoor location [
10]. 1001 Stories of Denmark
4 is a participatory cultural heritage digital platform dedicated to storytelling in Denmark. The Megalithic Portal
5 application allows users to contribute photos of megalithic monuments in Europe. The Ancient Lives cultural heritage application asks volunteers to transcribe ancient Greek text on fragments from the Oxyrhynchus Papyri collection [
11]. The Know Your Place cultural heritage digital application engages local communities in shaping the stories of their neighbourhoods by allowing contributors to add media and metadata, thus producing archaeologically relevant information [
12]. The Heritage Together platform allows users to upload their own photographs of heritage assets, which are then processed into 3D models using an automated photogrammetry workflow [
13].
The evaluation of such platforms, during the design phase or even after their launch to the broad public, plays a crucial role in their usability and acceptance. Nina Simon in Reference [
31] argues that the “lack of good evaluation of participatory projects is probably the greatest contributing factor to their slow acceptance and use in the museum field.” The author continues by stating that there are 4 considerations to have in mind when evaluating a participatory platform for cultural heritage information management: (i) “evaluation must focus on participant behaviour and the impact of participatory actions,” (ii) “evaluators should articulate goals for the participants who actively collaborate with the institution, for the staff members who manage the process and for the audience that consumes the participatory product,” (iii) “participatory projects often benefit from incremental and adaptive measurement techniques” and (iv) “it is beneficial to make the evaluative process participatory in itself.” In the first consideration Simon states that the evaluators should measure “what participants do and describe what happens as a result of participation” because it is not useful to just present the services of participatory platforms and continues by arguing that the “participatory outcomes may be external, like increased incidence of conversation among visitors and internal, such as development of new skills or enhanced relationships.” The second consideration argues that the evaluation should set a clear goal in all stakeholders. The third and fourth considerations suggest that an evaluation procedure should integrate various methods or tools adapting to the changing environment of the platform and should involve the users of the platform and the moderators that perform the everyday maintenance tasks.
Many research teams have performed usability evaluation studies on participatory digital platforms [
32,
33,
34]. Authors in Reference [
32] present a usability evaluation for a web-based public participatory GIS platform, concluding that users with familiarity in GIS, higher education and web surfing experience tend to use more easily the platform than other users who do not have those characteristics. Paper [
33] presents the usability evaluation of a participatory platform for young people empowerment in the digital society, concluding that the users should accept the platform in order for the system to fulfil its goal. Authors in Reference [
34] propose a conceptual model based on the DeLone & McLean success model [
35], that “assesses the citizen satisfaction regarding the perception of the e-participation system quality; the expectation-confirmation model for the continued intention to use, which evaluates satisfaction based on the confirmation of ex-post experience on e-participation use and the perceived usefulness; and the dimensions of sense of place, which play a moderator role between the citizen satisfaction and the e-participation use.” Other theories or models, in scientific literature, that examine the usability and user acceptance of a digital platform, in general and can be applied in participatory designs are the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) [
36] and its extension the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) [
37,
38] or the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and its extensions [
39,
40,
41].
Cultural heritage capital is apparent in various aspects of human life, influencing mainly positively individuals and societies [
42,
43,
44,
45]. Cultural heritage platforms, systems and applications, as carriers and disseminators of cultural heritage information, occupy an important position in today’s world. Many researchers have dedicated their time in examining whether modern cultural heritage platforms fulfil their destiny and at what extent [
16,
46,
47,
48,
49]. Authors in Reference [
47] evaluate the capability of the “Living Avatars Network”, a platform that urges people to experience the cultural heritage of Singapore, to promote intergenerational dialogue. A qualitative evaluation of the benefits that the participatory platform “Stories for Hope–Rwanda” offers to intergenerational dialogue in a post-war Rwanda, is presented in Reference [
48]. A cultural heritage platform is evaluated in Reference [
49] using qualitative and quantitative tools in order to explore how online visitors connect with virtual heritage. An evaluation concerning the valorisation of GeoPan Atl@s, a cultural heritage application that hosts information about the history and historical changes that took place in the cultural landscape of the Lombardy region in Italy, is presented in Reference [
16]. Authors attempt to reveal the impact that the aforementioned application has on activating user participation and on raising awareness about the status of cultural heritage landscape in the Lombardy region. The social impact of MOSAICA, a system that urges users to engage actively in preserving cultural heritage via activities such as investigation, exploration and storytelling, is evaluated in Reference [
46]. MOSAICA is also evaluated for the quality of its content, its attractiveness and user-friendliness. Author in Reference [
45] examines the personal impact of a well-designed crowdsourcing cultural heritage application on individuals and performs an evaluation of audience engagement and user participation in the crowdsourcing procedure.
Several methodologies have been proposed by the scientific community to evaluate a cultural heritage digital platform, system, application or tool [
27,
46]. The evaluation methodology of MOSAICA [
46] follows the mixed methods research model [
50] that combines both quantitative (through questionnaires) and qualitative (through personal interviews) evaluation tools. Moreover, the evaluation process consisted of three stages and it was conducted on a group of 20 individuals (amateurs and professionals) with strong interest for MOSAICA’s content and services. The evaluation methodology of CLIO, an urban computing application that allows forming and interacting with the collective city memory, dictated the application’s installation on the streets of Corfu, Greece and Oulu, Finland [
27]. Evaluation process in Corfu involved 30 students and 27 adults which were asked to use the application in real-time. The experiment team observed and recorded user reactions, took personal interviews and distributed questionnaires to the users. Evaluation process in Oulu was conducted in the streets of the city were individuals were asked to use CLIO to explore collective city memory and share their own memories via smart personal devices. The experiment team observed and took notes over the behaviour of random users and also formulated a group of 12 users with equal distribution among genders and ages from teenage up to sixties which were asked to complete specific tasks, answer a questionnaire (to assess user-friendliness) and give a personal interview (to extract people’s views of the system). During the experiment, usage statistics were recorded for further analysis.
A review of the evaluation literature pointed out various kinds of evaluation tools (methods and instruments) for collecting evaluative information in order to examine the personal and social impact of a cultural heritage digital platform. Three of the most popular tools are the questionnaires, the personal interviews and the analysis of usage statistics [
51]. Questionnaires are used as an evaluation tool since the early days of software applications [
52,
53] because they are inexpensive, quick and easy to implement and analyse. On the other hand, questionnaires could be confusing for the interviewee or they could provide a limited number of possible answers leading interviewees to insincere responses, jeopardizing their reliability [
54]. In order to ensure that a questionnaire is reliable, several measures have been introduced to the scientific community most common of which is Cronbach’s alpha [
55]. Cronbach’s alpha determines the internal consistency or average correlation of items in a survey instrument to gauge its reliability [
56]. Personal interviews are a qualitative research tool that involves conducting individual interviews with a small number of respondents to explore their perspectives on a software application. Interviews are useful for extracting detailed information about a person’s thoughts and behaviours or want to explore new issues in depth. Interviews are often used to provide context to other data (such as outcome data), offering a more complete picture of a software application. On the other hand, personal interviews have some limitations like biased answers, excessive time load in implementation and analysis and conclusions that are not easily generalizable [
57].
In questionnaires and interviews, users say what they would do during a website visit. On the other hand, usage statistics monitor how users actually work while visiting a website [
58]. Google Analytics (GA) web service, is a web analytics tool offered by Google, that tracks and reports website traffic. Launched in 2005, GA has become the most popular tool for viewing website usage statistics, according to web portal w3techs.com
6. The last decade, many researchers have used GA in order to collect access data and examine user behaviour during a website visit [
30,
59,
60,
61,
62]. Author in Reference [
59] highlights the reasons why choose GA to measure access data in cultural tourism websites like the fact that GA provides time series data, it is free and it is a user-friendly application with the guarantee of Google technology. The importance of time series data is also acknowledged in Reference [
60], where the author explains that “the analysis of the effectiveness of a site’s traffic source lies necessarily in the use of time series analysis.” Authors in Reference [
30] state the superiority of GA as a usage statistics collector in comparison to traditional server logs and the tool’s effectiveness in understanding the behaviour of users in the virtual environment. Besides measuring user behaviour, GA is an excellent tool for evaluating the overall usability of websites, improve the design and content of web sites and to identify potential usability problem areas [
61,
62]. Authors in Reference [
61] discover specific GA metrics for evaluating and improving content, improving navigation, evaluating accessibility and improving design of a website. Authors in Reference [
62] use the GA service to evaluate and improve the design and content of an online library website [
62].
5. Discussion
5.1. Engagement
We investigated the hypothesis that the platform offers an interesting and engaging environment for its users (H1). Questionnaire results reveal that all users liked the platform (S23). This is an index that the basic idea of the platform is engaging for the users and it is up to the platform services to prolong the time period that a user will spend on the platform. More than half of the users (58%) answered that when using the platform they experienced specific emotions (S24). Only 6% of the users felt indifferent towards the platform (S25). The next set of statements tries to reveal user attitude towards platform content and basic services, which constitute the basic fabric that makes a digital platform engaging. Given their background, (cultural heritage students) all users naturally responded that they are interested in the platform content (S26). Moreover, platform basic services (cultural map, cultural points list, calendar of cultural events, discussion forum) were very interesting for almost all users (S27–S31) with the discussion forum service scoring lesser results. However, results from the usage statistics analysis revealed that the discussion forum was one of the most visited areas of the platform during the second stage of the experiment. This trend indicates that users started to realize forum’s importance over time since the discussion forum is the prime point where a user can share thoughts with the other community members about topics of common interest. Furthermore, we asked users to state their preference between two services that serve the same purpose in order to find out which of the two services is considered the most engaging: the interactive cultural map service and the traditional cultural points list service. The cultural map service displays all cultural points as pins of distinct colour and marker icon, based on the discipline they belong to, on a geographical cultural map. The cultural points list service displays cultural points in lists per discipline. More than 7 out of 10 users (72%) confirmed that they preferred the interactive map service better (S32). This result is confirmed by the examination of user answers in private interviews. Users were asked to state their favourite service of the platform. More than 34% of the answers, about user favourite service, related to the cultural map service while 4.29% of the answers referred to the thematic lists service. Additionally, the platform offers two basic services to help users learn how to use the platform: the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) service and the video tutorial service. As expected, both services were considered rather helpful but the users favoured the video tutorial service the most with 85% of acceptance (S34) in comparison to the 76% score of the FAQ service (S33). This difference is another indication that the interactive services, like the video tutorial are more engaging for the users. Almost all users responded that the registration and login services are considered very easy-to-use (S35-S36). Statement 37 revealed that users are not very open to provide feedback to platform administrators if they spot a technical problem yet (46%). Providing feedback for technical problems is a classic index that indicates how aware a user is about the success of a digital platform. Users rarely spend their time to improve an application if they do not care about it. Moreover, the platform offers only one way to allow users send technical feedback (direct email). Nowadays users prefer to communicate with an institution or a company through social media.
We extract a conclusion for hypothesis H1 by comparing usage statistics among stages 1, 2 and 3. The comparison between stages 1 and 3 indicates that users were more familiar with the contributions process and performed the same task at one third of the time for the double amount of successful contributions (M6). Measurements 7 to 10 examine the content search service. M7 reveals that users performed 3.5 times more content searches in stage 3 than in stage 1. M8 indicates that users find the content they need, during a search, 15 seconds faster on average in third stage than in first stage. Both measurements indicate that users become familiar with the platform over time and perform the same tasks faster. Measurements 11 and 13 reveal a decreasing interest in using the thematic lists service and an increasing interest in using the cultural map service for finding cultural content. Those measurements confirm yet again the aforementioned preference of users for the modern interactive map service in comparison to the traditional thematic lists service. Moreover, measurement 14 shows a decrease in the average duration that users spend on searching information on the cultural map, which is explained by the fact that users become more familiar with the map and find the information they need faster over time. Measurement 15 shows a balance in user accesses on specific cultural point, both in first and third stage, due to the similar experiment conditions. Furthermore, measurement 16 reveals a balance in time spent on each cultural point, in both the first and third stage, indicating that users give the same attention to the cultural content. Measurements 17 and 18 reveal that users accessed the discussion forum 2 times more and spent 6 times more time on average in the third stage than in the first stage. The cultural events calendar service is one of the most interesting services for the users (questionnaire answers). Access log analysis confirms the growing users’ interest in accessing the content pages of current and future cultural events (M19-M21). During the first stage of the experiment, users did not visit the service at all. But during stage two, users unveiled their interest in the service with 139 accesses and an average duration of almost 2 minutes spent on the service. This trend continued during the third stage of the experiment where users visited the service 32 times and even contributed one event successfully in a limited amount of time. The FAQ service, quite naturally, was visited by users more times during stage one than stage three (M22), indicating that users needed fewer help after using the platform for one week. Moreover, users that seek for help devoted a significant amount of time to read usage instructions (about 2.10 minutes) in both stages (M23). Measurement 24 indicates that users found registration procedure rather easy, since they managed to register an account on the platform, 4 times faster in the third stage than in the first experimental stage. Furthermore, users spent similar amounts of time to login to the system in each experimental stage (M25). Login and logout procedure is similar in the majority of online applications so users where familiar with the process from the first stage of the experiment. Finally, measurements 26 and 27 referred to the number and average duration for accesses of pages that hosted platform’s informative content (About us, Contributors, Authors, Artists Corner, Features etc.). Analysis results show that users visited such pages more and spent more time on average to read their content in the first stage than in the third stage because they wanted to learn more about the platform.
Personal interview answers identified the platform services that are considered the most interesting and therefore engaging for the users. The most popular answers were the interactive cultural map and the platform’s cultural content confirming related findings from the questionnaires and the usage statistics analysis. Other services that are considered rather interesting are the calendar of cultural events and the contributions service. Evaluation results concerning engagement in cultural heritage digital platforms, positively support related findings presented in Reference [
15,
46].
5.2. Participation
We investigated the hypothesis that users intend to participate actively in contributing content to the platform (H2). Results reveal that almost all users acknowledge the platform’s participatory nature (S1) and almost all users accept that the platform promotes a sense of belonging to a society among its users (S2). Almost all users understand that the platform allows them to upload cultural heritage content (S3). More than 87% of users are open to contribute cultural heritage content (S4) or a cultural event (S6) to the platform. 2 out of 3 users (66.67%) are eager to leave a review on another user’s contribution (S5). More than 67% of the users responded that they are intrigued to further study a cultural heritage topic/issue/event/object after finding related information to the platform (S7). More than 63% of the users responded that specific information provided by the platform could trigger them into contributing related content and form a thematic collection (S8). Almost all users answered that they would download platform’s mobile applications to contribute cultural content in real-time (S9) and about 60% of them would make a contribution while witnessing a cultural event (S10). The lack of reliable and costless infrastructure influences negatively user intention of 2 out of 3 users to use the mobile applications (S11) but almost all of the users stated their intention to use platform’s mobile applications if they could connect to the platform reliably, fast and free of charge regardless of the time and space of the connection (S12). Recorded usage statistics in stage 2, show that users spent an average of 7.27 minutes per contribution for 21 contributions, indicating that users devoted an adequate amount of time to make a notable contribution (M5, M6). Moreover, users needed significantly fewer time to make a contribution in stage 3 (1.43 min) than in stage 1 (4.17 min).
Questionnaire results suggest that the users are willing to participate actively in an online community focused around cultural heritage. Almost all users comprehended that the platform allows them to upload their own cultural heritage content and the wide majority of the users would be eager to contribute content to the platform. The platform also provides a potential starting point for users to investigate a cultural topic further. Users seem to be comfortable in enriching existing content in order to form a thematic collection, an important feature since users tend to seek information regarding a specific topic in each session thus improving user engagement. Usage statistics results in stage 2 indicate that users devoted a significant amount of time to make a sound contribution of cultural content to the platform suggesting that they wanted to offer rich scientifically correct information. Comparing the average contribution time in stages 1 and 3 (similar experimental conditions, limited amount of time to perform a contribution) we can conclude that as users become more familiar with the platform they spend fewer time to make a contribution. The main platform area that promotes the online community and the exchange of opinions on cultural topics is the discussion forum. Measurements 17 and 18 reveal that users accessed the discussion forum 2 times more and spent 6 times more time on average in the third stage than in the first stage. This increase in user interest could be an indication that the discussion forum service has the potential to support a vivid online community of users that share a passion for cultural heritage. Evaluation results concerning user participation in cultural heritage digital platforms, positively support related findings presented in Reference [
15,
16].
5.3. Dissemination
We investigated the hypothesis that users have the intention to disseminate the platform to their peers or even to the broad public (H3). Results reveal that almost all users would motivate their peers or others to visit the platform, view its content and use its services (S13). On the other hand, about 2 out of 3 (65.67%), answered that they would urge their peers or others to contribute content to the platform (S14). This measurement suggests that users comprehend the content viewing process as distinct from the content contributing process.
5.4. Exploitation
We investigated the hypothesis that users have the intention to exploit platform services and content in order to generate revenue (H4). Results reveal that the majority of users (above 73%) would be willing to use the platform in order to advertise their creations (artwork, cultural digital application) or a cultural event that they are organizing to platform’s audience (S15). Furthermore, the great majority of users (above 89%) answered that they would be open to use platform services and content in a project at work (S16). The results from the personal interviews, concerning the exploitation potential of Culture Gate, identified the platform services that are considered more likely to be exploited by them in their professional life. The platform’s collected digital cultural content was the most popular service with the greatest exploitation potential. Notable services with exploitation potential according to the participants were the interactive cultural map service and the calendar of cultural events. The above results suggest that the platform touches the goal of creating an exploitable environment for users to promote their work or use its content and services in their professional life, now and in the near future.
5.5. Belonging
We investigated the hypothesis that the platform usage reinforces a user’s sense of belonging to her/his place of living/birth/origination (H5). Questionnaire results reveal that almost all users would be interested in searching and discovering content related to their place of living/birth/origination (S17). Furthermore, almost all users agree that the platform helps them link to their origins (S18). The great majority of users (80%) stated that they would be interested in contributing content related to their origins (S19). More than 2 out of 3 users responded that their opinion about their place of birth/living/origination has been improved when they found cultural heritage information related to that place (S20). Most of the users (above 82%) answered that they learned new and interesting cultural information related to their place of birth/living/origination (S21) and 80% of the users stated that the use of Culture Gate would motivate them to visit specific locations within that place (S22). The study of user access logs strongly confirms user interest towards information related to their roots. During the experiment, users, without guidance by the supervisors, performed their own searches of cultural content. 54.87% of user searches were related to cultural content within or near their roots. Moreover, users spent over 71 seconds to view information related to their roots in comparison to the 63 seconds that they spent on viewing other information. This result highlights the increased interest of users in cultural content related to their roots since the experiment. Usage statistics results reveal an increasing interest in local searches (M9). In stage 3, 77% of the searches had local characteristics in contrast to 48,7% of stage 2 and 38% of stage 1 (M9). This measurement reveals that users, at least at the initial stages of their contact with the platform, care about content related to their origins. Furthermore, local searches occupied users, more time on average (0.49 min) than total searches (0.43 min) or thematic collections searches (0.38 min) (M10). Evaluation results concerning the sense of belonging supported by a cultural heritage digital platform, confirm related findings presented in Reference [
49].
5.6. Responsibility
We investigated the hypothesis that the platform promotes personal and social responsibility among its users (H6). Results reveal that about 72% of the users would be willing to dedicate their time in contributing scientifically correct content to the platform (S38) and more than 67% answered that they would inform platform staff in they found scientifically inaccurate content (S39). The aforementioned data reveal that the users possess an adequate level of responsibility towards the other users since they are more likely to contribute content when they have done a full research on a cultural heritage topic and they are sure that their contribution is scientifically sound. A very high percentage of users (86%) answered that the platform could motivate them in getting involved with the preservation and rescue of cultural heritage property within the area they live or come from. The above evidence suggests that the platform instils a sense of responsibility to its users towards the society and the online community.
5.7. Intergenerational Dialogue
We investigated the hypothesis that the platform promotes intergenerational dialogue (H7). Results reveal that more than 74% of the users would present the platform to their parents and grandparents and would urge them to visit and use platform services (S41). Moreover, 86% of the users would help their relatives to search and view cultural content (S42). Furthermore, 79% of the users answered that they would use their parents’ and grandparents’ experiences, memories and knowledge to derive information about cultural heritage issues related to the area they live or come from. The above results provide a first glimpse about the positive impact a cultural heritage participatory digital platform could have on strengthening the bond between consecutive generations and promoting the peaceful continuity of modern societies, thus supporting related findings presented in Reference [
47,
48].
5.8. Limitations and Future Work
This study has various limitations. At first, the examined sample consisted of only one category of potential stakeholders. Chosen undergraduate and postgraduate students are future or current professionals of cultural heritage with familiarity in using IT platforms. The sample is intentionally biased in terms of skills, age and educational levels. The sample could be enriched with other categories of potential users like public authorities’ officials, tour operators, school teachers or parents, in order to extract a more general view of the platform’s personal and social impact. Moreover, the limited time period of usage statistics collection did not allow us to explore the potential interactions that could have been developed among the personal and social impact factors (participation, dissemination, exploitation, belonging, engagement, responsibility, intergenerational dialogue). Different results may be obtained if this study measured personal and social impact for a longer period of time. Future studies can reveal potential relationships among participation, dissemination, exploitation, belonging, engagement, responsibility and intergenerational dialogue. Another important limitation is the real life truth that there is a massive potential gap between people’s attitudes and actions. This fact inserts a component of uncertainty in linking the evaluation results with our conclusions. Finally, we chose to guide the evaluation procedure through well-structured experiments and not organically, in order to capture the first impressions of cultural heritage experts towards the impact of using a participatory cultural heritage platform.
6. Conclusions
This study gives a first answer to a series of research questions concerning how usable and acceptable, in a personally and social level, is a specific participatory cultural heritage digital platform (Culture Gate) considered by its users. Through a series of experiments and utilizing popular evaluation instruments, individuals, future experts and professionals of cultural heritage, were guided to provide answers concerning specific areas that reflect on usability and acceptability: active participation, dissemination, exploitation, belonging, engagement, responsibility and intergenerational dialogue. Moreover, user answers were accompanied by the collection of the corresponding usage statistics, in order to extract a more spherical view about the evaluation results. Questionnaire answers, interviews and usage statistics suggested that the platform is considered both usable and acceptable by its users, as suggested by all evaluated factors.
In the area of active user participation, evaluation results suggested that the platform provides the necessary background (tools and services) to its users to participate actively in an online community focused around cultural heritage. Although, there is a controversy among users around the idea of using platform’s mobile applications to contribute content in real-time, such an intention is clearly influenced by the lack or presence of qualitative and costless mobile internet access infrastructure in their living area.
The dissemination potential of Culture Gate was backed by the evaluation results since users stated their intention to spread their good word to peers and to the broad public about the merits of the platform, urging them to visit Culture Gate or download the platform mobile applications. On the other hand, users believe that it would be easier to convince another user to access the platform to view content than convince her/him to upload content. Furthermore, such an attitude towards content contribution could mean a lack of trust in the content submission process that requires further investigation.
In the area of exploitation, evaluation results suggested that users would advertise their creations or cultural events to platform’s audience. As Culture Gate is a platform dedicated solely to cultural heritage, its targeted audience towards cultural heritage presents a great advantage for promotion actions. For that reason, there is a greater likelihood that platform visitors would be interested in such cultural heritage creations or events. Moreover, users would be open to exploit the platform services and content in the course of a professional project or task.
Based on the evaluation results, Culture Gate seems to have a positive impact on a user’s sense of belonging to her/his place of living/birth/origination. Evaluation results support a characteristic of participatory platforms that manage and disseminate cultural heritage digital content: such platforms motivate users to come in touch with their origins, helping individuals build a strong connection with their place of birth/living/origination and improving users’ opinion about those places.
Culture Gate aspires to be an engaging and interesting environment for its users. Questionnaire results suggest that the platform provides an engaging environment based on the interesting content and the modern, interactive and informative services it offers. Usage statistics measurements reveal that users managed to become familiar with the platform after using it for only a week (each user accessed the platform 3-4 times in 7 days) suggesting that the platform is easy to use and user-friendly. Moreover, the platform seems to offer engaging content and services since users spend a significant amount of time on the platform to access or contribute cultural heritage content.
Evaluation results suggest that the platform has a positive influence on individuals concerning the cultivation of personal and social responsibility towards the society and the online community. A significant percentage of the users would not remain abstinent towards inaccurate content. This attitude could be strengthened as users become more aware about the online community. Furthermore, users answered that the platform could urge them to help in preserving or rescuing cultural heritage property within their living areas.
The evaluation procedure suggested that Culture Gate could have a positive influence on supporting intergenerational dialogue, managing to trace a first footprint of the impact that digital cultural heritage platforms could have on an otherwise complex and difficult issue to approach. Further studies are needed in order to establish a strong connection between the usage of participatory cultural heritage platforms and intergenerational dialogue.
Personal interviews results also indicate that the platform offers various interesting services covering a wide spectrum of user needs and aspirations from modern ones that seek interactive and personalized services to more traditional users that want to view cultural content in thematic lists and engage in discussions about their favourite cultural heritage topics.
This paper is a first step towards the formulation of a model that explains the adoption and success of a participatory digital platform for cultural heritage. As a first step we used as a test-bed for the application of the model we propose, a specific participatory platform for cultural heritage. In the future we plan to extend our study investigating the application of our research model to other participatory digital platforms in the field of cultural heritage. Various stakeholders that wish to implement a similar platform could exploit Culture Gate’s evaluation results on personal and social acceptance and usability. Finally, evaluation results suggest that sustaining an engaging, user-friendly and attractive environment for users, plays a key part in the popularity of cultural heritage participatory digital platforms.