Implementation of a Gamification-Based Metaverse Exhibition: A Case Study of the Farewell Museum

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper primarily discusses the implementation of a gamification-based metaverse exhibition in the Farewell Museum. The research is interesting and well-organized. However, the paper could be improved by addressing the following points:

1. It would be beneficial to include more examples or information, such as images, to better illustrate the real exhibition in the museum and its representation in the metaverse exhibition. Figure 4 alone does not provide a clear understanding of the metaverse exhibition.

2. Additional information about the participants (124) in the experiment would enhance the paper. Details such as age and background information related to their experience with museums would be valuable.

Author Response

Comments 1 : It would be beneficial to include more examples or information, such as images, to better illustrate the real exhibition in the museum and its representation in the metaverse exhibition. Figure 4 alone does not provide a clear understanding of the metaverse exhibition.

Response 1 : Thank you for your valuable feedback. We agree with your comment. To assist in understanding the metaverse exhibition space of the Farewell Museum, we have made the following enhancements to our manuscript: We have added a new section titled "3.3 Composition and Scenario of the Metaverse Exhibition Space." This section includes Figures 4, 5, and 6, which provide visual representations, as well as Table 5, which details the exhibition scenario. 

Comments 2 : Additional information about the participants (124) in the experiment would enhance the paper. Details such as age and background information related to their experience with museums would be valuable.

Response 2 : Agree. Based on your suggestion, we have added a paragraph on page 11 detailing the characteristics of the 124 participants in the usability test. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The introduction should be reworded, as it gives the impression that real exhibits are to be replaced (rather than doubled) by online exhibits. The graphs are generally too small or not commented on enough: perhaps some should be removed if they are not commented on. The authors make a set of five hypotheses which they place in a table, but only hypotheses 1 to 3 appear: more rigor is needed in the development. Finally, acronyms should be explained earlier in the article. 

Author Response

Comments : The introduction should be reworded, as it gives the impression that real exhibits are to be replaced (rather than doubled) by online exhibits. The graphs are generally too small or not commented on enough: perhaps some should be removed if they are not commented on. The authors make a set of five hypotheses which they place in a table, but only hypotheses 1 to 3 appear: more rigor is needed in the development. Finally, acronyms should be explained earlier in the article. 

Response : Thank you for your valuable feedback. Based on your suggestions, we have made the following revisions:

1. Introduction: Added relevant research indicating that combining offline and online exhibitions yields positive effects, rather than replacing offline exhibitions with online ones.
2. Graphs: Enlarged the graphs and added clearer explanations.
3. Hypotheses: Revised Table 6 to include all five hypotheses.
4. Acronyms: Explained acronyms earlier in the article to improve readability and comprehension.

We believe these changes address your concerns and enhance the overall quality of the paper. Thank you again for your insightful comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript explores an exciting and relevant topic: how gamification can be used to enhance metaverse exhibitions.  The authors focus on the Farewell Museum as a case study, examining how a combination of metaverse elements and gamification strategies can improve user engagement and create a bridge between online and offline experiences. While the study has strengths and makes a contribution, I believe that there are several, yet not major, points that should be improved.

 

Strengths

The paper is well-structured and easy to follow. The authors clearly explain the implementation of metaverse elements and gamification, and they use user feedback to evaluate the effectiveness of their approach. The study's focus on cultural heritage and sustainability is particularly interesting, and it demonstrates the potential of these technologies for meaningful applications.

The research is innovative and timely, given the growing interest in both metaverse and gamification. The case study approach is a strength, as it provides concrete examples of how these technologies can be used in practice.  The authors do a good job of explaining the gamification elements and the user experience.

Weaknesses – Areas of Improvement

However, there are a few areas where the manuscript could be strengthened.

1.      The literature review could be more comprehensive, including more recent studies on gamification and metaverse technologies in museum contexts.

2.      The implementation details could be even more specific, with more examples of the gamification elements and detailed descriptions of user interactions.

3.      The evaluation section could benefit from a more detailed analysis of the user feedback, including statistical analysis of survey results.

4.      The quality of the figures should be improved. Their current state is like Excel charts.

5.      Consider incorporating a theoretical framework, such as Self-Determination Theory or Flow Theory, to provide a deeper understanding of user engagement and motivation in the gamified metaverse environment.

6.      Discuss the accessibility considerations of the metaverse exhibition to ensure it is inclusive for diverse audiences with varying abilities and technological access.

7.      Explore the potential long-term impact of this approach. Could gamification in metaverse exhibitions lead to sustained engagement with cultural heritage topics or changes in behavior related to sustainability?

 

8.      If possible, compare your findings with other museums or cultural institutions that have implemented similar digital or gamified experiences.

Author Response

Comments 1 : The literature review could be more comprehensive, including more recent studies on gamification and metaverse technologies in museum contexts.

Response 1 : Thank you for your valuable feedback. In response to your suggestion, we have revised the introduction to include five recent studies on gamification and metaverse technologies throughout the section.

 

Comments 2 : The implementation details could be even more specific, with more examples of the gamification elements and detailed descriptions of user interactions.

Response 2 : We agree with the mentioned points, and we have included additional content related to the request in section 3.3 on page 11. We have also added relevant Table 5 and Figures 4, 5, and 6 to support this content.

 

Comments 3 :  The evaluation section could benefit from a more detailed analysis of the user feedback, including statistical analysis of survey results.

Response 3 : Thank you for your valuable feedback. We agree that a more detailed analysis of user feedback would enhance the evaluation section. In response, we have conducted a statistical analysis of the survey results and presented the findings in Table 7. This table includes a detailed breakdown of user feedback, providing a comprehensive overview of the results.

 

Comments 4 : The quality of the figures should be improved. Their current state is like Excel charts.

Response 4 : We agree with your comment. Therefore, we have revised the figures by adding annotations to the graphs.

 

Comments 5 : Consider incorporating a theoretical framework, such as Self-Determination Theory or Flow Theory, to provide a deeper understanding of user engagement and motivation in the gamified metaverse environment.

Response 5 : Thank you for your valuable feedback. To gain a deeper understanding of user engagement and motivation, we have added references related to Self-Determination Theory and Flow Theory on page 6, lines 235-239.

 

Comments 6 : Discuss the accessibility considerations of the metaverse exhibition to ensure it is inclusive for diverse audiences with varying abilities and technological access.

Response 6 : Thank you for your valuable feedback. In response, we have added a paragraph on pages 8-9 that discusses how the designed Farewell Museum metaverse exhibition promotes inclusivity and equal access to technology and cultural experiences. Additionally, we have explained how these efforts are related to various United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

 

Comments 7 : Explore the potential long-term impact of this approach. Could gamification in metaverse exhibitions lead to sustained engagement with cultural heritage topics or changes in behavior related to sustainability?

Response 7 : Thank you for your insightful feedback. In response to your comments on the potential long-term impact of gamification in metaverse exhibitions, we have added Figure 9 to illustrate our analysis. This figure and the accompanying discussion explain how gamification can lead to sustained visitor engagement and behavior changes related to sustainability.

 

Comments 8 : If possible, compare your findings with other museums or cultural institutions that have implemented similar digital or gamified experiences.

Response 8 : In the introduction, we have included an example of another museum that has implemented a gamified experience in lines 50-54.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article expresses a current study in the field of reflections on the perception of museums and their forms of dissemination, through the specific case of the metaverse.  

The study focuses on a specific case study that is certainly interesting. However, it is necessary to improve the state of the question and the theoretical framework of the article.

On the one hand, ICOM has established a new definition of museum. It would be interesting to problematize the issues of dissemination as a function of museums through this new definition that implies a new approach in the museum field.

On the other hand, it is necessary to improve the focus of the work within the scope of the journal, therefore associated with sustainability or at least what it implies from the scope of the SDGs. This is where aspects such as sustainability or equality, including the right to culture, come into context. Aspects that should be better worked in the theoretical framework. It is perhaps this lack of an in-depth approach that would help to problematize the issue that is most lacking. 

Finally, the evaluation and analysis studies carried out start from theoretical aspects and hypotheses but do not clarify what the evaluation system is from a quantitative point of view and for a museum approach, more importantly, a qualitative one. 

The conclusions should be improved because they are insufficient, should be worked with comparative cases and should be based on updated bibliography on the subject. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Comments 1 : ICOM has established a new definition of museum. It would be interesting to problematize the issues of dissemination as a function of museums through this new definition that implies a new approach in the museum field.

Response 1 : Thank you for your insightful comments and for highlighting the importance of the new ICOM definition of a museum. We appreciate your suggestion to problematize the issues of dissemination within this context. We have taken your feedback into careful consideration and introduced the new ICOM definition of a museum in the introduction section of our paper. Additionally, we have connected this new definition to the concept of the metaverse, considering the positive cyclical structure of both online and offline museums in the context of digital spaces.

 

Comments 2: It is necessary to improve the focus of the work within the scope of the journal, therefore associated with sustainability or at least what it implies from the scope of the SDGs. This is where aspects such as sustainability or equality, including the right to culture, come into context. Aspects that should be better worked in the theoretical framework. It is perhaps this lack of an in-depth approach that would help to problematize the issue that is most lacking.

Response 2: We agree with your suggestion. In response, we have added a paragraph and Figure 9, which illustrates the positive cyclical structure of metaverse museums, within the section "3.1. The Background of the Metaverse Farewell Museum" on lines 322-343, and before the section "5. Conclusion" in our manuscript. These additions emphasize that our study significantly contributes not only to the sustainability and dissemination of museums but also to the achievement of the United Nations' 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions).

 

Comments 3 : the evaluation and analysis studies carried out start from theoretical aspects and hypotheses but do not clarify what the evaluation system is from a quantitative point of view and for a museum approach, more importantly, a qualitative one.

Response 3 :   In response, in section 4. Usability Evaluation, we have clarified the evaluation system and included both quantitative data and qualitative evaluation methods in the graph results to enhance the reliability and comprehensiveness of the study.

 

Comments 4 : The conclusions should be improved because they are insufficient, should be worked with comparative cases and should be based on updated bibliography on the subject.

Response 4 :   We acknowledge your feedback regarding the insufficiency of the conclusions, the need for comparative cases, and the inclusion of an updated bibliography. In response, we have revised the conclusions by incorporating the newly suggested content, including references to ICOM and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I would like to thank the authors for effectively addressing my comments. 

I humbly believe that the manuscript has now adequate quality for publication. 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The considerations made in the review process have been taken into account and the most relevant aspects introduced in the study. The study has been considerably improved.