Revista Cultura Científica - web logo
Submit Your Research
  • Research Article

Virtualization of Cultural Heritage: Ar/vr Technologies in Museum and Excursion Practice as a Factor in Preserving Memory

Hanna Marynchenko1, Dmytro Nefodov2, Raddamila Kosarevska3, Mariia Silich4, Ivan Kostashchuk5
1Teacher of History Department, V. O. Sukhomlinskiy Educational and Scientific Pedagogical Institute, Admiral Makarov National University of Shipbuilding, Mykolaiv, Ukraine
2Doctor of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of History, V. O. Sukhomlynskyi Educational and Scientific Pedagogical Institute, Admiral Makarov National University of Shipbuilding, Mykolaiv, Ukraine
3Academic Title of Docent, Associate Professor, Department of Design, Faculty of Architecture, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Kyiv, Ukraine
4AR/XR Experience Designer and Creative Technologist in Spatial Computing
5Doctor of Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Geography of Ukraine and Regional Studies, Faculty of Geography, Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, Chernivtsi, Ukraine
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70517/revcc272518
Published: 10/09/2026
: Hanna Marynchenko, Dmytro Nefodov, Raddamila Kosarevska, Mariia Silich, Ivan Kostashchuk. Virtualization of Cultural Heritage: Ar/vr Technologies in Museum and Excursion Practice as a Factor in Preserving Memory. Revista Cultura Científica, 2027 Issue 25. pg. 216-230.

Abstract

The aim of the study was to identify the technological, spatial, and semiotic conditions under which the use of augmented, virtual, and extended reality contributed to the preservation of cultural memory in museum and excursion practice. The study was conducted from May 1 to July 15, 2026, as a structured review of the subject field, supplemented by comparative qualitative content analysis. The final corpus included 42 English-language publications from 2021–2025, of which 31 empirical, project-based, or practice-oriented works were used for coding, while 11 review and conceptual studies were used for theoretical comparison. It was found that technological immersiveness received the highest average score of 1.48 points on a scale from 0 to 2. Spatial-narrative integration received 1.19 points, semiotic integrity 1.13 points, memorial potential 1.03 points, and historical validity 1.00 point. The most balanced formats were excursion and historical-archaeological formats, with an average score of 1.29 points. Museum and hybrid exhibitions received 1.26 points, while remote virtual environments received 0.83 points. Among technological solutions, augmented reality systems had the highest overall score of 1.23 points. Virtual reality provided the most pronounced sense of presence but more often weakened the connection with the material context. It was determined that the preservation of memory depended not on maximum spectacle but on historical authenticity, semiotic integrity, spatial localization, and the alignment of digital content with the curatorial narrative. The proposed criteria can be used for evaluating and designing digital exhibitions.

Keywords: museum space; semiotics of cultural heritage; digital museology; immersive interpretation; visitor experience; cultural communication

Abstract

The aim of the study was to identify the technological, spatial, and semiotic conditions under which the use of augmented, virtual, and extended reality contributed to the preservation of cultural memory in museum and excursion practice. The study was conducted from May 1 to July 15, 2026, as a structured review of the subject field, supplemented by comparative qualitative content analysis. The final corpus included 42 English-language publications from 2021–2025, of which 31 empirical, project-based, or practice-oriented works were used for coding, while 11 review and conceptual studies were used for theoretical comparison. It was found that technological immersiveness received the highest average score of 1.48 points on a scale from 0 to 2. Spatial-narrative integration received 1.19 points, semiotic integrity 1.13 points, memorial potential 1.03 points, and historical validity 1.00 point. The most balanced formats were excursion and historical-archaeological formats, with an average score of 1.29 points. Museum and hybrid exhibitions received 1.26 points, while remote virtual environments received 0.83 points. Among technological solutions, augmented reality systems had the highest overall score of 1.23 points. Virtual reality provided the most pronounced sense of presence but more often weakened the connection with the material context. It was determined that the preservation of memory depended not on maximum spectacle but on historical authenticity, semiotic integrity, spatial localization, and the alignment of digital content with the curatorial narrative. The proposed criteria can be used for evaluating and designing digital exhibitions.

Keywords: museum space; semiotics of cultural heritage; digital museology; immersive interpretation; visitor experience; cultural communication

References

  1. Boboc, Răzvan Gabriel, et al. “Augmented Reality in Cultural Heritage: An Overview of the Last Decade of Applications.” Applied Sciences, vol. 12, no. 19, 2022, article 9859.

  2. Anastasovitis, Eleftherios, et al. “Enhanced Inclusion through Advanced Immersion in Cultural Heritage: A Holistic Framework in Virtual Museology.” Electronics, vol. 13, no. 7, 2024, article 1396.

  3. Chen, Yuangao, et al. “Why People Use Augmented Reality in Heritage Museums: A Socio-Technical Perspective.” Heritage Science, vol. 12, 2024, article 108.

  4. Cranmer, Eleanor E., et al. “The Role of Augmented Reality for Sustainable Development: Evidence from Cultural Heritage Tourism.” Tourism Management Perspectives, vol. 49, 2023, article 101196.

  5. Anwar, Muhammad Shahid, et al. “Metaverse and XR for Cultural Heritage Education: Applications, Standards, Architecture, and Technological Insights for Enhanced Immersive Experience.” Virtual Reality, vol. 29, no. 2, 2025, article 51.

  6. Innocente, Chiara, et al. “A Framework Study on the Use of Immersive XR Technologies in the Cultural Heritage Domain.” Journal of Cultural Heritage, vol. 62, 2023, pp. 268–283.

  7. Ramtohul, Arvind, and Kavi Kumar Khedo. “Augmented Reality Systems in the Cultural Heritage Domains: A Systematic Review.” Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, vol. 32, 2024, article e00317.

  8. Li, Jingjing, et al. “A Systematic Review of Digital Transformation Technologies in Museum Exhibition.” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 161, 2024, article 108407.

  9. Trunfio, Marianna, et al. “Innovating the Cultural Heritage Museum Service Model through Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality: The Effects on the Overall Visitor Experience and Satisfaction.” Journal of Heritage Tourism, vol. 17, no. 1, 2022, pp. 1–19.

  10. Jangra, Shinnu, et al. “Exploring the Impact of Virtual Reality on Museum Experiences: Visitor Immersion and Experience Consequences.” Virtual Reality, vol. 29, no. 2, 2025, article 84.

  11. Wang, Ning, et al. “Identifying Key Factors Influencing Immersive Experiences in Virtual Reality Enhanced Museums.” Scientific Reports, vol. 15, 2025, article 31990.

  12. Panhale, Tanvi, et al. “Augmented Reality and Experience Co-Creation in Heritage Settings.” Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 39, nos. 5–6, 2023, pp. 470–497.

  13. Tang, Yangyi (Eric), and Qi Zhou. “Inspired by Intertemporal Connections: Using AR Technology to Enhance Visitor Satisfaction in Historical Museums.” Tourism Management, vol. 108, 2025, article 105096.

  14. Kleftodimos, Alexandros, et al. “Location-Based Augmented Reality for Cultural Heritage Education: Creating Educational, Gamified Location-Based AR Applications for the Prehistoric Lake Settlement of Dispilio.” Digital, vol. 3, no. 1, 2023, pp. 18–45.

  15. Galani, Sophie, and Spyros Vosinakis. “An Augmented Reality Approach for Communicating Intangible and Architectural Heritage through Digital Characters and Scale Models.” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 28, nos. 3–4, 2024, pp. 471–490.

  16. Wang, Zirui, and Jie Meng. “Dialogues with Cultural Heritage via Museum Digitalisation: Developing a Model of Visitors’ Cognitive Identity, Technological Agent, Cultural Symbolism, and Public Engagement.” Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 39, no. 6, 2024, pp. 810–833.

  17. Hellwig, Anne F. J. “Exuberant and Fantastical: How Flythroughs Are Changing the Way Museums Construct Their Identities and Build Relationships with Their Publics.” Multimodality & Society, vol. 4, no. 3, 2024, pp. 354–371.

  18. Song, Zhennuo, and Leighton Evans. “The Museum of Digital Things: Extended Reality and Museum Practices.” Frontiers in Virtual Reality, vol. 5, 2024, article 1396280.

  19. Iacono, Saverio, et al. “Virtual Reality in Cultural Heritage: A Setup for Balzi Rossi Museum.” Applied Sciences, vol. 14, no. 9, 2024, article 3562.

  20. Leopardi, A., et al. “X-Reality Technologies for Museums: A Comparative Evaluation Based on Presence and Visitors’ Experience through User Studies.” Journal of Cultural Heritage, vol. 47, 2021, pp. 188–198.

  21. Wang, Jinwei, et al. “Effect of Display Methods on Intentions to Use Virtual Reality in Museum Tourism.” Journal of Travel Research, vol. 63, no. 2, 2024, pp. 314–334.

  22. Zhang, Yan, and Xueyuan Zhang. “Virtual Museum ‘Traditional Dress of Liangshan Yi Nationality’: Analysis of User Experience in Cultural Heritage Interaction.” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, vol. 40, no. 1, 2025, pp. 432–446.

  23. Liu, Junshan, et al. “Navigating Maritime Heritage: An Immersive Virtual Tour of the USS Drum Submarine Museum.” Histories, vol. 4, no. 3, 2024, pp. 346–368.

  24. Dobrovolska, Viktoriia, et al. “Intelligence Web Analysis of Internet Resources of Intangible Digital Cultural Heritage Collections.” Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop of IT-Professionals on Artificial Intelligence (ProfIT AI 2022), edited by Dmytro Chumachenko et al., vol. 3348, CEUR-WS.org, 2022, pp. 1–18.

  25. Li, Jingjing, et al. “A Bibliometric Analysis of Immersive Technology in Museum Exhibitions: Exploring User Experience.” Frontiers in Virtual Reality, vol. 4, 2023, article 1240562.

  26. Rodriguez-Garcia, Bruno, et al. “A Systematic Review of Virtual 3D Reconstructions of Cultural Heritage in Immersive Virtual Reality.” Multimedia Tools and Applications, vol. 83, no. 42, 2024, pp. 89743–89793.

  27. Zhang, J., et al. “The Impact of Immersive Technologies on Cultural Heritage: A Bibliometric Study of VR, AR, and MR Applications.” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 15, 2024, article 6446.

  28. Ch’ng, E., et al. “Social Augmented Reality: Communicating via Cultural Heritage.” ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, vol. 16, no. 2, 2023, article 29, pp. 1–26.

  29. Xu, Ningning, et al. “CubeMuseum AR: A Tangible Augmented Reality Interface for Cultural Heritage Learning and Museum Gifting.” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 40, no. 6, 2024, pp. 1409–1437.

  30. Krumpen, Stefan, et al. “Towards Tangible Cultural Heritage Experiences: Enriching VR-Based Object Inspection with Haptic Feedback.” ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, vol. 15, no. 1, 2021, article 19, pp. 1–17.

  31. Zhu, C., et al. “Interpreting the Impact of Augmented Reality on Heritage Tourism: Two Empirical Studies from World Heritage Sites.” Current Issues in Tourism, vol. 27, no. 23, 2024, pp. 4374–4388.

  32. Yap, Joel Qi Hong, et al. “The Impact of Digitalisation and Digitisation in Museums on Memory-Making.” Current Issues in Tourism, vol. 27, no. 16, 2024, pp. 2538–2560.

  33. Komarac, Tanja, and Đurđana Ozretić Došen. “Understanding Virtual Museum Visits: Generation Z Experiences.” Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 39, no. 3, 2024, pp. 357–376.

  34. Wang, Hanbing, et al. “Grand Challenges in Immersive Technologies for Cultural Heritage.” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 41, no. 21, 2025, pp. 13682–13703.

  35. Trunfio, Marianna, et al. “Mixed Reality Experiences in Museums: Exploring the Impact of Functional Elements of the Devices on Visitors’ Immersive Experiences and Post-Experience Behaviours.” Information & Management, vol. 59, no. 8, 2022, article 103698.

  36. Zhou, Yuting, et al. “A Meta-Analytic Review on Incorporating Virtual and Augmented Reality in Museum Learning.” Educational Research Review, vol. 36, 2022, article 100454.

  37. Zhang, Rui, et al. “Exploring the Role of Immersive Technology in Digitally Representing Contemporary Crafts within Hybrid Museum Exhibitions: A Scoping Review.” Digital Creativity, vol. 35, no. 4, 2024, pp. 355–377.

  38. Chung, Seung Jin, et al. “Comparison of Visitor Experiences of Virtual Reality Exhibitions by Spatial Environment.” International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, vol. 181, 2024, article 103145.

  39. Kamariotou, Vassiliki, et al. “Strategic Planning for Virtual Exhibitions and Visitors’ Experience: A Multidisciplinary Approach for Museums in the Digital Age.” Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, vol. 21, 2021, article e00183.

  40. Xu, Ding, et al. “Digitally Enriched Exhibitions: Perspectives from Museum Professionals.” Tourism Management, vol. 105, 2024, article 104970.

  41. Komianos, Vasileios, et al. “Introducing Digitized Cultural Heritage to Wider Audiences by Employing Virtual and Augmented Reality Experiences: The Case of the v-Corfu Project.” Technologies, vol. 12, no. 10, 2024, article 196.

  42. Kontogiorgakis, Emmanouil, et al. “Gamified VR Storytelling for Cultural Tourism Using 3D Reconstructions, Virtual Humans, and 360° Videos.” Technologies, vol. 12, no. 6, 2024, article 73.

Hanna Marynchenko
Teacher of History Department, V. O. Sukhomlinskiy Educational and Scientific Pedagogical Institute, Admiral Makarov National University of Shipbuilding, Mykolaiv, Ukraine
anya.marinchenko@gmail.com
Dmytro Nefodov
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of History, V. O. Sukhomlynskyi Educational and Scientific Pedagogical Institute, Admiral Makarov National University of Shipbuilding, Mykolaiv, Ukraine
Raddamila Kosarevska
Academic Title of Docent, Associate Professor, Department of Design, Faculty of Architecture, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Kyiv, Ukraine
Mariia Silich
AR/XR Experience Designer and Creative Technologist in Spatial Computing
Ivan Kostashchuk
Doctor of Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Geography of Ukraine and Regional Studies, Faculty of Geography, Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, Chernivtsi, Ukraine

How to cite:

Hanna Marynchenko, Dmytro Nefodov, Raddamila Kosarevska, Mariia Silich, Ivan Kostashchuk. Virtualization of Cultural Heritage: Ar/vr Technologies in Museum and Excursion Practice as a Factor in Preserving Memory. Revista Cultura Científica, 2027 Issue 25. pg. 216-230.

Publication History

  • Received: 29/05/2026
  • Accepted: 20/08/2026
  • Published: 10/09/2026
Copyright © 2026, Hanna Marynchenko, Dmytro Nefodov, Raddamila Kosarevska, Mariia Silich, Ivan Kostashchuk. Published by Revista Cultura Científica. This article is published as open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Browse Advance Search