I came up with this topic based on the requirement below and the lecture content that I wanna focus(mainly focus on 2-consisency lecture, and i also attached 1-ui-overview to see if it could help in any way), please let me know if you can come up with topics with better inspiration and higher quality we could discuss. Maybe a more specific topic could be better? Let me know if you think this topic is good or should we aim for a more specific topic.
Norman’s principle and Shneiderman’s Golden Rules need to be mentioned (since it was mentioned in the lecture, find literatures to relate this)
literature review needs to be related to the lecture content (shown in attached file). literature need to be recent 5 years, and they need to be good resources articles. There needs to be at least 6 literatures. literature analysis needs to be deep and show a good understanding.
Not including title, table of content and reference pages, there need to be 10 pages at least. double spaced.
Please provide ordinarility report when submit the paper draft to me. No chat gpt , no plagarism please.
we have been working on a group project that’s about designing a virtual museum UI. please also make a point to relate the consistancy of ui design to virtual museum design. I will write some recommended articles about virtual museum below.
A compensation of $50 will be provided if the essay gets more than 85%
please let me know if you have any confusion or if you want to confirm anything, i will respond right away.
Outline for a literature review research report
A literature review is only one of the types of term paper you might choose to submit.
Title page
Table of contents
§Introduction
Motivation (1–2 sentences)
Describe the structure and purpose of your essay
Tell the reader what you will be doing, e.g. a review of the research literature with the intention to ….
The articles are organized by theme or by topic or by time or some other way that makes sense in the context of your stated purpose.
§Methodology
It would be great if you can show easily and clearly that you have covered all of the literature within sensible limits.
Explain how you organised the literature (research articles) you summarise, for example by topic or by approach. If you can make a case that you have covered all approaches that would be great.
Describe briefly how you choose which research articles to read and then to write about. An example could be I chose articles published in the most recent two years with the following keywords or about these topics (and then list them). Searches can further be limited by which database you use to search them (the ACM Digital Library is a good choice if you want to use only one database).
Explain, or justify, the limits you imposed on your search. Something simple like for feasibility (or practicality) I limited the search to the last two years of articles in this field (e.g. human visual cognition or cultural heritage) published by ACM.
§Findings
This is where you summarise the articles.
It is usually better to organise them by theme than article by article but either way can work.
§Summary
Compare the results from the articles if you can;
Re-state the most important and interesting points;
If possible tie it all back to the purpose from the Introduction.
References
This is where you will have all of the bibliographic detail for the articles you cited in-line in the body of the essay.
Appendix / Appendices
Grading Scheme
Basic Expectations
Violations of any of these expectations will result in deductions or outright failure.
topic and its analysis are relevant to the class
correct and consistent spelling — you may use English or American spelling in your essay but you must spell the same word the same way throughout
your essay must not be much shorter or longer than the specified length
Style
You may refer to yourself, as the author of the essay, as either We or I so long as you are consistent.
Strive to make your meaning clear:
avoid ambiguity and
prefer specific concrete terms to figurative language and colloquialisms.
Do not use contractions (except quoting verbatim) in formal writing.
Your sources must be credible. You should be relying much more on publications in refereed journals and conferences than anything in the popular press or unreferenced websites.
You must use only one citation style throughout the essay.
Citations must be to single claims or thoughts; You must not include a citation as part of a section heading.
Your syllabus provides specifications for the format of your essay. If you are planning to submit in a non-traditional format please tell the professor as soon as you can.
Use of References
Your essay should be self-contained. References to any external sources should be for additional information and sources of evidence rather than being necessary for the reader to understand the essay.
Plagiarism will not be tolerated. You must give proper credit when referring to or using work by others. If you require guidance about the mechanics of citation and what constitutes plagiarism, consult with the experts recommended in your syllabus.
All of the ideas and their expression must be yours or properly credited (as quotation or paraphrase).
Content
Your essay essay is evaluated for the demonstrated understanding of underlying issues and, to a less extent, terminology. In particular, the most important aspects of your essay are:
quality of research (how well you selected appropriate high-quality materials by others);
quality of analysis (your contribution in making sense of the material you have selected);
demonstrated understanding of underlying issues and terminology; and
style (how the essay is organized, and how well the text flows).
Your insight and analysis are critical to the success of your essay.
Generally
Grade Criteria
A-level Considerable evidence of original thinking; demonstrated outstanding capacity to analyze and synthesize; outstanding grasp of subject matter; evidence of extensive knowledge base.
B-level Evidence of grasp of subject matter, some evidence of critical capacity and analytical ability; reasonable understanding of relevant issues; evidence of familiarity with the literature.
C-level Evidence of some understanding of the subject matter; ability to develop solutions to simple problems; benefitting from his/her university experience.
D Evidence of minimally acceptable familiarity with subject matter, critical and analytical skills….
F Insufficient evidence of understanding of the subject matter; weakness in critical and analytical skills; limited or irrelevant use of the literature.
Virtual museum recommended readings:
1. Kotut, Lindah, Ann Hoang, Jennifer Shenk, Havisha Panda, and D. Scott McCrickard. ‘Technology at the Museum: The Missing Voice’. In Proceedings of the Second African Conference for Human Computer Interaction: Thriving Communities, 20:1-20:5. AfriCHI ’18. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3283458.3283491.
2. Meinecke, Christofer, Chris Hall, and Stefan Jänicke. ‘Towards Enhancing Virtual Museums by Contextualizing Art through Interactive Visualizations’. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 15, no. 4 (6 December 2022): 62:1-62:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3527619.
3. Meli, Leonardo, Claudio Pacchierotti, Gionata Salvietti, Francesco Chinello, Maurizio Maisto, Alessandro De Luca, and Domenico Prattichizzo. ‘Combining Wearable Finger Haptics and Augmented Reality: User Evaluation Using an External Camera and the Microsoft HoloLens’. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 3, no. 4 (October 2018): 4297–4304. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2018.2864354.
4. Morse, Christopher, Blandine Landau, Carine Lallemand, Lars Wieneke, and Vincent Koenig. ‘From #MuseumAtHome to #AtHomeAtTheMuseum: Digital Museums and Dialogical Engagement Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic’. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 15, no. 2 (7 April 2022): 30:1-30:29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3480955.
5. Muntean, Reese, Alissa N. Antle, Brendan Matkin, Kate Hennessy, Susan Rowley, and Jordan Wilson. ‘Designing Cultural Values into Interaction’. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 6062–74. CHI ’17. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025908.
6. Pollalis, Christina, Amanda Gilvin, Lauren Westendorf, Lauren Futami, Bella Virgilio, Dana Hsiao, and Orit Shaer. ‘ARtLens: Enhancing Museum Visitors’ Engagement with African Art’. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems, 195–200. DIS ’18 Companion. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3197391.3205435
7. Prange, Sarah, Victoria Müller, Daniel Buschek, and Florian Alt. ‘Quakequiz: A Case Study on Deploying a Playful Display Application in a Museum Context’. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia, 49–56. MUM ’17. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1145/3152832.3152841.
8. Roberts, Jessica, Amartya Banerjee, Annette Hong, Steven McGee, Michael Horn, and Matt Matcuk. ‘Digital Exhibit Labels in Museums: Promoting Visitor Engagement with Cultural Artifacts’. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 623:1-623:12. CHI ’18. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174197.
9. Shapiro, Ben Rydal, and Rogers Hall. ‘Making Engagement Visible: The Use of Mondrian Transcripts in a Museum’, 2017, 8.
Stanković Elesini, Urška, Hlede Miha, David Kristan, Andreja Korošec, Eni Protić, Andrej Učakar, Urška Vrabič Brodnjak, and Jože Rugelj. ‘Mobile Serious Game for Enhancing User Experience in Museum’. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 16, no. 1 (24 December 2022): 15:1-15:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3569088.
10. Vi, Chi Thanh, Damien Ablart, Elia Gatti, Carlos Velasco, and Marianna Obrist. ‘Not Just Seeing, but Also Feeling Art: Mid-Air Haptic Experiences Integrated in a Multisensory Art Exhibition’. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 108 (December 2017): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.06.004.
11. Wood, Madi, Ibrahim Husain, Jenifer Wong, and Bryan (Xu) Yan. ‘The Art of Engagement : Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery’. University of British Columbia, 2017. https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0374217.Kotut, Lindah, Ann Hoang, Jennifer Shenk, Havisha Panda, and D. Scott McCrickard. ‘Technology at the Museum: The Missing Voice’. In Proceedings of the Second African Conference for Human Computer Interaction: Thriving Communities, 20:1-20:5. AfriCHI ’18. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3283458.3283491.
