Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
mohamed zaifri
 -- 2293 2023-08-23 06:17:37 |
2 Reference format revised.
Lindsay Dong
 -2 word(s) 2291 2023-08-24 08:45:38 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Zaifri, M.; Khalloufi, H.; Kaghat, F.Z.; Azough, A.; Zidani, K.A. Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry (2002-2022). Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48348 (accessed on 19 May 2024).
Zaifri M, Khalloufi H, Kaghat FZ, Azough A, Zidani KA. Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry (2002-2022). Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48348. Accessed May 19, 2024.
Zaifri, Mohamed, Hamza Khalloufi, Fatima Zahra Kaghat, Ahmed Azough, Khalid Alaoui Zidani. "Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry (2002-2022)" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48348 (accessed May 19, 2024).
Zaifri, M., Khalloufi, H., Kaghat, F.Z., Azough, A., & Zidani, K.A. (2023, August 23). Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry (2002-2022). In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48348
Zaifri, Mohamed, et al. "Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry (2002-2022)." Encyclopedia. Web. 23 August, 2023.
Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry (2002-2022)
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/mti7070064

Augmented reality has emerged as a transformative technology, with the potential to revolutionize the tourism industry.

augmented reality immersive technology tourism

1. Introduction

In recent years, immersive technologies have become increasingly popular in various industries, including tourism. Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) are being implemented in various tourist and hospitality areas, such as theme parks, museums, historical sites, etc. [1]. These technologies have gained significant attention from researchers and practitioners, due to their capability to enhance tourists’ satisfaction, by delivering unforgettable experiences [2].
AR technology, a variant of virtual environments (VE) that allows users to see the real world with virtual objects overlaid in real time [3], has emerged as a transformative tool that can revolutionize various sectors, offering enhanced and immersive experiences. Researchers and tourism practitioners have recognized AR’s potential in tourism since 2000 [4]. Pioneering studies, such as that by Vlahakis et al. [5], have introduced novel systems that offer personalized AR tours and 3D reconstructions of ruined historical sites. Additionally, advancements in AR technology, as highlighted by Höllerer and Feiner in their study [6], have enabled tourists to easily discover destinations, access background information, and explore countless possibilities, limited only by the capabilities of the AR device, and the available information. Since then, AR has been increasingly adopted to provide tourists with relevant information about the sites they visit, improve navigation, and create highly dynamic experiences at tourist attractions [7]. The growing interest in AR applications for tourism requires a comprehensive understanding of AR technology’s evolution, contexts, and design elements in this field.
Moreover, tourism is facing numerous challenges related to technology, economics, and sustainability [8]. The COVID-19 pandemic has further intensified these challenges, causing significant socio-cultural and economic impacts on various stakeholders in the industry, with some effects expected to persist for years to come [9]. In addition, with the rapid development of mobile technology, and the emergence of groundbreaking AR applications, such as the Pokémon Go craze [10], tourists are showing an increasing demand for AR-based solutions to enhance their travel experiences [11].

2. Research Progress of Augmented Reality in Tourism Industry

2.1. Annual and Regional Distribution of Scientific Production

The growth of research in the field of AR for tourism can be assessed by analyzing the annual distribution of published papers. The timeline of the number of research papers published per year is demonstrated in Figure 1, which reveals three distinct periods of productivity, each characterized by specific underlying factors.
Figure 1. Annual scientific production.
The first period, spanning from 2002 to 2008, marks the nascent stage of AR tourism research, with a minimal output of 1 to 5 publications per year. The limited productivity can be attributed to the novelty of the technology, the scarcity of practical applications, and the lack of widespread awareness about the potential benefits of AR in tourism. This period is characterized by the pioneering efforts of researchers to investigate the potential of AR technology in the tourism industry.
The second period, covering 2009 to 2019, exhibits a steady increase in research output, with annual publication numbers ranging from 8 to 131. This growth can be attributed to the maturation of AR technology, increased accessibility, and a growing recognition of its potential application in the tourism sector. During this period, researchers began to explore a wider range of topics, such as design, development, gamification, user experience, satisfaction, and behavior intention, demonstrating an expanding interest in the field.
The third period, extending from 2020 to 2022, features consistent annual publication numbers, stabilizing at around 98 in both 2020 and 2022. This period, known as the post-COVID-19 era, commences in 2021, after a decline in research productivity during 2020 due to the pandemic. This phase is characterized by a renewed interest in AR tourism research, as the tourism industry pursued innovative approaches, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, to adapt to novel challenges and shifting consumer behaviors resulting from the pandemic.
Figure 2 demonstrates the world map of regional scientific production. Delving deeper into the productivity of countries in the realm of AR tourism research, Italy emerges as a frontrunner, with an impressive 170 publications (20% of the total publications), followed closely by China at 142 (17%), and the UK with 87 (10%). When juxtaposed, these countries exemplify the varied regional and economic contexts that contribute to the field’s diversity and growth.
Figure 2. Geographical distribution of scientific production.
As shown in Figure 3, Europe is strongly involved, with countries such as Italy, the UK, Greece, Portugal, and Spain contributing significantly to AR tourism research. Concurrently, Asian nations such as China, Malaysia, South Korea, and Indonesia reveal considerable dedication to the field. The United States of America (USA), as the leading contributor from North America, further highlights the global scope of AR tourism research.
Mti 07 00064 g004 550
Figure 3. Top 10 most productive countries.
A nuanced examination of the economic classification of countries involved in AR tourism research unveils a heterogeneous landscape. Advanced economies such as Italy, the UK, and the USA are undoubtedly prominent players; however, the substantial contributions from emerging economies such as China, Malaysia, and Indonesia underscore the inclusive nature of the field. This observation suggests that AR tourism research transcends economic boundaries, fostering participation from nations across a broad spectrum of income levels and developmental stages.
A thorough analysis of the most cited countries in AR tourism research, as depicted in Figure 4, highlights a diverse landscape that transcends geographic borders. The United Kingdom’s leading with 1172 citations demonstrates the nation’s commitment to producing high-quality research in AR tourism. South Korea having 1084 citations reflects the country’s rapid technological advancements, and its keen interest in the development of innovative applications for AR in tourism. Spain and Italy contributing 995 and 856 citations, respectively, underscores the importance of AR in preserving and promoting cultural heritage within the tourism sector. Both countries have a rich history and a plethora of tourist attractions, which has driven the need for groundbreaking research in AR, to enhance visitor experiences and boost tourism. The USA having 815 citations displays the nation’s status as a global leader in technology and innovation. The significant citation count is a testament to the quality of research produced by excellent universities and research centers across the country.
Mti 07 00064 g005 550
Figure 4. Top 10 most cited countries.

2.2. Emerging Topics of AR in Tourism

Figure 5 provides a network visualization of the conceptual structure of the most commonly occurring concepts in AR research within the tourism industry. Each node in the network diagram represents a specific keyword, while the links between nodes illustrate the frequency of co-occurrence of these keywords. The size of each node corresponds to the frequency of occurrence of the respective keyword, while the thickness of the links represents the strength of the association between the keywords. To facilitate interpretation, each thematic cluster in the network is color-coded, highlighting the most salient topics (nodes) and their interrelationships (links).  As a result, a minimum node size was maintained, to ensure visual clarity, regardless of variation in the frequencies of keyword occurrence.

Mti 07 00064 g006 550
Figure 5. Keyword co-occurrence network based on author’s keywords.
Figure 6 illustrates the evolution of AR research themes in tourism over time. Together with Figure 1, which displays the annual distribution of published papers, the 2002–2022 timeframe has been divided into five distinct phases.
The first phase, known as the Pioneering Phase (2002–2006), saw a small group of early visionaries exploring the potential of AR in the tourism industry, with a particular focus on mobile technology that would become increasingly important in subsequent years [12]. The second phase, referred to as the Mobile Engagement Era (2006–2013), emphasizes the growing importance of mobile technology, which facilitated tourists’ access to augmented reality experiences, using handheld devices. During this phase, a focus was placed on developing engaging and interactive AR experiences for tourists [13]. The third phase, known as the Technological Convergence Period (2014–2017), is characterized by the emergence of wearable devices such as smart glasses, and the integration of AR with advanced navigation technologies such as GIS, as well as image-processing techniques such as 3D modeling and image recognition [14]. Heritage education and museums also gained prominence during this phase [15], coinciding with the growth of MAR, allowing visitors to better understand and appreciate cultural tourism experiences. The fourth phase is the User Experience Optimization Stage (2017–2019). At this stage, the focus shifted to enhancing the user experience, often through gamification techniques, and to developing the smart tourism concept [16]. Studies also investigated user acceptance of AR in tourism, seeking to understand the factors that influence user adoption and satisfaction [17]. Visualization techniques were further explored, to improve the overall user experience [18]. As a result, cultural tourism experienced significant growth in 2019, as shown in Figure 6. The final phase is the Adaptation and Integration Stage (2020–2022). The most recent stage in the development of AR in tourism is characterized by the use of big data to enhance AR experiences [19], and the growing importance of sustainability in the industry [8]. The COVID-19 pandemic led to an acceleration in the adoption of AR for virtual tourism [20], offering new possibilities for survival and recovery in the sector [21]. Furthermore, artificial intelligence has increasingly been integrated into AR applications, creating more personalized and dynamic experiences for tourists [22].
Mti 07 00064 g007 550
Figure 6. The occurrence of keywords and their frequency over time (years) based on the authors’ keywords.

2.3. Most Utilized AR Design Components in Tourism Settings

A content analysis of the 57 articles revealed a variety of AR systems being researched in the context of tourism.

2.3.1. Tracking Systems

As shown in Figure 7a, marker-based systems, which rely on specific visual cues, such as art gallery paintings [23], food menus [24], and museum artifacts [25] for the accurate tracking and rendering of virtual information, account for 18 articles, with 13 focused on image-based systems, and 5 on object-based systems. 

Mti 07 00064 g008 550
Figure 7. AR design elements. (a) AR tracking systems. (b) Virtual content overlaid by AR devices. (c) AR devices used to deploy AR experiences. (d) Tourism settings supported by AR technology.

2.3.2. AR Devices

Figure 7c demonstrates the range of devices that researchers and practitioners have been exploring to deliver AR experiences in the tourism industry. Handheld devices, especially smartphones and tablets, were the most commonly used, featuring in 49 of the articles (84%). This prevalence can be attributed to the widespread accessibility and portability of mobile devices, making them a popular choice for implementing AR experiences in tourism. Head-mounted displays (HMDs), particularly smart glasses and headsets, were utilized in 7 articles (12%), offering a more immersive experience for users. Desktop systems were employed in just 1 study (2%), while spatial devices, which enable users to interact with their surroundings using video projectors [26], also appeared in 1 article (2%).

2.3.3. Tourism Settings

Figure 7d reveals the different tourism settings in which AR is being applied. The majority of the studies, with 41 articles (71.93%), focus on outdoor settings, highlighting the potential of AR to enhance the experience of tourists visiting natural and urban environments [27]. In contrast, 11 articles (19.30%) explore indoor settings, such as museums, galleries, and historical buildings, demonstrating the value of augmented reality in providing immersive experiences within confined spaces (e.g., [28]).

2.3.4. Virtual Content

The content analysis of the 57 articles, as shown in Figure 7b, reveals the various virtual content types employed in AR experiences for tourism. The most predominant type of content is visual, featured in 43 articles (75.44%), which aligns with the primary objective of augmented reality, to overlay digital information onto the physical world. Auditory content, although less common, was employed in 5 articles (8.77%), providing an additional layer of sensory experience for users. It is intriguing to observe that none of the papers focus on haptic, olfactory, or gustatory content individually. However, 9 studies (15.79%) have developed systems that incorporate these sensory experiences simultaneously, through multi-sensor systems.

2.3.5. Links between AR Tracking Systems and Tourism Settings

Table 1 presents the matrix of relationships between AR systems (rows) and tourism settings (columns), where they were employed to improve the tourist experience. Noticeable preferences for particular systems can be seen, depending on the environment. It is important to note that the total sum of articles exceeds 57, as numerous studies employ more than one system to accommodate various tourism settings. The values in parentheses correspond to the instances of the matrix.
Table 1. Interrelationships between AR tracking systems and tourism settings.
  Indoor Outdoor Combined Settings Not Specified
Marker-based image 5
[23][29][30][31][32]		 8
[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]		 2
[41][42]		 3
[24][43][44]
Marker-based object 1
[25]		 6
[45][46][47][48][49][50]		 1
[41]		 0
Marker-less location 2
[28][51]		 24
[16][27][38][40][48][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70]		 1
[42]		 0
Marker-less projection 1
[26]		 0 0 0
Marker-less superimposition 2
[71][72]		 10
[27][33][45][57][73][74][75][76][77][78]		 0 0

2.3.6. Links between AR Devices and Virtual Content

Table 2 illustrates the matrix of relations between AR devices (rows) and the virtual content (columns) they produce, examining how these elements work together to improve user experience. It is important to note that the total sum of rows and columns is 59, as some projects have utilized multiple tools to provide multisensory content. For instance, ref. [65] presented two location-based AR systems that employed both smartphones and smart glasses, enabling users to access audio and visual information when arriving at a point of interest.
Table 2. Interrelationships between AR devices and virtual content.
  Visual Auditory Haptic Olfactory Gustatory Multisensory
Handheld 39
[24][27][28][29][30][31][33][34][35][36][39][40][41][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][52][53][54][55][57][59][60][61][63][64][66][67][68][69][70][75][76][77][78]		 2
[16][56]		 0 0 0 8
[25][37][38][42][50][65][73][74]
HMD 3
[23][32][71]		 3
[51][58][62]		 0 0 0 2
[65][72]
Desktop 1
[60]		 0 0 0 0 0
Spatial 1
[26]		 0 0 0 0 0

The matrix indicates that users are primarily attracted to handheld devices, such as smartphones, tablets, or even portable telescopes, as demonstrated by [60], for creating various types of virtual content. A substantial emphasis is placed on visual (39) and multisensory (8) content. 

HMDs, on the other hand, are predominantly utilized for visual content (3), with smart glasses enabling users to interact with 3D animations [71], or enhance learning experiences at art galleries [32]. Similarly, HMDs are employed for auditory content (3), with headsets serving as audio AR tour guides in indoor museums [51] and outdoor environments [58][62]. HMDs have also been used for multisensory content (2), incorporating smart glasses with audio output, to facilitate exploration and navigation of historic sites [65]. 

Regarding desktop and spatial devices, both have a very limited representation, with each being used only once for generating visual content. This could be attributed to the fact that desktop and spatial devices, such as AR projectors, are less practical, and have limited sensor capacities for AR application in tourism. As a result, researchers and practitioners may be less inclined to explore these devices in the context of AR tourism for enhancing user experiences, instead focusing on more portable and versatile options such as handheld devices and HMDs.

References

  1. Wei, W. Research progress on virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) in tourism and hospitality: A critical review of publications from 2000 to 2018. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2019, 10, 539–570.
  2. Loureiro, S.M.C.; Guerreiro, J.; Ali, F. 20 years of research on virtual reality and augmented reality in tourism context: A text-mining approach. Tour. Manag. 2020, 77, 104028.
  3. Azuma, R.; Baillot, Y.; Behringer, R.; Feiner, S.; Julier, S.; MacIntyre, B. Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 2001, 21, 34–47.
  4. Liang, L.J.; Elliot, S. A systematic review of augmented reality tourism research: What is now and what is next? Tour. Hosp. Res. 2021, 21, 15–30.
  5. Vlahakis, V.; Karigiannis, J.; Tsotros, M.; Gounaris, M.; Almeida, L.; Stricker, D.; Gleue, T.; Christou, I.T.; Carlucci, R.; Ioannidis, N. Archeoguide: First results of an augmented reality, mobile computing system in cultural heritage sites. In Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on Virtual Reality, Archeology, and Cultural Heritage, Glyfada, Greece, 28–30 November 2001; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2001; pp. 131–140.
  6. Höllerer, T.; Feiner, S. Mobile augmented reality. Telegeoinformatics Locat.-Based Comput. Serv. 2004, 21, 221–260.
  7. Kounavis, C.D.; Kasimati, A.E.; Zamani, E.D. Enhancing the tourism experience through mobile augmented reality: Challenges and prospects. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2012, 4, 1–6.
  8. Loureiro, S.M.C.; Nascimento, J. Shaping a view on the influence of technologies on sustainable tourism. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12691.
  9. Sigala, M. Tourism and COVID-19: Impacts and implications for advancing and resetting industry and research. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 117, 312–321.
  10. Laine, T.H. Mobile educational augmented reality games: A systematic literature review and two case studies. Computers 2018, 7, 19.
  11. Mohanty, P.; Hassan, A.; Ekis, E. Augmented reality for relaunching tourism post-COVID-19: Socially distant, virtually connected. Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes 2020, 12, 753–760.
  12. Wolfson, O. Moving objects information management: The database challenge (Vision paper). Next Gener. Inf. Technol. Syst. 2002, 2382, 75–89.
  13. Hurst, W.; van Wezel, C. Multimodal Interaction Concepts for Mobile Augmented Reality Applications. In Advances in Multimedia Modeling: 17th International Multimedia Modeling Conference, MMM 2011, Taipei, Taiwan, 5–7 January 2011; Proceedings, Part II; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; Volume 6524, pp. 157–167.
  14. Mata, F.; Claramunt, C. Augmented navigation in outdoor environments. In Proceedings of the GIS: ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, Orlando, FL, USA, 5–8 November 2013; pp. 514–517.
  15. Laudazi, A.; Boccaccini, R. Augmented museums through mobile apps. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings; Niccolucci, F.R.P., Ed.; CEUR-WS; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, MA, USA, 2014; Volume 1336, pp. 12–17.
  16. Boletsis, C.; Chasanidou, D. Smart tourism in cities: Exploring urban destinations with audio augmented reality. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 515–521.
  17. Obeidy, W.K.; Arshad, H.; Huang, J.Y. An acceptance model for smart glasses based tourism augmented reality. In AIP Conference Proceedings; Nifa, F.A.A.L.C.K., Hussain, A., Eds.; American Institute of Physics Inc.: College Park, MD, USA, 2017; Volume 1891.
  18. Hu, Q.; Yu, D.; Wang, S.; Fu, C.; Ai, M.; Wang, W. Hybrid three-dimensional representation based on panoramic images and three-dimensional models for a virtual museum: Data collection, model, and visualization. Inf. Vis. 2017, 16, 126–138.
  19. Bermejo, C.; Huang, Z.; Braud, T.; Hui, P. When Augmented Reality meets Big Data. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW), Atlanta, GA, USA, 5–8 June 2017; pp. 169–174.
  20. Brozović, D.; Saito, H. The Impacts of Covid-19 on the Tourism Sector: Changes, Adaptations and Challenges. Tour. Int. Interdiscip. J. 2022, 70, 465–479.
  21. Franco, M.; Mota, L. Reopening for Business Post-COVID-19: Augmented Reality as a Strategy for Attracting Visitors to a Tourist Destination. Eur. J. Tour. Hosp. Recreat. 2021, 11, 54–65.
  22. Allal-Chérif, O. Intelligent cathedrals: Using augmented reality, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence to provide an intense cultural, historical, and religious visitor experience. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2022, 178, 121604.
  23. Tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T.; Han, D.-I. Mapping requirements for the wearable smart glasses augmented reality museum application. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2016, 7, 230–253.
  24. Pu, M.; Majid, N.A.A.; Idrus, B. Framework based on mobile augmented reality for translating food menu in thai language to malay language. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2017, 7, 153–159.
  25. Rodrigues, J.M.F.; Ramos, C.M.Q.; Pereira, J.A.R.; Sardo, J.D.P.; Cardoso, P.J.S. Mobile Five Senses Augmented Reality System: Technology Acceptance Study. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 163022–163033.
  26. Mendes, M.; Almeida, J.; Mohamed, H.; Giot, R. Projected augmented reality intelligent model of a city area with path optimization. Algorithms 2019, 12, 140.
  27. Lipianina-Honcharenko, K.; Savchyshyn, R.; Sachenko, A.; Chaban, A.; Kit, I.; Lendiuk, T. Concept of the Intelligent Guide with AR Support. Int. J. Comput. 2022, 21, 271–277.
  28. Shin, S.; Choi, Y. SEOUL AR: Designing a mobile AR tour application for seoul sky observatory in South Korea. Electronics 2021, 10, 2552.
  29. Paliokas, I.; Patenidis, A.T.; Mitsopoulou, E.E.; Tsita, C.; Pehlivanides, G.; Karyati, E.; Tsafaras, S.; Stathopoulos, E.A.; Kokkalas, A.; Diplaris, S.; et al. A gamified augmented reality application for digital heritage and tourism. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7868.
  30. Agustina, R.; Sutadji, E.; Purnomo; Suprianto, D.; Kusumawati, E.; Hudha, M.N.D.; Afif, M. Analysis of implementation Augmented Reality (AR) introduction of temple and ancient objects based on android to increasing student learning outcomes. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; Nandiyanto, A.B.D., Abdullah, A.G., Eds.; Institute of Physics Publishing: London, UK, 2018; Volume 434.
  31. Haryani, P.; Triyono, J. The designing of interactive learning media at Yogyakarta’s sandi museum based on augmented reality. Int. J. Inform. Vis. 2020, 4, 52–57.
  32. Tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T.H.; tom Dieck, D. Enhancing art gallery visitors’ learning experience using wearable augmented reality: Generic learning outcomes perspective. Curr. Issues Tour. 2018, 21, 2014–2034.
  33. Shih, N.-J.; Diao, P.-H.; Chen, Y. ARTS, an AR tourism system, for the integration of 3D scanning and smartphone AR in cultural heritage tourism and pedagogy. Sensors 2019, 19, 3725.
  34. Affan, B.N.; Suryanto, A.; Arfriandi, A. Implementation of augmented reality as information and promotion media on Dieng tourism area. Telkomnika Telecommun. Comput. Electron. Control 2018, 16, 1818–1825.
  35. Besharat, J.; Komninos, A.; Papadimitriou, G.; Lagiou, E.; Garofalakis, J. Augmented paper maps: Design of POI markers and effects on group navigation. J. Ambient Intell. Smart Environ. 2016, 8, 515–530.
  36. Dewi Agushinta, R.; Hustinawaty; Jatnika, I.; Medyawati, H. Boundary value analysis testing on augmented reality of indonesian fruit recognition at mekarsari tourist park using cloud method on android mobile devices. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1196, 012060.
  37. Gutierrez, J.M.; Molinero, M.A.; Soto-Martín, O.; Medina, C.R. Augmented Reality Technology Spreads Information about Historical Graffiti in Temple of Debod. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 75, 390–397.
  38. Han, D.-I.; tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T. User experience model for augmented reality applications in urban heritage tourism. J. Herit. Tour. 2018, 13, 46–61.
  39. Shih, N.-J.; Chen, H.-X.; Chen, T.-Y.; Qiu, Y.-T. Digital preservation and reconstruction of old cultural elements in augmented reality (AR). Sustainability 2020, 12, 9262.
  40. Tahyudin, I.; Saputra, D.I.S. A response analysis of mobile augmented reality application for Tourism Objects. Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2017, 7, 3500–3506.
  41. Amato, A.; Venticinque, S.; Di Martino, B. Image Recognition and Augmented Reality in Cultural Heritage Using OpenCV. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Mobile Computing & Multimedia—MoMM ’13, Vienna, Austria, 2–4 December 2013; ACM Press: Vienna, Austria, 2013; pp. 53–62.
  42. Tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T. A theoretical model of mobile augmented reality acceptance in urban heritage tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2018, 21, 154–174.
  43. Bibiloni, A.; Ramis, S.; Oliver, A.; Perales, F.J. An Augmented Reality and 360-degree Video System to Access Audiovisual Content through Mobile Devices for Touristic Applications. In Applications and Usability of Interactive TV: 4th Iberoamerican Conference, jAUTI 2015, and 6th Congress on Interactive Digital TV, CTVDI 2015, Palma de Mallorca, Spain, 15–16 October 2015; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; Volume 605, pp. 44–58.
  44. Lin, H.-F.; Chen, C.-H. Combining the technology acceptance model and uses and gratifications theory to examine the usage behavior of an augmented reality tour-sharing application. Symmetry 2017, 9, 113.
  45. Cejka, J.; Mangeruga, M.; Bruno, F.; Skarlatos, D.; Liarokapis, F. Evaluating the Potential of Augmented Reality Interfaces for Exploring Underwater Historical Sites. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 45017–45031.
  46. Fino, E.R.; Martín-Gutiérrez, J.; Fernández, M.D.M.; Davara, E.A. Interactive tourist guide: Connecting web 2.0, augmented reality and QR codes. Procedia Computer Science 2013, 25, 338–344.
  47. Li, X.-Z.; Chen, C.-C.; Kang, X.; Kang, J. Research on Relevant Dimensions of Tourism Experience of Intangible Cultural Heritage Lantern Festival: Integrating Generic Learning Outcomes with the Technology Acceptance Model. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 943277.
  48. Sasaki, R.; Yamamoto, K. A sightseeing support system using augmented reality and pictograms within urban tourist areas in Japan. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2019, 8, 381.
  49. Tatić, D. Mobile Presentation of the War History of the City of Niš. Digit. Present. Preserv. Cult. Sci. Herit. 2022, 12, 151–160.
  50. Tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T.H.; Rauschnabel, P.A. Determining visitor engagement through augmented reality at science festivals: An experience economy perspective. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 82, 44–53.
  51. Kaghat, F.Z.; Azough, A.; Fakhour, M.; Meknassi, M. A new audio augmented reality interaction and adaptation model for museum visits. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2020, 84, 106606.
  52. Yovcheva, Z.; Buhalis, D.; Gatzidis, C.; Van Elzakker, C.P.J.M. Empirical evaluation of smartphone Augmented Reality browsers in an urban tourism destination context. Int. J. Mob. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2014, 6, 10–31.
  53. Basori, A.H.; Abdul Hamid, A.L.B.; Firdausiah Mansur, A.B.; Yusof, N. IMars: Intelligent Municipality Augmented Reality Service for Efficient Information Dissemination based on Deep Learning algorithm in Smart City of Jeddah. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 163, 93–108.
  54. Abidin, R.Z.; Arshad, H.; Shukri, S.A.A.; Ling, M.F. Leveraging multimodal interaction and adaptive interfaces for location-based augmented reality Islamic tourism application. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2018, 8, 1784–1791.
  55. Mendoza, R.; Baldiris, S.; Fabregat, R. Framework to Heritage Education Using Emerging Technologies. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 75, 239–249.
  56. Chong, U.; Alimardanov, S. Audio Augmented Reality Using Unity for Marine Tourism. In Intelligent Human Computer Interaction; Singh, M., Kang, D.-K., Lee, J.-H., Tiwary, U.S., Singh, D., Chung, W.-Y., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 303–311.
  57. Panou, C.; Ragia, L.; Dimelli, D.; Mania, K. An architecture for mobile outdoors augmented reality for cultural heritage. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7, 463.
  58. Boletsis, C.; Chasanidou, D. Audio augmented reality in public transport for exploring tourist sites. In ACM International Conference Proceedings Series; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 721–725.
  59. Chen, W. Historical Oslo on a handheld device—A mobile augmented reality application. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2014, 35, 979–985.
  60. Chendeb, S.; Ridene, T.; Leroy, L. A generic augmented reality telescope for heritage valorization. In The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences; International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing: Istanbul, Turkey, 2013; Volume XL-2/W2, pp. 25–30.
  61. Demir, O.F.; Karaarslan, E. Augmented reality application for smart tourism: GökovAR. In Proceedings of the 2018 6th International Istanbul Smart Grids and Cities Congress and Fair (ICSG), Istanbul, Turkey, 25–26 April 2018; pp. 164–167.
  62. Fakhour, M.; Azough, A.; Kaghat, F.-Z.; Meknassi, M. A Cultural Scavenger Hunt Serious Game Based on Audio Augmented Reality. In Advanced Intelligent Systems for Sustainable Development (AI2SD’2019); Ezziyyani, M., Ed.; Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 1102, pp. 1–8. ISBN 978-3-030-36652-0.
  63. Galih, S.; Iansyah, S.; Yudistira, H. Location and orientation based augmented reality mobile application for enhancing heritage landmark history and information. Univ. J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2019, 6, 39–45.
  64. Kadi, D.; Suyoto; Santoso, A.J. Mobile application development with augmented reality for promoting tourism objects in Southwest Sumba. In Proceedings of the 2017 3rd International Conference on Science in Information Technology (ICSITech), Bandung, Indonesia, 25–26 October 2017; Riza, L.S., Pranolo, A., Wibawa, A.P., Junaeti, E., Wihardi, Y., Hashim, U.R., Horng, S.-J., Drezewski, R., Lim, H.S., Chakraborty, G., et al., Eds.; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017; Volume 2018, pp. 200–205.
  65. Litvak, E.; Kuflik, T. Enhancing cultural heritage outdoor experience with augmented-reality smart glasses. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2020, 24, 873–886.
  66. Rezaee, S.; Sadeghi-Niaraki, A.; Shakeri, M.; Choi, S.-M. Personalized augmented reality based tourism system: Big data and user demographic contexts. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 6047.
  67. Rokhsaritalemi, S.; Sadeghi-Niaraki, A.; Kang, H.-S.; Lee, J.-W.; Choi, S.-M. Ubiquitous Tourist System Based on Multicriteria Decision Making and Augmented Reality. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 5241.
  68. Wegrzyn, M.; Moscicka, A. CityGuideTour Torun—Tourist application using augmented reality. Geod. Cartogr. 2017, 66, 317–331.
  69. Williams, M.; Yao, K.K.K.; Nurse, J.R.C. ToARist: An augmented reality tourism app created through user-centred design. In Digital Make Believe; BCS Learning and Development Ltd.: Swindon, Wiltshire, 2017; Volume 2017.
  70. Zaifri, M.; Azough, A.; El Alaoui, S.O. Experimentation of visual augmented reality for visiting the historical monuments of the medina of Fez. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Intelligent Systems and Computer Vision (ISCV), Fez, Morocco, 2–4 April 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018; pp. 1–4.
  71. Bird, J.; Smart, P.; Harris, D.; Phillips, L.; Giannachi, G.; Vine, S. A Magic Leap in Tourism: Intended and Realized Experience of Head-Mounted Augmented Reality in a Museum Context. J. Travel Res. 2022.
  72. Han, D.-I.D.; tom Dieck, M.C.; Jung, T. Augmented Reality Smart Glasses (ARSG) visitor adoption in cultural tourism. Leis. Stud. 2019, 38, 618–633.
  73. Marto, A.; Melo, M.; Goncalves, A.; Bessa, M. Development and Evaluation of an Outdoor Multisensory AR System for Cultural Heritage. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 16419–16434.
  74. Boboc, R.; Duguleana, M.; Voinea, G.; Postelnicu, C.; Popovici, D.; Carrozzino, M. Mobile Augmented Reality for Cultural Heritage: Following the Footsteps of Ovid among Different Locations in Europe. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1167.
  75. Cibilic, I.; Posloncec-Petric, V.; Tomithc, K. Implementing Augmented Reality in Tourism; Zamperlin, P., Cantile, A., Milli, M., Eds.; University of Zagreb: Zagreb, Croatia, 2021.
  76. Flores, N.M.; Dolores, L.; Cayabyab, G.; Palaoag, T.; Angeles, J.; Corpuz, G.; Samson, R.; Cruz, J.D.; Mamaril, M. Rebuilding cultural and heritage space of corregidor island using GPS-based augmented reality. Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2019, 8, 2799–2804.
  77. Huo, X.; Chen, H.; Ma, Y.; Wang, Q. Design and realization of relic augmented reality system of integration positioning and posture sensing technology. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web Conferences, Wuhan, China, 13–14 August 2022; Li, H., Yu, Y., Lei, X., Cai, S., Eds.; EDP Sciences: Les Ulis, France, 2018; Volume 246.
  78. Messelodi, S.; Modena, C.M.; Porzi, L.; Chippendale, P. i-Street: Detection, Identification, Augmentation of Street Plates in a Touristic Mobile Application. In Image Analysis and Processing—ICIAP 2015 18th International Conference, Genoa, Italy, 7–11 September 2015; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Murino, V., Puppo, E., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 9280, pp. 194–204. ISBN 978-3-319-23233-1.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Mohamed Zaifri
,
Hamza Khalloufi
,
Fatima Zahra Kaghat
,
Ahmed Azough
,
Khalid Alaoui Zidani
View Times: 526
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 24 Aug 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback