I am interested in discussing best practices for conducting peer review of 3D models of heritage sites or past urban cities, monuments, and artifacts? How to assess 3D models and interactive applications in an objective and transparent way? How one should address the peer review of digital scholarship projects for promotions/tenure revisions?
1) The use of Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and stereoscopic technology improves perception of 3D models during peer-review using a scale 1:1 . We have developed someting on this topic applied to design review obtaining good feedbacks from the users involved (see link 1 and 2). We've also done something on cultural heritage buildings but we're in pubblication phase. Nowadays the cost of these systems is not too high as in the past.
2) For evaluation of interactive applications, tipically, it is required to conduct an experiment that involves one or more groups of users. The group tries the system and answers to a questionnaire. Tthe questions can propose a comparison to the traditional approach (see link 2) or the same questionnaire can be provided to another group of participants which adopted the standard technique to conduct the same operation (see link 3).
Conference Paper A Novel 3D User Interface for the Immersive Design Review
Conference Paper A Virtual Prototyping Platform to Improve CAE Analysis Workflow
Article Immersive virtual environments versus physical built environ...
Thank you Francesco, I downloaded your publications and am about read them. What you propose is great, in fact my collaborators and I also conduct user studies to assess 3D applications, interface design, interaction, etc.
I would like to hear more discussion on how to use a broader approach to the peer review of 3D content that is feasible to be used by a larger academic community for tenure review.
Hello- I have no knowledge in your particular discipline, but I have had experience creating new policies and practices for P&T. It sounds like you may be creating something new, so Just in terms of methodology, there is a large body coming from community engaged research on how to assess scholarship for P&T that is non-traditional, but still needs to be recognized for P&T by people that may not know how to do what is being reviewed. There's a classic text link that discusses this, and also a doc that presents differing universities take on CEnR as it emerged as something worth reviewing, and an example of an art/design take on P&T changes from a policy standpoint.
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0787910910.html
https://ccph.memberclicks.net/assets/Documents/FocusAreas/developingcriteria.pdf
Hi Cyntia, thank you for the suggestions and references. I will review them and then add a new post.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals