## 4 Study 2: A Case Study
### Results  
Overall, the curator narrative was found to be more engaging. Specifically, participants who experienced the curator narrative gave higher scores for self location, possible actions, higher cognitive involvement, and domain-specific interest (see Table 1). The scores differ from participants who experienced the user-generated content by at least 0.5. For the other constructs, no differences were found.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**MEC Spatial Presence Item Category**} & **Curator** & **User-Generated** \\  & **Narrative** & **Narrative** \\  & **M(SD)** & **M(SD)** \\ \hline Attention allocation & 3.77(0.93) & 3.83(0.68) \\ Spatial Situation Model & 3.54(1.18) & 3.60(1.18) \\ Spatial Presence: Self Location & **3.87(1.10)** & 3.32(1.32) \\ Spatial Presence: Possible Actions & **3.79(1.28)** & 3.00(1.17) \\ Higher Cognitive Involvement & **4.24(0.66)** & 3.56(1.03) \\ Suspension of Disbelief & 2.74(1.23) & 2.74(1.16) \\ Domain Specific Interest & **3.77(1.25)** & 3.23(1.11) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Average MEC-SPQ (Measurements, Effects, Conditions Spatial Presence Questionnaire) scores for each construct for participants who experienced the curator narrative vs. those who experienced the user-generated narrative. In bold are the scores with at least a difference of 0.5 in comparison to the other participant group.  
The Role of Familiarity  
Based on the qualitative data (i.e., observations and user comments), participants showed preferences for the curator narrative because they trusted it more than the user-generated narrative. This was the case especially for participants who were less familiar with the context and who, therefore, wished to grasp most of the knowledge about the area from an expert. For example, [PERSON] said _\"I'm from Sydney, Australia, and I just arrived in the UK yesterday. I'm not very familiar with the surroundings and I'd like to know more about that statue (referring to the Albert Memorial) from a more official source.\"_ On the other hand, participants who were more familiar with the surroundings preferred the user-generated narrative in order to check other people's experience about the same place, i.e., [PERSON] said _\"I live in London since six years now and I work nearby since four years. I think, letting people share their experience about the same places is very nice, especially because I'm always interested to get to know what other Londoners know about a specific area.\"_  
The cultural background also seemed to play a key role in participants' preferred narrative type. It made a difference on the amount and the diversity of details the users mentioned to be able to grasp from the surroundings, which is supported by previous research [45]. For example, some participants were not always familiar with the Latin inscriptions under the Albert Memorial monument, and they expected a prompt translation from the audio narrative. This was the case for participants who came from eastern Asia and some European countries where Latin is not taught in secondary school. An audio narrative required a high attention span for non-English native speakers, especially if the content was delivered in a speech form. For this reason, participants in this specific case preferred to also read the text while listening to the audio narrative.  
Only when participants were familiar with the heritage site (because of a previous experience related with the site or because of the cultural background) or have a similar cultural background did they prefer to listen to the user-generated narrative. Therefore, in order to consider local audiences as experts or locals as an important marketing channel, the cultural background and knowledge of the content consumers should be taken into consideration. This supports previous research [46]; user-generated content may only be interesting to those with familiarity of the context [47].