# Enhancing User Experience in Virtual Museums: Impact of Finger Vibrotactile Feedback
## 3 Methodology
### Experiment: Evaluating Vibrotactile Glove  
The study sampled a diverse group of 30 participants, categorized by age, gender, and nationality. The age distribution highlights a predominantly young demographic, with 56.7% in their 20s and 40% in their 30s, indicating a relatively youthful participant base. A single individual in their 40s represents the smallest age category at 3.3%. The gender composition of the participants is predominantly male (66.7%), with females representing the remaining 33.3%. Participants hailed from a range of countries, with the largest representations from India (36.7%), followed by South Korea (20%). Other participant nationalities included Nepal (13.3%), China (10%), and Mongolia (6.7%), with minimal representations from Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Vietnam, and Malaysia, each constituting 3.3% of the sample. The analysis indicates varying exposure to VR technologies across demographic segments. The younger demographic (the 20s) shows a more balanced distribution of virtual reality experience, suggesting a greater inclination or opportunity towards engaging with emerging technologies compared to the older groups. Gender-wise, males demonstrated slightly higher exposure to virtual reality (35% with experience) than females (20% with experience), indicating potential gender disparities in access to or interest in virtual reality technologies. Familiarity with haptic technology is significantly lower across all demographic segments than VR technology. In age-related terms, the youngest group (20s) showed slightly more familiarity, although the overall experience level remains low across all age groups. Gender disparities are pronounced in haptics technology, with no females reporting any experience, while a small proportion of males (20%) indicated some level of familiarity. Participants first undergo a training session aimed at acquainting them with the virtual museum environment. This session includes instructions on navigating the virtual reality space and manipulating virtual objects. The training is crucial for ensuring that participants are comfortable with the virtual reality interface, allowing for a fair assessment of the vibrotactile glove's effectiveness. The session focuses on general navigation and interaction techniques without delving into the specifics of the haptic feedback to avoid preconceived expectations about the tactile sensations. The main experiment was structured in three experimental settings as shown in Figure 5 to evaluate the impact of different types of feedback on user performance and experience:Condition 1 with no haptics: In this initial phase, participants are tasked with matching visually similar artifacts to their corresponding material boards, relying solely on visual information. This setup, Figure 5a, was designed to test their ability to discern differences among artifacts without the aid of tactile feedback, establishing a baseline for performance. The challenge lies in the artifacts' visual similarity, designed to emphasize the limitations of relying only on visual cues in the virtual museum environment. Throughout this task, task completion time and error count are meticulously recorded to establish a baseline for performance. This data will later serve as a reference point for evaluating the added value of haptic feedback in subsequent conditions. After completing this task, participants provide feedback through a questionnaire [35], detailing their experience and any difficulties faced due to the absence of haptic feedback  
Condition 2 with oculus hand controller haptics feedback: This condition introduces standard haptic feedback through the oculus hand controller Figure 5b. Participants engage with a set of visually similar artifacts as in the first condition. However, this time, they receive generalized vibration feedback from the controller based on the objects' surface textures they interact with.