## 4 Results
### Result of Verification and Validation Phase  
#### 4.4.1 User's Preferences for Museum Signifier  
Study 1 relates to users' preferences for museum signifiers that are aimed at verifying the visual signifiers and their features on a large display. The verification is needed to integrate the supported visual signifiers in interaction with the high-fidelity prototype. There are two calculations derived for this sub-section by using the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) method. The first calculation is presented in \"User Preferences and Ranking Using Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) Analysis\" and used to rank the three features (size, colour and label) involved. All these three features are regarded as important to the museum signifier but among these, the study wants to know which feature the user believed to be the most significant for the museum signifier of a large display. The second calculation is presented in \"Alternative Ranking of User Preferences using AHP Analysis\". It is used to rank the alternative sizes (small, medium and large) involved in undersize features. These three sizes of the touch target are considered convenient based on the display size because the target is to be sufficiently discriminatory but not overly distracting. Hence, the size was limited to only three sizes (small, medium and large) that could be easily differentiated. User Preferences and Ranking Using Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) Analysis  
The Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) analysis was conducted to identify a ranking of the features involved that shows the significance of the features on the signifiers through their priority. Three features were chosen to indicate the features that should be included in a museum signifier. Each feature consists of two to five alternatives that will be compared to each other to know which alternatives can support the user's interaction. Features that are considered able to support user interaction on a large display in a museum environment were listed as Size, Colour and Label. Based on the findings reported in Section 4.2.3, each of these proposed features can make the signifiers visible and help users to interact. It is believed that these features are important for the large display. To identify which feature contributes the best to the signifier, a multi-criteria decision-making technique such as AHP is adapted to determine the hierarchy of the features. The steps to conducting the AHP analysis together with the output are explained further as follows. * **Step 1: Define the objective** The first step involved defining the objective. Identifying a ranking for three features (colour, label and size) of a museum signifier on a large display brings the objective for this calculation. * **Step 2: Structure elements into criteria** The second step involved structuring the features into criteria, sub-criteria and alternatives. In this case, the criteria are defined as follows: Criteria A = Colour; Criteria B = Label; and Criteria C = Size. Subsequently, all the criteria will be presented as thus: A--Color, B--Label and C--Size. * **Step 3: Pairwise comparisons** The third step involved the comparisons of the criteria with each other in the AHP analysis. Therefore, there are 3 comparisons in this context. * The first comparison is between criteria A (colour) and B (label). * The third comparison is between criteria B (label) and C (size). * The second comparison is between criteria A (colour) and C (size). * **Rating** This involved the scoring of each criterion by test participants to represent their significance. The scoring was given according to the degree of their importance using the interval of 1 to 9 scale. After scoring all the criteria, a matrix table was created and a rating datum of 1 was entered diagonally from the top-left corner to the bottom-right corner, as shown in Table 9. A score of 1 indicates that each of the criteria is equally essential.