## 3 Method
### Construction of Judgment Matrices and Consistency Tests  
#### 3.3.1 Construction of Judgment Matrices  
Establishing the judgment matrix involves quantifying consumers' subjective assessments of each indicator. Fifty experts in packaging and virtual reality technology were invited to design a questionnaire using AHP. Regarding the experts, they are professionals with over 10 years of experience in packaging design and virtual reality applications. These experts provided consultation during the system development phase but did not participate in the experiment described in Section 3.2.1, which involved different participants. The questionnaire is designed to compare the criteria in the criteria layer and the indicators in the sub-criteria layer in a pairwise manner [38]. Experts must use [PERSON]'s nine-level importance scale to select the appropriate values for comparing pairs of indicators, as shown in Table 2. The options should follow logical consistency; for example, if A > B and B > C, then C cannot be greater than A. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Target Layer** & **Criteria Layer** & **Sub-Criteria Layer** \\ \hline Virtual packaging multi-sensory evaluation model (A) & Interactive behavior (B1) & Consistency of operational behavior (C1) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Accuracy of information transmission (C2) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Rationalization of the control module (C3) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Rationality of color application (C4) \\ \cline{3-3}  & Color transmission (B2) & Coordination of color and environment (C5) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Replaceability of color groups (C6) \\ \hline Virtual packaging multi-sensory evaluation model (A) & & Hearing (C7) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Vision (C8) \\ \cline{3-3}  & Sensory experience (B3) & Touch (C9) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Smell (C10) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Taste (C11) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Adaptation of scene and packaging (C12) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Scene imperfection (B4) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Scene entertainment (C14) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & Accuracy of packaging function \\ \cline{3-3}  & & realization (C15) \\ \cline{3-3}  & Packaging function (B5) & Matching degree of packaging function (C16) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & The suitability of packing model and \\ \cline{3-3}  & & function (C17) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Virtual packaging multi-sensory evaluation model. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Scale** & **Meaning** \\ \hline
1 & Indicates that the two elements are equally important. \\
3 & Indicates that one element is slightly more important. \\
5 & Indicates that one element is more important but not overwhelmingly so. \\
7 & Indicates that one element is more important. \\
9 & Indicates that one element is extremely more important. \\ Reciprocal Values (1/3, 1/5, 1/7, 1/9) & If one element has a higher value of x than another, then the reciprocal of x (1/x) \\  & indicates the relative importance of the second element compared to the first. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: [PERSON]’s nine-point scale and its meaning. In this study, 50 experts participated, and all 50 questionnaires were completed with valid responses. Survey results are summarized in Figure 6, indicating that respondents have varying opinions on different packaging function indicators. However, the accuracy of packaging function realization (C15) is identified as a particularly significant indicator. Additionally, the suitability of the packaging model (C17) is also recognized as necessary in certain aspects. Therefore, to better meet user needs and expectations, it is essential to consider the importance of these indicators comprehensively and make necessary optimizations and adjustments in practical applications. Step 1: The judgment matrix is established using the questionnaire survey data, and the weights are subsequently computed. Calculating the weights is a crucial step in assessing the importance of indicators.