No Longer Stuck(ist) in Two Dimensions:

Evaluating Augmented Reality Art Experiences


  • Christopher Wypyski State university of New York (Oswego)
  • Ronald Throop
  • Damian Schofield Department of Computer Science State University of New York



Augmented Reality, Interaction, Engagement, Art, Painting, Stuckism


The aim of this study is to explore how bringing art to life using Augmented Reality (AR) technology can affect viewer engagement and interest compared to the viewing of traditional static artwork. To measure these properties this study uses a combination of surveys: The User Engagement Scale (UES) and a slightly modified version of the Museum Experience Scale (MES). The results from both questionnaires were aggregated to obtain a more accurate measurement of engagement, as the UES questionnaire is specifically focused on interactive systems while the MES is focused on an overall view of an exhibit. Using both questionnaires a more accurate measurement of “engagement” can be reached for the purposes of this study.

Author Biography

  • Damian Schofield, Department of Computer Science State University of New York

    Dr. Schofield is currently Director of Human Computer Interaction (Full Professor) at the State University of New York (SUNY) at Oswego, a position he has held since November 2009. He also currently Adjunct Associate Professor of Forensic Computing at Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia – Dr. Schofield began this visiting professor position in November 2011.



Clowney, D. (2011). Definitions of Art and Fine Art's Historical Origins. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 69(3), 309-320.

Carmigniani, J., Furht, B., Anisetti, M., Ceravolo, P., Damiani, E., & Ivkovic, M. (2011). Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications. Multimedia tools and applications, 51(1), 341-377.

O’Brien, H., & Cairns, P. (2015). An empirical evaluation of the User Engagement Scale (UES) in online news environments. Information Processing & Management, 51(4), 413-427.

Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385.

Rauschnabel, P. A., Rossmann, A., & tom Dieck, M. C. (2017). An adoption framework for mobile augmented reality games: The case of Pokémon Go. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 276-286.

Singh, P., & Pandey, M. (2014). Augmented reality advertising: An impactful platform for new age consumer engagement. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 16(2), 24-28.

Van Der Vaart, M., & Damala, A. (2015, September). Through the Loupe: Visitor engagement with a primarily text-based handheld AR application. In 2015 Digital Heritage (Vol. 2, pp. 565-572). IEEE.

Wojciechowski, R., Walczak, K., White, M., & Cellary, W. (2004, April). Building virtual and augmented reality museum exhibitions. In Proceedings of the ninth international conference on 3D Web technology (pp. 135-144).

O'Brien, H. L., & Toms, E. G. (2008). What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. Journal of the American society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 938-955.

O’Brien, H. L., Cairns, P., & Hall, M. (2018). A practical approach to measuring user engagement with the refined user engagement scale (UES) and new UES short form. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 112, 28-39.

Othman, M. K., Petrie, H., & Power, C. (2011, September). Engaging visitors in museums with technology: scales for the measurement of visitor and multimedia guide experience. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 92-99). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Jung, T., tom Dieck, M. C., Lee, H., & Chung, N. (2016). Effects of virtual reality and augmented reality on visitor experiences in museum. In Information and communication technologies in tourism 2016 (pp. 621-635). Springer, Cham.







Similar Articles

1-10 of 299

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.