International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 12, Issue 11 (November 2025), Pages: 183-197

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Modeling digital visualization for vernacular heritage: A case study of Chengzi Yi Village

 Author(s): 

 Yinchuan Yang 1, Jing Ding 2, *

 Affiliation(s):

  1Faculty of Art and Communication, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, China
  2School of Art, Kunming City University, Kunming, China

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8845-2946

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2025.11.018

 Abstract

This study develops and validates a Perception-Engagement-Sustainability (PES) model to assess cultural understanding in digital immersion at vernacular heritage sites. Using Chengzi Yi Village in Yunnan, China as a case study, the model integrates cultural memory, sense of place theory, and system success theory to examine symbolic perception, emotional engagement, and intergenerational transmission. A sequential mixed-methods approach, combining ethnographic observation, expert interviews, and a user survey (n = 270), shows that cultural value perception is strongly associated with user satisfaction (β = 0.65, p < 0.001). Qualitative results further indicate that symbolic fidelity and spatial immersion foster emotional attachment. Unlike earlier models that emphasize usability or aesthetics, the PES model provides a culture-based framework that supports both meaningful interpretation and the long-term sustainability of rural heritage sites. While geographically limited, the study offers a replicable and empirically grounded approach for participatory and community-centered digital heritage design.

 © 2025 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Cultural perception, Emotional engagement, Digital heritage, Vernacular sites, Sustainability

 Article history

 Received 22 June 2025, Received in revised form 23 October 2025, Accepted 29 October 2025

 Funding

This research was supported by the Yunnan Provincial Philosophy, Social Science, and Art Science Planning Project (Grant No. A2020YS15), titled “Research on the Digital Preservation and Cultural Continuity of Yi Chengzi Village under the Digital Countryside Strategy.” 

 Acknowledgment

The authors would like to express sincere gratitude to Kunming University of Science and Technology for its academic guidance and to the Chengzi Yi Village community for their generous cooperation and valuable contributions during the fieldwork. 

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

This research was conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines of Kunming University of Science and Technology. While the nature of the study—non-invasive cultural research involving adult participants—did not require formal ethics board approval, all ethical protocols were observed. Informational consent was obtained from all participants, who were assured of the voluntary nature of their participation and the confidentiality of their responses. These measures align with established ethical standards in cultural and social research.

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Yang Y and Ding J (2025). Modeling digital visualization for vernacular heritage: A case study of Chengzi Yi Village. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 12(11): 183-197

  Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

  Fig. 1  Fig. 2  Fig. 3  Fig. 4 

 Tables

  Table 1  Table 2  Table 3  Table 4  Table 5

----------------------------------------------   

 References (48)

  1. Aledda S, Galeoto G, Fabbrini G, Lucibello L, Tofani M, Conte A, and Berardi A (2024). A systematic review of the psychometric properties of Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 19(4): 1228-1235.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2022.2161648    [Google Scholar] PMid:36645802
  2. Aljaafreh A, Garaj V, and Choi Y (2023). Using a digital participatory approach to facilitate inclusivity in Jordanian heritage sites: Stakeholders’ requirements and a proposed system. Architecture Papers of the Faculty of Architecture and Design STU, 28(3): 3–9.  https://doi.org/10.2478/alfa-2023-0014    [Google Scholar]
  3. Amelio A and Zarri GP (2024). Cultural heritage digital twin: Modeling and representing the visual narrative in Leonardo Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa. Neural Computing and Applications, 36: 11859–11876.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-024-10010-x    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bala P, Nisi V, and Nunes N (2024). Stories as boundary objects: Digital storytelling with migrant communities for heritage discourses. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 8(CSCW1): 177.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3641016    [Google Scholar]
  5. Banfi F and Oreni D (2025). Unlocking the interactive potential of digital models with game engines and visual programming for inclusive VR and web-based museums. Virtual Archaeology Review, 16(32): 44-70.  https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2024.22628    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bertrand S, Vassiliadi M, Zikas P, Geronikolakis E, and Papagiannakis G (2021). From readership to usership: Communicating heritage digitally through presence, embodiment and aesthetic experience. Frontiers in Communication, 6: 676446.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.676446    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bolognesi CM and Fiorillo F (2023). Virtual representations of cultural heritage: Sharable and implementable case study to be enjoyed and maintained by the community. Buildings, 13(2): 410.  https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13020410    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dipasquale L, Ammendola J, Montoni L, Ferrari EP, and Zambelli M (2024). Harnessing vernacular knowledge for contemporary sustainable design through a collaborative digital platform. Heritage, 7(9): 5251-5267.  https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7090247    [Google Scholar]
  9. Echavarria KR, Samaroudi M, Dibble L, Silverton E, and Dixon S (2022). Creative experiences for engaging communities with cultural heritage through place-based narratives. ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), 15(2): 33.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3479007    [Google Scholar]
  10. Elliott J (2022). The craft of using NVivo12 to analyze open-ended questions: An approach to mixed methods analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(6): 1673-1687.  https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5460    [Google Scholar]
  11. Facchinetti G, Piredda M, Ausili D et al. (2021). Information before discharge in geriatric patients in Italy: Cultural adaptation and validation of the patient continuity of care questionnaire. European Journal of Ageing, 18: 99-107.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-020-00576-5    [Google Scholar] PMid:33746685 PMCid:PMC7925798
  12. Ferreira I, Lupp G, and Mahmoud I (2023). Guidelines for co-creation and co-governance of nature-based solutions: Insights from EU-funded projects. Publications Office of the European Union.  https://doi.org/10.2777/157060    [Google Scholar]
  13. González Martínez P (2022). The ‘preservation by relocation’ of Huizhou vernacular architecture: Shifting notions on the authenticity of rural heritage in China. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 28(2): 200-215.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2021.1955728    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hu M, Suh J, and Pedro C (2023). An integrated framework for preservation of Hawaii indigenous culture: Learning from vernacular knowledge. Buildings, 13(5): 1190.  https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13051190    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jangra S, Singh G, and Mantri A (2025). Evaluating user experience in cultural heritage through virtual reality simulations. Virtual Archaeology Review, 16(32): 17-31.  https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2024.22556    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jiang L, Li J, Wider W, Tanucan JCM, Lobo J, Fauzi MA, Hidayat H, and Zou R (2025). A bibliometric insight into immersive technologies for cultural heritage preservation. NPJ Heritage Science, 13: 126. https://doi.org/10.1038/s40494-025-01704-z    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kara N (2024). A mixed-methods study of cultural heritage learning through playing a serious game. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(6): 1397-1408.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2125627    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kebir A, Kacher S, Larabi MC, and Meneveaux D (2025). Engaging youth in Moorish architectural heritage through virtual 3D experience of the Bardo Palace of Algiers. ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 18(2): 24.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3718089    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lei Y, Fiorillo F, and Fassi F (2024). 3D survey point cloud data as direct rendering assets for visualising complex heritage in virtual applications. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 48: 279-286.  https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-2-W4-2024-279-2024    [Google Scholar]
  20. Li H, Feng B, Su M, and Liu Z (2024a). Design of interactive digital virtual display application for Chinese heritage traditional herbal medicine culture. In: Rauterberg M (Ed.), Culture and Computing. HCII 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: 274-292. Springer, Cham, Switzerland.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61147-6_19    [Google Scholar]
  21. Li J, Pan J, Dou Q, Fu F, and Shi Y (2024b). Digital footprint as a public participatory tool: Identifying and assessing industrial heritage landscape through user-generated content on social media. Land, 13(6): 743.  https://doi.org/10.3390/land13060743    [Google Scholar]
  22. Li S, Yu Y, Yang H, Zhao J, and Shen M (2024c). Development and application of concentric lock platform under digital cultural tourism product innovation. Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management, 14(1): 218–222.  https://doi.org/10.54097/k6e7xv62    [Google Scholar]
  23. Liang X, Hua N, Martin J, Dellapiana E, Coscia C, and Zhang Y (2022). Social media as a medium to promote local perception expression in China’s world heritage sites. Land, 11(6): 841.  https://doi.org/10.3390/land11060841    [Google Scholar]
  24. Liew CL, Goulding A, and Nichol M (2022). From shoeboxes to shared spaces: participatory cultural heritage via digital platforms. Information, Communication & Society, 25(9): 1293-1310.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1851391    [Google Scholar]
  25. Loignon C, Dupéré S, Leblanc C et al. (2021). Equity and inclusivity in research: Co-creation of a digital platform with representatives of marginalized populations to enhance the involvement in research of people with limited literacy skills. Research Involvement and Engagement, 7: 70.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00313-x    [Google Scholar] PMid:34610847 PMCid:PMC8491375
  26. Ma YP (2021). Extending 3D-GIS district models and BIM-based building models into computer gaming environment for better workflow of cultural heritage conservation. Applied Sciences, 11(5): 2101.  https://doi.org/10.3390/app11052101    [Google Scholar]
  27. McShane N, Condell J, Alvarez J, and Miller A (2021). Virtual community heritage: An immersive approach to community heritage. The Journal of Media Innovations, 7(1): 4-18.  https://doi.org/10.5617/jomi.8791    [Google Scholar]
  28. Murphy M, Fai S, Chow L et al. (2022). Virtual historic centers: Digital representation of archaeological heritage. In: D'Amico S and Venuti V (Eds.), Handbook of cultural heritage analysis: 1497-1528. Springer, Cham, Switzerland.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60016-7_51    [Google Scholar]
  29. Pescarin S, Città G, and Spotti S (2024). Authenticity in interactive experiences. Heritage, 7(11): 6213-6242.  https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7110292    [Google Scholar]
  30. Petousi D, Katifori A, Servi K, Roussou M, and Ioannidis Y (2022). Interactive digital storytelling in cultural heritage: The transformative role of agency. In: Vosmeer M and Holloway-Attaway L (Eds.), Interactive Storytelling. ICIDS 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: 48-67. Springer, Cham, Switzerland.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22298-6_3    [Google Scholar]
  31. Planer RJ (2021). What is symbolic cognition? Topoi, 40: 233-244.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-019-09670-5    [Google Scholar]
  32. Pujol L and Champion E (2012). Evaluating presence in cultural heritage projects. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 18(1): 83-102.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2011.577796    [Google Scholar]
  33. Rajkovic I, Bojovic M, Tomanovic D, and Akšamija LC (2022). Sustainable development of vernacular residential architecture: a case study of the Karuc settlement in the Skadar lake region of Montenegro. Sustainability 14(16): 9956.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su14169956    [Google Scholar]
  34. Risco E, Sauch G, Albero A et al. (2020). Spanish validation of the “user reported measure of care coordination” questionnaire for older people with complex, chronic conditions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18): 6608.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186608    [Google Scholar] PMid:32932760 PMCid:PMC7558675
  35. Roth C and Koenitz H (2016). Evaluating the user experience of interactive digital narrative. In the Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Multimedia Alternate Realities, ACM Multimedia Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands: 31-36.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2983298.2983302    [Google Scholar] PMCid:PMC4878886
  36. Saariluoma P and Rousi R (2015). Symbolic interactions: towards a cognitive scientific theory of meaning in human technology interaction. Journal of Advances in Humanities, 3(3): 310-324.  https://doi.org/10.24297/jah.v3i2.5145    [Google Scholar]
  37. Santana-Berlanga NDR, Romero-Sanchez JM, Botello-Hermosa A, Bergland A, Edvardsson D, and Porcel-Galvez AM (2024). Thriving of older people assessment scale (TOPAS): Transcultural adaptation, psychometric evaluation, and refinement in a Spanish sample. Geriatric Nursing, 59: 431-439.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2024.08.004    [Google Scholar] PMid:39141951
  38. Silva C, Zagalo N, and Vairinhos M (2023). Towards participatory activities with augmented reality for cultural heritage: A literature review. Computers & Education: X Reality, 3: 100044.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cexr.2023.100044    [Google Scholar]
  39. Srdanović P, Skala T, and Maričević M (2025). InHeritage—A gamified mobile application with AR and VR for cultural heritage preservation in the metaverse. Applied Sciences, 15(1): 257.  https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010257    [Google Scholar]
  40. Tamborrino R, Dinler M, Patti E et al. (2022). Engaging users in resource ecosystem building for local heritage-led knowledge. Sustainability, 14(8): 4575.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084575    [Google Scholar]
  41. Vert S, Andone D, Ternauciuc A et al. (2021). User evaluation of a multi-platform digital storytelling concept for cultural heritage. Mathematics, 9(21): 2678.  https://doi.org/10.3390/math9212678    [Google Scholar]
  42. Vinodan A and Meera S (2024). Integrated management of heritage sites: Scale development and validation. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 14(3): 312-336.  https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-09-2021-0158    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wang Z, Liu X, Qin Y, and Zhang Y (2024). How rural digitization promote coordinated urban–rural development: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China. Agriculture, 14(12): 2323.  https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14122323    [Google Scholar]
  44. Waterton E and Smith L (2010). The recognition and misrecognition of community heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2): 4-15.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250903441671    [Google Scholar]
  45. Yang N, Chen J, Ban L, Li P, and Wang H (2024). Pre-planning and post-evaluation approaches to sustainable vernacular architectural practice: A research-by-design study to building renovation in Shangri-La’s Shanpian House, China. Sustainability, 16(21): 9568.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su16219568    [Google Scholar]
  46. Zhang A, Gong Y, Chen Q, Jin X, Mu Y, and Lu Y (2025). Driving innovation and sustainable development in cultural heritage education through digital transformation: The role of interactive technologies. Sustainability, 17(1): 314.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010314    [Google Scholar]
  47. Zhang M, Wang L, and Zhang Q (2022). Research on subjective-cultural ecological design system of vernacular architecture. Sustainability, 14(20): 13564.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013564    [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhou Q, Wang S, and Wang J (2025). Exploring user experience in virtual industrial heritage platforms: Impact of cultural identity, functional clarity, scene interactivity, and narrative quality. Buildings, 15(2): 253.  https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15020253    [Google Scholar]