Ethical Approval Secured for VAARHeT Museum Visitor Validation Framework

Research Ethics Committee Approval Achievement

Maynooth University research ethics committee has approved comprehensive validation methodology framework for VAARHeT museum visitor testing, enabling Phase 3 demonstration sprint to proceed with 39 participant usability evaluation whilst ensuring participant protection, informed consent, data sovereignty, and GDPR compliance throughout validation activities. Ethical approval addressed participant protection protocols including voluntary participation without coercion, withdrawal accommodation at any point without prejudice or explanation requirements, wellbeing monitoring for cybersickness or technostress symptoms particularly concerning given VR headset and AR wearable use, and age-appropriate testing procedures whilst validation targeted adult populations 25-75 avoiding complexity of minor participant protocols requiring guardian consent and specialised instruments. Data protection framework approval covered informed consent procedures explaining research purposes and participant rights, anonymisation through participant code assignment preventing individual identification in analysis datasets, EU-jurisdiction storage on XR Ireland secure servers located in Germany, five-year retention limit with automatic deletion preventing indefinite privacy exposure, and access provisions enabling participants to review collected data, request corrections, or demand deletion exercising GDPR-mandated rights. Cordula Hansen from Technical Art Services designed validation methodology incorporating industry-standard evaluation instruments (System Usability Scale, Net Promoter Score, Nielsen severity ratings) adapted for heritage contexts through added value assessment measuring educational contribution and heritage-specific appropriateness beyond pure technical usability or generic satisfaction measurement.

Validation Framework Rigour and Academic Research Standards

Approval process required comprehensive documentation addressing research objectives, evaluation instrument validity, participant recruitment procedures, informed consent protocols, data collection minimisation principles, analysis procedures, dissemination plans, and risk mitigation strategies, ensuring validation activities meet academic research standards beyond informal technology testing or vendor demonstrations that might lack rigour, participant protection, or methodological transparency enabling replication and peer review. Ethical committee review validated that validation framework balanced research value generation with participant burden minimisation, avoiding excessive testing duration or invasive data collection whilst gathering sufficient evidence for meaningful assessment, that inclusion criteria proved appropriate without unjustified exclusion of populations museums serve, that informed consent procedures adequately communicated purposes and rights without technical jargon preventing genuine understanding, and that data protection measures satisfied GDPR obligations plus institutional responsibility standards for visitor information stewardship. This approval enables confident validation execution knowing procedures meet European research ethics standards, protect participant wellbeing and privacy, and generate credible evidence that academic publication, commercial decision-making, and institutional planning can rely upon without concerns about methodological validity or ethical compliance that might undermine result credibility or create regulatory exposure.

Strategic Value for Heritage Technology Evaluation Best Practice

VAARHeT ethical approval and validation methodology development contributes to heritage sector capability building for rigorous technology evaluation beyond anecdotal feedback or vendor-controlled demonstrations potentially lacking independence, methodological rigour, or representative sampling that confident adoption decisions require. Published methodology, instruments, and protocols through open-access repositories enable other heritage institutions to replicate or adapt validation approaches for their own technology evaluation needs, supporting sector-wide evidence-based assessment culture development that currently remains underdeveloped compared to medical, educational, or commercial domains with extensive evaluation literature and established best practices. This methodological contribution proves equally valuable as technical findings, building institutional capability for critical technology assessment whilst establishing standards that heritage technology providers should meet when claiming usability, effectiveness, or value delivery that validation evidence either supports or contradicts, preventing unchallenged vendor assertions potentially leading to adoption of technologies failing to deliver promised benefits when confronted with operational deployment reality.