Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examined the inclusivity of a virtual tour of a virtual museum, which was presented on a government platform. It was based on the experiences of 10 non‐disabled (ND), 10 hearing‐impaired (HI), and 10 visually impaired (VI) participants. After the virtual museum visit, the participants took part in semi‐structured individual interviews. These interviews were transcribed from audio recordings, and the data was evaluated using reflexive thematic analysis. The results were divided into six thematic areas: (i) accessibility, (ii) user experience, (iii) multimedia experience, (iv) satisfaction and perceived value, (v) technical infrastructure and digital barriers, and (vi) participants' suggestions for improvement. The results show that the virtual museum partially breaks down physical and spatial barriers. However, inclusivity is determined by various factors in the digital environment, such as sensory equivalence, cognitive accessibility, orientation, and technical performance. The study therefore conceptualizes accessibility not as a final compliance check but as a design and governance responsibility embedded within digital curatorial practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kılınç et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: