Construction and Empirical Study of Functional Evaluation of Smart Seats in Science Popularization Museums Based on the Entropy Weight–TOPSIS Method

In the quiet corners of science museums, where exhibits glow and interactive screens invite touch, a piece of furniture often goes unnoticed: the seat. For decades, these chairs have served a single, passive purpose—to hold a tired visitor while they rest. But as museums transform into dynamic hubs of digital learning, where visitors might be solving puzzles on tablets, watching augmented reality overlays, or collaborating in groups, the old, static chair is beginning to feel out of place. It is a simple piece of equipment that no longer fits the complex needs of a modern learning environment.

This mismatch has led researchers to ask a fundamental question: what does a seat actually do for a person in a smart museum? The answer lies in a concept known as "affordance." In plain terms, affordance describes the hidden possibilities an object offers to a user. A door handle affords pulling; a flat surface affords placing things on it. For a museum seat, affordance is not just about sitting comfortably; it is about how the chair's shape, materials, and hidden technology invite a visitor to adjust their posture, charge a device, or interact with a display. When a chair fails to offer these possibilities clearly, visitors become uncomfortable, disengaged, or simply ignore the technology entirely.

A team of researchers from institutions across China and Australia set out to solve this problem by building a new way to measure and design these smart seats. They did not just guess what visitors wanted; they constructed a rigorous evaluation system to test how well different chairs perform in real-world scenarios. Their work moves beyond simple comfort to examine how a seat can support learning, health, and interaction in a high-tech setting.

The researchers began by breaking down the complex idea of a "smart seat" into four core areas that matter most to a visitor: comfort, interactivity, intelligence, and adaptability. They asked whether a chair could adjust to different body types, whether it could help a group of students work together, whether it could monitor a visitor's posture to prevent fatigue, and whether it could fit seamlessly into various parts of a museum, from quiet reading nooks to bustling interactive zones. To find the answers, they first gathered insights from university students and faculty, asking them to rate their needs across eight different functional categories. This initial survey, which collected 120 valid responses, revealed that while visitors cared about many things, five specific areas stood out as the most critical for a successful experience.

With these priorities in mind, the team turned their attention to evaluating specific design concepts. They compared the performance of traditional, static seats against new, smart seating systems designed with these modern needs in mind using a structured expert scoring process. To make sense of this information, the researchers used a mathematical approach that allowed them to weigh different factors objectively, ensuring that the most important features influenced the final score the most.

The results were clear and significant. The smart seats did not just offer a slightly better experience; they fundamentally changed how a museum environment could support a visitor. The study found that the new smart seating was 42.3% better at adapting to different situations than traditional chairs. Whether a visitor needed to lean forward to examine a small artifact, sit back to watch a video, or swivel to talk to a companion, the smart seat adjusted to the task. Furthermore, the health support provided by these seats was 38.7% higher, meaning visitors would feel less physical strain after long periods of use. The intelligent functions, such as built-in charging ports and posture sensors, were found to be 3.2 times more effective than what conventional seating could offer.

The researchers also discovered that the success of these seats depended on a delicate balance between what the chair could actually do and what the visitor thought it could do. A chair might have a powerful motor to adjust its height, but if the button is hidden or the mechanism is confusing, the visitor will not use it. The study showed that the best designs were those where the physical capabilities of the chair were matched by clear, intuitive cues. When the design made it obvious how to adjust the seat or access a power port, visitors felt more confident and engaged. This connection between the physical object and the user's understanding is what makes a smart seat truly functional.

In the end, this research provides a roadmap for the future of museum design. It suggests that the next generation of museum furniture should not be viewed merely as a place to rest, but as an active participant in the learning process. By focusing on adaptability, health, and clear interaction, museums can create environments where visitors are physically supported and mentally engaged. The study confirms that when seats are designed with the visitor's needs in mind, they become more than just furniture; they become essential tools that help people learn, explore, and stay connected in the digital age.