Slide 1

Digital MediaVisitor Engagement in the MuseumMerel van der Vaart - @MerelVaartAmsterdam School for Heritage & Memory StudiesAllard Pierson Museum

meSchPhD Research:

Mediating the Museum: The impact of on-gallery technology on visitors' engagement with museum objects

(How) can technology help visitors engage with museum objects?

meSchmeSchMaterial Encounters with Digital Cultural Heritage

meSch aims to co-design novel platforms for the creation of tangible digital exhibits at heritage sites

Digital Artifacts Tangible InteractionCo-creation

introductionPart 1: TheoryTechnology & MuseumsThe Museum VisitTechnology & Visitor Engagement

Part 2: PracticeVisit the exhibition Keys to Rome

Part 3: ReflectionDiscussion

Technology & MuseumsRoss Parry & Nadia ArbachIn: Cameron & Kenderine (eds.) Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage (MIT Press: 2007)onlineofflineoff-siteon-site

Technology & MuseumsRoss Parry & Nadia ArbachIn: Cameron & Kenderine (eds.) Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage (MIT Press: 2007)websites'outreach'in-gallery internet connections / live labelstraditional museum visitonlineofflineoff-siteon-site

Technology & MuseumsRoss Parry & Nadia ArbachIn: Cameron & Kenderine (eds.) Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage (MIT Press: 2007)Responsive websites'outreach'in-gallery internet connections / live labelstraditional museum visitApps / social mediaonlineofflineoff-siteon-site

Technology & MuseumsRoss Parry & Nadia ArbachIn: Cameron & Kenderine (eds.) Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage (MIT Press: 2007)Responsive websites'outreach'in-gallery internet connections / live labelstraditional museum visitApps / social mediaonlineofflineoff-siteon-site

The Museum VisitVisitorsinformationobjects

The Museum VisitVisitorsinformationobjectsMuseum Staff

The Museum VisitVisitorsinformationobjectsMuseum Staff

VisitorsinformationobjectsMuseum StaffThe Museum Visit: Positioning the museumonlineofflineoff-siteon-sitehttp://kpnrijksmuseum.com/

The Museum Visit: A visitor perspectiveVisitorsinformationobjectsMuseum Staff

Visitors are under no obligation to engage with free-choice exhibition environments and yet they do.

Tiina RoppolaDesigning for the Museum Visitor Experience (Routledge: 2012)The Museum Visit: A visitor perspective

John H. Falk & Lynn D. DierkingThe Museum Experience (Whaleback Books: 1992)The Interactive Experience ModelPhysical contextSocial ContextPersonal ContextInteractive ExperienceThe Museum Visit: A visitor perspective

on average, visitors use exhibitions at a rate of 200 to 400 square feet / 18,6 to 37,2 m2 per minute.

The museum visit is a continuous decision-making process.On average, visitors pace is high, because they only stop at a small selection of all displays.

Beverly SerrellPaying Attention: The Duration and Allocation of Visitors Time in Museum Exhibitions in Curator: The Museum Journal 40/2 (California Academy of Science: 1997)The Museum Visit: A visitor perspective

The Museum Visitattention is selective()attention has focusing power ()the capacity of attention is limited.

Stephen BitgoodThe role of attention in designing effective interpretive labels in Journal of Interpretation Research 5/2 (National Association for Interpretation: 2000)

The Museum VisitVisitors decide when and how they want to visit the museum.

Visitors have their own agenda when visiting the museum.

Visitors decide how to engage with exhibits & displays.

Some visitors like being guided, some dont.

Visiting museums is exhausting & people know it.

Technology & Visitor EngagementVisitors have needsinformationobjectsMuseum Staff have a message

Technology & Visitor EngagementMuseum staff:Rich content, complexity, multimedial, layered narratives, visitor-led exploration.

Visitor:What does it do & how will I benefit?How does it work?How much attention (time/energy) is required?

Keys to Rome: Visit & reflection

Touch screens: Depth & choice of information.How do you see the museums perspective (message)?Show personal points of view on the objects, from different cultural perspectives. Provide some interactivity & show how different people interacted with the objects in different ways.

Are visitors needs met?Might work well for children, while providing grandparents with a role as well. Content need is not met (lacking depth). Could do with more interaction opportunities.

Compliments:Looked nice. Potential of multiple perspectives on 1 screen is great. Easy to use. Screens close to objects.

Advice: Use the screen to tell an aditonal story. Dont repeat the same information thats available on text labels.Keys to Rome: Visit & reflection

Smart object: Tangible interface.How do you see the museums perspective (message)?Give people a more complete understanding of object. Provide information in a visual way.

Are visitors needs met?Screen and smart object are too far apart. Because of the positioning it is impossible to look at museum object, smart object and screen at the same time. The three should be more integrated, because now the smart object lacks added value. It is not necessarily clear how the installation should be used.

Compliments:The installation provides a different type of (tactile) interaction.

Advice: Put the screen in a different position to make it more accessible. Place the object a bit higher. Might make it multi-user/game.Keys to Rome: Visit & reflection

Revealing Flashlight: Mapping information onto object.How do you see the museums perspective (message)?Reveal the original colour together with original object, allow visitors to compare the two.

Are visitors needs met?Nice to have extra layer on top of object. You can see contrast, because not all of the colour is revealed at the same time. It makes your curious to see the rest. The installation is difficult to start with. Hard to figure out how it worked. You need to see how others are using it & make an effort to figure it out.

Compliments:Like this installation best. Engaging & incorporating object & digital.

Advice:Make it more visible, its easy to miss. Provide better instructions & make it easier to use. This could be a good discussion starter & frame the way people might look at other objects on display.Keys to Rome: Visit & reflection

Overall integration & visitor experienceConcept/idea of the three perspectives is nice!It is not possible to compare the three perspectives. The content of the iPads is perceived to offer very little to no added value.Some 3D objects are of poor quality compared to real objects. However, virtual reconstruction offers added value. Would have liked extra information with second layer objects.The narrators of the three perspectives are not introduced.We are not used to sharing screens & perspectives are personal, which makes visit less social.Keys to Rome: Visit & reflectionThe project (2013-2017) receives funding from the European Communitys Seventh Framework Programme ICT for access to cultural resources (ICT Call 9: FP7-ICT-2011-9) under the Grant Agreement 600851.

mesch-project.eumesch@shu.ac.ukm.j.vandervaart@uva.nl