Florida State University Libraries
Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School
2003 Virtual Museum Exhibitions: An Exploration of the Relationship Between Virtual Exhibitions and Visitors' Responses Namjin Park
Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS AND DANCE
VIRTUAL MUSEUM EXHIBITIONS:
AN EXPLORATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
VIRTUAL EXHIBITIONS AND VISITORS’ RESPONSES
By
NAMJIN PARK
A Thesis submitted to the Department of Interior Design in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science
Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2003 The members of the Committee approve the thesis of Namjin Park defended on
May 28, 2003.
______Lisa Waxman Professor Directing Thesis
______Gail Rubini Outside Committee Member
______Paul Marty Outside Committee Member
______Tock Ohazama Committee Member
Approved:
______David Butler, Chair, Department of Interior Design
______Sally McRorie, Dean, School of Visual Arts and Dance
The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members
ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My gratitude is extended to all who helped to make this study possible. Special thanks goes to my major professor Lisa Waxman for her patience and guidance throughout this study. I would also thank to my committee members, Gail Rubini and Tock Ohazama for their insightful comments. In addition, Dr. Paul Marty was remarkable in his knowledge and enthusiasm that has given depth to my study. Appreciation is also extended to Dr. Marsha Rehm for methodological advice and her encouragement. Special thanks are due to the Department chair, David Butler for his support. Additionally, appreciation goes to my English tutor Michell Mahana, statistician Daiho-Uhm, and editor Jayme Harpring for their assistance and encouragement. I would also like to thank to Interior Design students at the Florida State University who participated in my study. Immense gratitude is due to my family, especially to my parents and mother in- law with greatest admiration and love. My deepest appreciation is extended to my husband and daughter for their cooperation and endurance. Finally, thanks to God.
iii TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………… ….vi Abstract …………………………………………………………………………viii
1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………… 1
Background of Study ………………………………………………………… 1 Theoretical Perspective ………………………………………………… 2 Statement of Research Problem ………………………………………… 4 Conceptual Approach ………………………………………………… 4 Definitions of Terms ………………………………………………… 7 Limitations ………………………………………………………………… 7 Assumptions ………………………………………………………………… 7
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ………………………………………… 9
A History of the Museum…………………………………………………….. 9 From Object to Experience ………………………………………………… 10 Exhibition and Visitor Experience ………………………………… 11 Museum and Information ………………………………………… 11 New Technologies in Museum Environments ……………………...... …… 12 The World Wide Web………………………………………………… 13 Information Architecture ………………………………………… 13 Museum Information and Interface Culture ………………………… 14 The Future ………………………………………………………………… 15
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ………………………………………………… 16
Purpose of the Study ………………………………………………… 16 Theoretical Foundation of the Method ………………………………… 16 Research Overview ………………………………………………………… 17 Sample ………………………………………………………… 17 Selection of Virtual Exhibits ………………………………………… 17 Instrumentation ………………………………………………………… 19 Survey …...………………………………………………………… 20 Face-to-face In-depth Interview …………………………………… 20 Observation ………………………………………………………… 21
iv Data Analysis ………………………………………………………… 21 Validity and Reliability ………………………………………………… 22
4. FINDINGS ………………………………………………………………………… 23
Description of Sample ………………………………………………… 23 Survey Findings ………………………………………………………… 25 Visitors’ Perceived Usability of the Websites ………………… 26 Post-test Opinions Regarding Virtual Exhibits ...………………. 29 Post-test Opinions Regarding Visits to Physical Museums ……….... 30 Changes in Website Design Related Opinions about Physical vs. Virtual Exhibits after Viewing Virtual Exhibit ………………………… 32 Comparisons of Groups With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experience ………………………………………………………… 32 Changes in Opinions Regarding Visiting Physical Exhibitions Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit ………………………………………… 34 Changes in Opinions Regarding Virtual Exhibits Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit ………………………………………………… 36 Observation Results ………………………………………………………… 38 Interview Results ………………………………………………… 39
5. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………… 41
6. RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………………………………………… 44
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………… 47
REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………… 75
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ………………………………………………… 78
v LIST OF FIGURES
1. Hein’s Summary of Education Theories …...…...………………………… 3
2. Conceptual Model ………...…………………………………………………5
3. Overall Study Concept Diagram ………...…………………………………6
4. The Virtual Gallery in Fine Art Museum of San Francisco Website ….……13
5. The Front Page of the Virtual Smithsonian Website ……...…………………18
6. Several Pages from the Ballgame Website …...…..………………………... 19
7. Percentages of Total Participants by Gender ……...…………………………24
8. Percentages Showing Age of Participants …….....…………………………24
9. Frequency of Visits to a Physical Museum Per Year …………………….... 25
10. Prior Experience Viewing a Virtual Exhibit …...………………..…………. 26
11. Design Element Rating for the Smithsonian Website (n=12) …....………… 27
12. Design Element Rating for the Ballgame Website (n=13) ….…………….. 27
13. The Combined Website Qualities of design Elements of Virtual Smithsonian and Ballgame Website (n=25) …………….………………………………….. 28
14. Likelihood of Viewing an Exhibit Totally Virtual in the Future (n=25) ……. 29
15. Respondents With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit ExperienceWho Would Consider Viewing an Exhibit Totally Virtually in the Future …………….. 30
16. Respondents Who Would Prefer to Visit this Exhibit Physically (n=25) ...…31
17. Respondents With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experience Who Would Prefer to Visit this Exhibit Physically ………….………………………….. 31
vi 18. Model Illustration Pre-test and Post-test Groups with and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experience …………….………………………………………….. 33
19. Changes in Level of Importance of Various aspects of the Physical Exhibit Experience Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit(n=20) …….………….. 34
20. Changes in Level of Importance of Various Aspects of the Physical Exhibit Experience Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit (n=5) ……..………….. 35
21. Changes in Level of Importance of Various Aspects of the Physical Exhibit Experience Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit ……………………….. 36
22. Changes in Level of Importance of Various Aspects of the Virtual Exhibit Experience Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit (n=5) .……………….. 37
23. Changes in Level of Importance of Various aspects of the Virtual Exhibit Experience Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit ...….………………….. 38
24. Frequency of Behavior Observed While Participants were Viewing Virtual Exhibits …………………………………………………………………….. 39
vii ABSTRACT
This study began with an assumption that virtual museum exhibitions will continue to be created in the future and more knowledge is required about designing effective virtual exhibit designs. This study explored the relationship between virtual exhibits and visitor’s opinions following the viewing of the virtual exhibit in order to determine the components of a well-constructed virtual exhibit. To address the research problem, this study explored two aspects of virtual exhibit design: 1) what are the components of a well-constructed virtual exhibit, 2) how does viewing the virtual exhibit change visitors’ opinions about both physical and virtual museum experiences. Twenty-five participants were purposively selected from a school of visual arts at a university located in the Southeastern region of the United States. Twenty participants had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to the study, while five participants had never viewed a virtual exhibit before. Each participant was given a survey prior to their viewing of the virtual exhibit, then they were given the opportunity to view the website and finally surveyed regarding their opinions. From the 25 participants, six were selected for observation to record behavior exhibited while they viewed the site. In addition, five were interviewed for a better understanding of their responses to various aspects of the virtual exhibit experiences. Data from the surveys was tabulated for descriptive percentages in order to identify numerical patterns of relationships. Observation data was analyzed for simple frequencies in categories of responses and interview data was tape recorded and transcribed into text files. The results of the study show that respondents' opinions of both physical and virtual museums were influenced by the frequency of their exposure to virtual museum exhibits. This result indicates that something attractive in the newness of one's first visit to a virtual museum "wears off" after later visits to similar sites. On the other hand, many of the comments of respondents indicate that virtual exhibits not only
viii enrich the experience of visitors to physical museums, but also provide a unique experience that cannot be duplicated in real life. In addition, the most valued components of a well-constructed virtual exhibit were audio explanations, interactive tools, many attractive graphics, and clear icon design. Based on study results, recommendations were made for the future role of interior design in virtual space that stands independent from a physical building and resides only on the Internet.
ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
Over the years since its inception, the field of exhibition design has come to view museum exhibitions as containing a variety of information for public education. Museum exhibitions have evolved from didactic presentations of information to more open-ended public education exhibitions with elements of entertainment. This alternative model for exhibition design is derived from a growing need for increased public accessibility to museum exhibitions. The role of the exhibition designer has changed from a simple problem solver for the informational environment to provider of more active engagement with information. In this new role, the exhibition designer is involved in the process of creating dialogues between audience and information in a designated setting. In the last few decades, museum environments have utilized new technologies to meet the varied needs and learning styles of visitors. Museums today are experimenting with many avenues of access for visitors, including computer-based options like art collection database programs and museum websites. The Smithsonian Institution, for example, allows access to its overall collections over the Internet. The development of virtual museum websites has expanded the possibilities for delivering better-tailored information with more public accessibility.
Background of the Study
In recent decades, there has been a worldwide explosion in the number of museums and a growing interest in museum work as a profession. Today, museums are in the midst of a paradigm shift. As Hein (2000) has stated, “Museums have striven to become more democratic in their structure and more responsive at all levels to the
1 interests of a broad-based public” (p.2). Many museums have tried to expand their audiences by reaching out to the public in new ways. Social and technological changes have had an impact on museums as well. The rapid growth of electronic, computer and communication technologies as well as the prevalence of mass media have changed visitor expectations of museum experiences (Marty, 2003). Museums confronting the reality of works produced in digital media must meet another challenge: the integrity and logic of method in presentations of art. As a result, many museums have introduced virtual exhibitions as a new way of showing art and communicating with visitors. A number of formal visitor studies have evaluated the physical presentations of exhibitions. However, little research has been conducted on virtual museum exhibitions. This study will investigate visitor responses to virtual museum exhibitions and explore the relationship between virtual exhibitions and visitor’s changing opinions regarding both the physical and virtual exhibits following the viewing of the virtual exhibition. The findings of this study will have the potential to provide useful information on the growing demand for new technologies in museum environments. In addition, the results of this study will contribute to a better understanding of the components of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibition.
Theoretical Perspective
Museum exhibits and programs should be designed to allow visitors to connect what they do, see, and feel with what they already know, understand, and acknowledge (Hein, 1998). In museums, visitors make meaning by constructing their own understandings. The issue for museums, then, is to attempt to understand the meanings visitors make from their museum experiences, and then shape the experience by manipulating the exhibition environment (see Figure 1). As a constructivist, Hein (1998) believed it is essential for museums to tap into visitor understandings of their museum experiences. He noted, “Constructivism, a theory of learning that surfaced in the wider education community a little over a decade ago and has subsequently been embraced by many museums, is predicated on the belief that
2 learning is an active process in which the learner constructs meaning from experience” (p.156). A constructivist approach to exhibition design would seek to capitalize on the different ways that visitors learn. Hein (1998) cited Howard Gardner’s theory of “multiple intelligences”-- which describes the range of people’s cognitive abilities and preferences -- to illustrate the range of learning styles that might exist among museum visitors. According to Gardner (as cited by Hein), all individuals possess linguistic, musical, spatial, kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and mathematical abilities and preferences in differing proportions. Informed by the work of both Hein (1998) and Gardner, museum programs based on a constructivist approach use a variety of methods beyond the traditional linear exhibit style, organizing material so as to engage and educate a broad audience.
Figure 1. Hein’s Summary of Education Theories (Hein,1998, p. 24)
3 Statement of Research Problem
This study will investigate visitor responses to virtual museum exhibitions and explore the relationship between virtual museum exhibitions and visitors’ changing opinions in order to determine the components of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibit.
Conceptual Approach
To address the research problem, this study will explore two aspects of virtual museum exhibit design: 1) what are the components of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibit, 2) how does visiting a virtual museum exhibit change visitors’ opinions about both physical and virtual museum experiences. The study will investigate the effectiveness of the exhibit website design, specifically exploring the following variables related to exhibit elements or components: a) sensory and media experiences, b) conceptual and physical groupings of objects, c) information design, and d) interpretive devices. Also, this study will examine visitors’ changing opinions after viewing the virtual exhibit, specifically exploring: a) the importance of viewing objects or manipulating objects, b) the importance of observing objects up-close, c) the importance of reading object caption labels, and d) the importance of participating museum educational activities. The measurement of these variables is proposed as a practical, immediately applicable means for exploring how virtual visitors use virtual museum exhibitions. The results of the study will contribute to the ultimate goal of making effective exhibit website design. Figure 2 explains how visitors respond to a virtual exhibit, and provides a model illustrating visitor’s process mechanism. The conceptual model in Figure 2 shows three basic elements of exhibits, which include objects, media and text information. Bitgood (1993) considered three basic elements of exhibits as, “ objects are the concrete things provided in exhibits… Media are ways to present text information to the eye and/or the ear…Text information conveys messages” (p. 134). Figure 3 indicates an overall concept diagram of the study. The diagram shows not only the research process but also the research methodology used.
4 Prior Knowledge
Objects
Changes in: Perceived Opinions Text Objectives Attitudes Message Message Knowledge Captions Labels Media Encode Organization Organize Navigation Reorganize Formats Interpret Layouts Reconstruct Graphics Interactive components Video, Demos, Sound, Music, Narration (Explainer, Docents)
Virtual Exhibitions Visitors
Figure 2. Conceptual Model
5 The Virtual Museum Exhibition
What are the components How does visiting a virtual of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibit change museum exhibit? visitors’ opinions about both physical and virtual museums?
Research Methodology
Instrumentation Survey (Pre/Post-test) Likert-type scales Interview Observation
Data Analysis Survey-Frequency & Means Interview – Search for emergent themes Observation –Observation coding
Determining the components Analyzing changing opinions of a well-constructed museum exhibition website
Conclusion Implications
Figure 3. Overall Study Concept Diagram
6 Definition of Terms
1. The Museum: A non-profit permanent institution in the service of society and its development, which is open to the public, and which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates, and exhibits, for purposes of study, education and enjoyment, material evidence of man and his environment (International Council of Museums, 1974; 1987). 2. Exhibitions: “A group of elements, planned as a cohesive unit, under a specified theme or topic” (Serrell, 1998, p. 12). 3. Virtual reality: A computer generated environment within which people can interact. 4. Virtual exhibition: In this study, the virtual exhibition is defined as a museum exhibition accessible through the computer. 5. Interface: A boundary across which two independent systems meet and act on or communicate with each other (http://webopedia.com).
Limitations
A possible limitation of the study was the sample size, which consisted of twenty-five respondents. In addition, the sample of the study was chosen from students in the visual arts and could be biased in some way. Five people made up Group 2, respondents who had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to the test, which is a sample size limitation. The study will be limited to virtual museum exhibitions accessible through the computer. Further, this study will only consider two virtual museum exhibitions. The focus of the study is not intended to dismiss other variables as unimportant or to suggest that understanding how visitors use exhibitions is simple. Finally, this study only attempts to explore the effectiveness of the museum exhibit web site, rather than the content of the exhibit itself.
Assumptions
Several assumptions were made prior to conducting this research. The first assumption is that virtual museum exhibitions will continue to be created in the future, therefore, knowledge about effective virtual exhibit design will be requiring. The
7 second assumption is that participants will respond truthfully and to the best of their abilities.
8 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter is divided into four sections: a) the history of the museum, b) how the function and role of museums has changed from object to experience, c) the influence of new technologies on museum environments, and d) the future of museum exhibitions.
The History of the Museum
The term ‘museum’ derives from the Greek mouseion, a place of contemplation or a shrine of the muses, though the Romans used the term to describe a place of philosophical discussion. Woodhead and Stansfield (1989) state that, “In German the terms kammer or kabinett were used, often in the form of naturalienkabinett or wunderkammer (normally containing natural specimens), kunstkammer (an art collection), and rustkammer (historical objects or armour). The term pinakotheke was used in Athens in the fifth century BC to describe an art gallery and may still be found in the name of some art galleries today” (p. 3). The museum most frequently cited as the forerunner of the present-day museum was the museum at Alexandria, founded in 290 B.C. by Ptolemy Soter (Watts, 1999). This museum served as an institute for advanced research, and included a botanical and zoological park that was populated by scholars from the entire Greek East and later supported by Roman emperors. Art collections, initially, were owned by private individuals, especially, royalty, members of the noble class, and churches. Up until the 1700s, museums were privatized by the elite, whether by scholars as in Roman times, or as in the 18th century by the ruling class. After the French revolution, many museums changed their role from being privately enjoyed and unavailable to the public to being open to the public
9 and enjoyed by many. A number of influences can be identified in the development of public museums. In the book, Keyguide to Information Sources in Museum Studies, Woodhead & Stansfield (1989) provided examples: “In Europe, royal collections (in Austria, France, Spain, Germany and Russia) often formed the basis of the first public museums. The Musee du Louvre in Paris, for example, came into being following the French Revolution in 1789 and the creation of the Republic in 1792. The museum was based on the confiscated and nationalized royal collections, which were made accessible to the public with the opening of the Louvre in 1793” (p. 6). Museums have evolved from being the privately held collections of rulers, nobility, and institutions such as the church and learned societies to those that are maintained for and open to the public. Today’s museums perform their public service by offering themselves as resources and educational institutions.
From Object to Experience
According to Hein (2000), “An exhibition traditionally puts objects ‘on view’, inviting the visitor to inspect and contemplate them, guided by the epistemologically privileged museum authority. But what is observed in the museum today is no longer unequivocally an object; objects have been reconstituted as sites of experience, and museums increasingly hold themselves accountable for delivering experiences” (p. 5). Today’s museums accept an amplified educational mandate to stimulate and encourage inquiry in an effort to create a museum experience that is illuminating and satisfying. Hein (2000) stated, “Experiences are not collectibles but rather are quintessentially transient and elusive, strictly located neither in time nor in space. Museums compete for the public’s allegiance with other manufacturers of illusion such as movie and television industries, theme parks, and the advertising industry. In that light, museums must become as discriminating in the selection of the experiences they provide as they were formerly solicitous of their collection and care of objects” (p. 8).
10 Museums have traditionally communicated collection-based and associated information through a variety of media, but the advent of new technologies now presents opportunities to develop new means of communication by which visitors explore the richness and diversity of collections at their own pace for their own requirements (Fahy, 1994). Fahy stated, “Museums are faced with a unique opportunity to share information with each other. Also, museums have to commit themselves to the principle of sharing information and to consider how shared information can be maximized” (p. 87). Moving beyond the walls of the museum, new technologies can expand and enhance communication with other museums, the academic community and the public. Exhibitions and the Visitor Experience The term exhibition has been defined as a showing, though by such a definition, the world itself might be seen as an exhibition of sorts. In the context of the museum, the term exhibition would necessarily involve a sense of purpose, that is, "to affect the viewer in some predetermined way” (Belcher, 1991). Alexander (1997) defined an exhibit as a display of objects for the purpose of communicating with visitors. Primarily through exhibits, museums communicate information about historic, artistic, scientific or technologic objects to visitors. The visitor experience is dependent upon the interplay of the personal, social and physical contexts of the visit. The primary aim of the exhibit development process is to provide an exhibition environment that will enhance the visitor experience, by providing a physical context that will help visitors to construct their own interpretation from the exhibits (Caulton, 1998). The Museum and Information Much of the new technology seen in museums today is based on some combination of image, text, and sound. Most technologies used in museums provide information in a format that is accessible to the consumer, whether it is the now traditional narrative of a feature film, the multimedia choices of a CD-ROM, or the daily on-line bulletin board of a cultural institution. The increasing use of computers to create, manage, and integrate very large databases and link people and information in real time raises interesting questions with enormous implications for the future. In
11 museums, information is essential for the effective care of the collections and for future planning. The explosive development of information technology is transforming modern life in a variety of ways, large and small. A New York Times review of the CD-ROM version of the London Micro Gallery, for example, observed that a good quality image accessible by a computer takes art and turns it into cultural information. Information technology should be seen as a means, rather than an end in itself, which can enhance the experience of the real thing in meaningful ways (Mintz, 2000).
New Technologies on the Museum Environment
The museum's unique position and foundation provide the opportunity to create conceptually coherent, thematically interactive multimedia programs. There are many significant advantages to using new technology and media production in museum exhibitions. Borysewicz (1998) has pointed out some of the advantages of using media production in museums. These include: a) “A continuous, open-ended dialogue among visitors and between the visitor and the exhibit content” (p. 113). b) “Visitors make their own museums-‘official’ museums share web space with thousands of personal museums, created by individuals interested in sharing their own versions of connoisseurship and interpretation” (p. 113). c) “Safe handling of artifacts - exhibitors are always looking for ways to allow people to handle artifacts, take them apart, turn them upside-down, and try them on” (p. 114). d) “The exchange of objects with the public - a key feature of World Wide Web browsers is the ability to copy and save data files” (p. 114). e) “The ease of repeated visits – once an investment in hardware and network access is made, the cost to users for repeated visits to a site stays extremely low” (p. 115). f) “Ownership - the more access our public has to the fundamental processes of museum work, the greater their sense of ownership” (p. 115) (see Figure 4).
12 Figure 4. The Virtual Gallery in Fine Art Museum of San Francisco website
“Virtual reality may also become significant within the museum context. In computer-centered worlds, visitors may be able to experience through their senses the exploration of a sea bed, a Roman coliseum or the museum stores” (Fahy, 2000). The World Wide Web Since its inception, the World Wide Web has become a major communications medium. A dynamic medium of expression, the web mutates rapidly, changing as the underlying computing environment evolves. Still, any development of the World Wide Web is as dependent on writing and documentation as any other scientific or engineering project. Though web sites represent a new form of expression and communication, they nevertheless include text in a variety of organizational styles. Information Architecture In planning a museum website, site developers identify the content, goals, and target audience for a site. Information architecture refers to the structure of the site, how information is mapped onto its pages, and how the audience will travel through the
13 site. The aim of information architecture is to take complex information and convey it to the target audience as simply as possible. In the book Information Architects, Appelbaum (1996) drew on his recent work for the American Museum of Natural History and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in describing the role of the information architect. He stated, “We look for architectural and environmental metaphors for the key pedagogical concepts behind an exhibition, so that space traditionally left neutral is given voice. This approach casts a broader information net to engage the receptivities of different visitors. We feel the results are seen in people’s sense of immersion, attention span, and enhanced memory of their engagement in activities such as reading more on the subject, visiting related sites, or becoming more involved with the museum” (p150). Wurman (1996) also described the meaning of information architecture. He said, “I mean the architect as in the creating of systemic, structural, and orderly principles to make something work – the thoughtful making of either artifact, or idea, or policy that informs because it is clear… Most of the word information contains the word inform, so I call things information only if they inform me, not if they are just collections of data, of stuff” (p. 16). Strong information architecture is the most crucial part of website design. Without a well-designed fundamental structure, users will not be able to navigate a site efficiently, or may not find what they are looking for. Museum Information and Interface Culture “The museum offers a unique environment in which to study the way knowledge is accumulated, analyzed and distributed by information professionals.” (Marty, 1999, p. 207). “The importance of interface design revolves around this apparent paradox: we live in a society that is increasingly shaped by events in cyberspace, and yet cyberspace remains, for all practical purposes, invisible, outside our perceptual grasp” (Johnson, 1997). Representing all that information will require a new visual language, as complex
14 and meaningful as the great metropolitan narratives of the nineteenth-century novel. “The agora of the twenty-first century may very well relocate to cyberspace, but it will not get very far without interface architects to draw up the blueprints” (Johnson, 1997). New technologies are beginning to cause significant changes in the way museums perform their functions and in the way they are perceived by the public. Images enhance analysis by providing a tool for the visualization of information. The rapid conversion of text and images into digital form will affect work processes within the museum as well (Besser, 1997).
The Future
Museums are now part of a very crowded computer media world. The special talent of museums for creating conceptually coherent, thematically interactive multimedia programs gives them a tremendous advantage in new media production. New technologies are beginning to cause significant changes both in the way museums perform their functions and in the way they are perceived by public. Future resolution of these issues should make it possible for museums to operate within a truly international network of ideas and information exchange. In particular, this should assist the research process, making it quicker and simpler to locate objects of interest and assess the information associated with it (Fahy, 1994). As Fahy has pointed out, “Enhanced communication networks between museums, universities and other research organizations will be of benefit to all groups and to the generation of new knowledge” (p. 89). Once museums accept the notion of a future in which individuals are more inclined to acquire knowledge and experiences through computer mediation, more institutions can be expected to divert money and effort to the digitization of their information resources.
15 CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between virtual exhibitions and visitor responses by examining visitors’ changing opinions regarding both physical and virtual exhibits following the viewing of the virtual exhibit. The visitors’ overall satisfaction with the usability of the website design was gauged by answering a related questionnaire. The study employed both quantitative and qualitative methodologies for this purpose. Surveys, observations, and interviews were used for data collection. The findings of the study may help determine how virtual museum exhibits function as well as determine the components of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibition website.
Theoretical Foundation of the Method
The study employed surveys, observations, and interviews as instruments of data collection. Survey instrumentation allows the researcher to pose a series of questions to willing participants, summarize their responses with percentages, frequency counts, or more sophisticated statistical indexes, and then draw inferences about a particular population from the responses of the sample (Leedy, 2001). According to Leedy (2001), “Quantitative study involves either identifying the characteristics of an observed phenomenon or exploring possible correlations among two or more phenomena. In every case, descriptive research examines a situation as it is” (p. 191). For qualitative purposes, the study also employed face-to-face, in-depth interviews and observations. Personal interviews permit the researcher to clarify unclear responses and seek follow-up information (Leedy, 2001). Qualitative research methods are often useful in research that attempts to understand the thoughts and
16 perceptions of individuals. These methods allow the researcher to analyze data for themes found within in-depth interview or survey data inconsistent with a quantitative data analysis (Leedy, 2001). The findings of interviews can be synthesized with survey information for better interpretation of the data. Diamond (1999) stated, “If conducted in a responsible manner, interviews can be excellent tools for assessing visitors' thoughts and experiences” (p. 83). Conducting informal observations allows the researcher to gauge the nature and complexity of respondent responses. Observations are usually recorded in great detail that captures the variety of ways in which people act and interact (Leedy, 2001).
Research Overview
This study included five phases. The first phase involved establishing the theoretical work ground by reviewing the literature. The second phase was sample selection. The third phase involved selecting the virtual exhibit websites. The fourth phase involved creation of the instruments including the survey, observation and interview checklists. The fifth phase included data gathering using survey, observation, and interview methods. Sample Twenty-five participants were purposively selected from a school of visual arts at a university located in the Southeastern region of the United States. The students were contacted to determine times and dates for viewing websites and filling out a corresponding survey. Participants selected for follow-up interviews were recruited from those who completed the follow-up question asking if they were willing to participate. Students randomly selected from all participants were observed while viewing the website to better understand their responses to various parts of the virtual exhibit experience. Selection of Virtual Exhibit Websites The two virtual museum exhibit websites selected for the study were chosen according to several criteria. All sites were a) museum- based, b) on-line, and c)
17 contained art and/or artifacts, exhibit labels, label copies, audio-video tools, and games or activities related to the exhibit. The Virtual Smithsonian (http://2k.si.edu) and the Mesoamerican Ballgame (http://www.ballgame.org) met these criteria and were chosen for the study. Both sites were visually complex and easy to access. The Virtual Smithsonian (see Figure 5) site highlights over 360 artifacts from 14 Smithsonian museums and includes a virtual walk to the Castle, the architecture symbol of the Smithsonian site in Washington D.C. The site is based on a traveling exhibit, "Celebrating 150 Years, America’s Smithsonian." Included in the virtual exhibit are high resolution images, video and audio clips, and artifacts which rotate in 3-D and morph into other artifacts.
Figure 5. The Front Page of the Virtual Smithsonian Website
The other virtual exhibit "The Mesoamerican Ballgame" (see Figure 6), was originally organized by the Mint Museum of Art in 2001. The website itself was named "Best Museum Website" by Museums and the Web 2002. This website included lots of activity programs, such as watching and playing games while testing their knowledge of the exhibit information.
18 Figure 6. Several Pages from the Ballgame Website
Instrumentation
The procedure for conducting this study included the development of a survey instrument and the collection of data. Purposively selected students were contacted to determine times and dates for viewing websites and completing a survey. Study participants were asked to view and interact with a museum exhibition website and fill out a survey. While the respondents viewed the virtual exhibition, the researcher observed and recorded their interactions and attention using pre-determined observation codes.
19 Survey The survey research included three parts (see Appendix B). Part A requested demographic information and inquired about the respondent's prior experiences with both physical and virtual museum exhibits. After completing Part A, they viewed the virtual exhibit website, then asked to fill out the portion of Part B. Part B asked respondents to rate their overall satisfaction with the website and its usability of design. A total of 68 questions were asked using a Likert-type scale as a measurement. Part C contained a follow-up question that asked respondents about their willingness to participate in an interview. Students were asked to give consent prior to beginning the project. Each student spent approximately 30 to 45 minutes viewing the site and filling out a survey. The viewing location was in the computer labs in one of the University Fine Arts buildings. The survey was distributed to three groups with approximately eight students each. Groups were divided in two, then, an equal number were directed to the two selected websites. Face-to-face In-depth Interviews The survey questionnaire included an invitation to respondents to leave their names and email addresses/telephone numbers if they were willing to be interviewed regarding these websites. These selected interview volunteers participated in audiotaped interviews for approximately 15-20 minutes and were asked about their experiences with the virtual exhibition. All interviews were conducted by the researcher, and all responses were kept confidential. The researcher arranged a date and time for a follow-up interview with those survey respondents who agreed. The interviews contained 10 open-ended questions, including inquiries about their experience of the virtual exhibit they viewed for the survey. Interviews involved one subject at a time and varied in length between 15–20 minutes. The interviews were audiotaped to accurately record the information. The respondents were assured that only the researcher would have access to these tapes, and that the tapes would be destroyed by August 10, 2010. All names and identifying
20 details were changed during the transcription and analysis of the interviews. The interviews were semi-structured. Observation In this study, the researcher attempted to be as objective as possible in assessing the behavior under study. The researcher recorded the attention and physical reactions of participants while they viewed the website. The observations were made in a precise, concrete manner, and were divided into periods of small time segments with observations approximately every 5 minutes. The observation portion of this study yielded data that portrayed the complexity of human behavior, which was subsequently synthesized with data from the other two study instruments.
Data Analysis
The varied means of collecting data required several different forms of analysis. Data from the surveys was tabulated for descriptive percentages in order to identify numerical patterns of relationships. Interview data was tape recorded and transcribed into text files. The information was then coded into a table format for analysis and used to confirm or inform responses to the surveys. This enabled triangulation of all of the data collected. Collected data was arranged to make it comprehensible to the reader and to emphasize critical findings. Diamond (1999) mentioned that, “Findings should be grouped into headings or themes and presented in order of their relative importance.” Statistics provide a means by which numerical data can be made more meaningful so that the researcher may see the nature of the relationships in the phenomenon under study. Before considering any statistical procedure, it is essential that the researcher develop the habit of looking closely at the data collected and explore various ways of organizing it in order to see what patterns can be detected (Leedy, 2001). The SAS statistical software program was used for the analysis of survey data.
21 Validity and Reliability
Validity is the extent to which the assessment the researcher has developed is accurate and appropriate (Diamond, 1999). In order to ensure the validity of the research instruments used in this study, the researcher employed both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, including informal observations. Data from one method was compared and synthesized with others. According to Diamond (1999), reliability is a measure of the consistency of a research method. The researcher sought to ensure that similar conditions existed when each time surveys, interviews and observations were conducted. The content of two websites were consistent in each setting as well.
22 CHAPTER IV FINDINGS
The data gathered for this study were obtained from survey responses as well as in-depth interviews and observations. The data includes demographic information about the respondents, and pre-test and post-test measures of respondent experiences after viewing the virtual exhibit. Observation data collected while participants viewed the virtual exhibition were tabulated. Finally, interviews were transcribed and then analyzed to reveal major themes. The data will be discussed in the following order: a) description of sample, b) survey findings, c) observation results and d) interview results.
Description of Sample
A sample of 25 students was purposively selected from a school of visual arts at a southeastern university in the United States. The majority (92%) were female students (see Figure 7). Twenty percent were graduate students and 80% were undergraduates. The ages of participants ranged from 20 to 38 years old. As shown in Figure 8, sixty-eight percent were under 25, and thirty-two percent were under 25. The mean age was 22.5 years old. The entire sample could be described as a young visually-trained, computer literate and educated.
23 Male 8%
Female 92%
Figure 7. Percentages of total participants by gender
Over 25
32% Under 25
68%
Figure 8. Percentages showing age of participants
24 Survey Findings
The SAS Statistical software program package was used for the analysis of survey data. These data were initially analyzed for frequency percentages and mean scores. This step produced descriptive information about the data collected. Overall, about half of the respondents viewed The Virtual Smithsonian website, which highlights over 360 artifacts from 14 Smithsonian museums, while the other half viewed The Ballgame website entitled “The Sport of Life and Death”. Most respondents (81.2%) reported that they were interested in the theme of the website they viewed. Prior to the study, all respondents had experienced visiting a museum physically. Only 20% had viewed a virtual exhibit previously, while 80% had not (see Figure 10). Forty-six percent of those surveyed reported that they visit a museum physically once a year (see Figure 9).
More than 5 visits 5 visits 4% 4% 4 visits 8%
3 visits One visit 17% 46%
Two visits 21%
Figure 9. Frequency of Visits to a Physical Museum Per Year
25 Had viewed a virtual exhibit 20%
Never viewed a virtual exhibit 80%
Figure 10. Prior experience viewing a virtual exhibit
Visitors’ Perceived Usability of the Websites
The survey findings that follow include visitor’s perceived usability of website design. The data shows that the visitors’ perceived usability of the two virtual exhibit websites was highly rated by the respondents with regard to the following factors: a) the navigation and organization of the website, b) the effectiveness of overall message delivery, c) the quality and informativeness of the text, (4) the effectiveness of video image clips, (5) the quality of the music, sound and photographs, (6) the color schemes, lay-out, and style of text font, and (7) the usefulness of explanations by artist, curator, or narrator (see Figure 13). In terms of the quality of design elements for the Virtual Smithsonian website, respondents gave high ratings to navigation, organization, the color scheme, and the style of text font. In addition, the music and sounds were both seen as useful and effective (see Figure 11). Regarding the Ballgame website, respondents were more satisfied with the quality of photographs, the effectiveness of video clip, informativeness of text, the style of text font and the color scheme (see Figure 12).
26 The explanations by narrator
The sound occurred when scenes change
The sounds occured when buttons are selected
The sound occurred when the website started
The size of text font
The style of text font
Frame, format, or lay-out
The color scheme
The quality of photographs
Art activities or games
The meanings of icon
Appropriate music and/or sound
The ability to zoom & rotate
The effectiveness of video clips
The effectiveness of audio plays
The effectiveness of visual objects
The text was informative
The effectiveness of overall message
No technical problem
Organization
Navigation
1 2 3 4 5 Disagree Agree
Figure 11. Design Element Ratings for Virtual Smithsonian Website (n=12)
The explanations by narrator
The sound occurred when scenes change
The sounds occured when buttons are selected
The sound occurred when the website started
The size of text font
The style of text font
Frame, format, or lay-out
The color scheme
The quality of photographs
Art activities or games
The meanings of icon
Appropriate music and/or sound
The ability to zoom & rotate
The effectiveness of video clips
The effectiveness of audio plays
The effectiveness of visual objects
The text was informative
The effectiveness of overall message
No technical problem
Organization
Navigation
1 2 3 4 5 Disagree Agree
Figure 12. Design Element Rating for Ballgame Website (n=13) 27 The explanations by narrator
The sound occurred when scenes change
The sounds occured when buttons are selected
The sound occurred when the website started
The size of text font
The style of text font
Frame, format, or lay-out
The color scheme
The quality of photographs
Art activities or games
The meanings of icon
Appropriate music and/or sound
The ability to zoom & rotate
The effectiveness of video clips
The effectiveness of audio plays
The effectiveness of visual objects
The text was informative
The effectiveness of overall message
No technical problem
Organization
Navigation
1 2 3 4 5 Disagree Agree
Figure 13. The Combined Website Qualities of Design Elements of Virtual Smithsonian and Ballgame Website (n=25)
28 Post-test Opinions Regarding Virtual Exhibits
Following the viewing of the virtual exhibit, respondents were presented with a five points Likert scale asking if they would consider viewing an exhibit totally virtually in the future. A rating of 1 designated that they were not likely, while a rating of 5 designated that they were more likely to view an exhibit virtually in the future. Nearly 40% of respondents answered with a 4 or 5 suggesting a likelihood that they would view virtually in the future. Thirty-six percent selected 1 or 2 on the scale suggesting that they were not likely to view an exhibit totally virtually in the future (see Figure 14). This result suggests there may be some question about the future of virtual exhibitions.
24% 24%
20%
16% 16%
1(Not likely) 2 3 4 5(Definitely)
Figure 14. Likelihood of Viewing an Exhibit Totally Virtually in the Future (n=25)
To better understand the results, data were divided into 2 groups: the respondents who had never before viewed a virtual exhibit prior to this study and those who had viewed other virtual exhibits prior to participating in the study. Interestingly,
29 students who had never before viewed a virtual exhibit prior to this study were more positive about viewing a virtual exhibit format in the future (see Figure 15).
5 Definitely
4
3
2
1 Not likely exhibits virtual exhibits People who had never viewed virtual People who had seen n=20 n=5
Figure 15. Respondents With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experience Who Would Consider Viewing an Exhibit Totally Virtually in the Future
Post-test Opinions Regarding Visits to Physical Museums Respondents were presented with five-point Likert scale asking if they would prefer to visit this exhibit physically after viewing one of the virtual exhibits as part of this study. Seventy-six percent of respondents answered with a 4 or 5 suggesting a likelihood that they would have preferred to see the exhibit in a museum (see Figure 16). Among respondents, students who had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to this study were more likely to prefer physical exhibits (see Figure 17).
30 48%
28%
12%
8%
4%
1(Not likely) 2.00 3 4 5(Definitely)
Figure 16. Respondents Who Would Prefer to Visit this Exhibit Physically (n=25)
5 Definitely 4
3
2
1 Not likely exhibits seen virtual never viewed virtual exhibits People who had People who had n=5 n=20
Figure 17. Respondents With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experience Who Would Prefer to Visit this Exhibit Physically
31 Changes in Website Design Related Opinions about Physical vs. Virtual Exhibits The data shown in Table 1 suggests that respondents were more likely to value the viewing artifacts up-close and in detail in physical exhibits after viewing the virtual exhibit. At the same time, respondents revealed their enjoyment in manipulating artifacts in virtual exhibits. Although respondents were more likely to read text and listen to audio in virtual exhibits, results showed they reported valuing playing games or activities rather than reading details about artifacts in both virtual and physical exhibits. One interesting finding was that after viewing the virtual exhibit website respondents were more likely to want to use audio-guide even though it wasn’t free.
Table 1. Changes in Website Design Related Opinions after Viewing the Virtual Exhibit
Opinions After Viewing the Virtual Exhibit
Increase in level of Decrease in level of importance importance • Manipulate • Up close view art/ Regarding the virtual art/artifacts artifacts museum exhibit • Read caption • Get more experiences • Listen to audio information • Watch video • Participate in games or activities • View art/ artifacts • Read caption label Regarding the physical • Detail view art / • Read label copies museum exhibit artifacts • Audio-guide (if free) experiences • Audio-guide (if not free) • Participate in games or activities
Comparison of Groups With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experiences A comparison of the data revealed that the interest of first time visitors to a virtual exhibit was similar to that of more frequent visitors. For a better understand of the findings, the responses of students who had never before viewed a virtual exhibit were compared to students who had viewed other virtual exhibits prior to the test. The
32 data was derived from one of the survey questions (#17, see Appendix B) asking “Have you ever viewed a virtual museum exhibit?”. From this response, participants were sorted into two groups. Group 1 represented participants who had never viewed a virtual exhibit before, while Group 2 indicated those who had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to the test. The line graphs show responses both before and after viewing the websites selected for this study. Figure 18 better explains the comparison between the two groups.
Pre-test
Group 1 Group 2 Participants with prior Participants with prior Visitor experience visiting experience visiting physical exhibits only physical exhibits as well as virtual exhibits
Virtual Exhibits (Treatment)
Post-test
Group 1 Group 2 Responses regarding Responses regarding Visitor opinions about visiting opinions about visiting physical exhibits and physical exhibits and viewing the virtual viewing the virtual exhibit exhibit
Figure 18. Model Illustration Pre-test and Post-test Groups With and Without Prior Virtual Exhibit Experience
33 Changes in Opinions Regarding Visiting Physical Exhibitions Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit Between Two Groups Group 1, twenty students who had never viewed a virtual exhibit prior to this study, reported an increase in the level of importance placed on viewing objects in real life and up-close in physical exhibits. However, the level of importance regarding reading object caption label and label copies decreased (see Figure 19).
1.00
0.50 importance of level
0.00 Increased activities
-0.50 View objects in real life Read exhibit label copy Use audio-guide, if free Follow a docent-led tour Participate in educational Read object caption label Observe objects up-close Use audio-guide, if not free importance------of level -1.00 Decreased
-1.50
Figure 19. Changes in level of importance of various aspects of the physical exhibit experience Following viewing the virtual exhibit (n=20)
Group 2 consisted five students who had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to the study. After viewing the virtual exhibit, they reported an increase in the level of importance in following a docent-led tour, but were less likely to observe objects up-close, read both captions and label copies, and participate in educational activities in a museum (see Figure 20).
34 2.00
1.50
1.00 importance of level 0.50 Increased
0.00 ------activities importance -0.50 of View objects in real life Use audio-guide, if free Read exhibit label copy Follow a docent-led tour Participate in educational Read object caption label Observe objects up-close Use audio-guide, if not free level
-1.00 Decreased
Figure 20. Changes in Level of Importance of Various Aspects of the Physical Exhibit Experience Following Viewing a Virtual Exhibition (n=5)
Another way to illustrate the changes in the level of importance is with line graphs. On the line graph in figure 21, each point on the graph represents respondents’ changes in level of importance with various aspects of the physical exhibit experience. These line graphs illustrate differences between the two groups, those with and without prior virtual exhibit experiences. Some of the more noticeable changes will be discussed below. Group 1 reported an increase in importance placed on viewing objects in real life and observing objects up-close. At the same time Group 2 showed an increase in importance placed on ‘following a docent-led tour” and use of audio-guide, but most other categories went down. As line graphs in Figure 21 shown, both groups revealed decreases in the revel of importance in placed on reading object captions and labels.
35 5
4
3
Mean of Score View objects in real life Observe objects up-close 2 Read object caption label Read exhibit label copy Use audio-guide, if free Use audio-guide, if not free Follow a docent-led tour 1 Participate in educational activities n=20 n=5 Group 1 Group 2 the virtual exhibit the virtual exhibit Group 1 after viewing Group 2 after viewing
Figure 21. Changes in Level of Importance of Various Aspects of the Physical Exhibit Experience Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit
Changes in Opinions Regarding Virtual Exhibitions Following Viewing the Virtual Exhibit In the virtual exhibit, participants highest rated activities included listening to audio explanations, watching video, and participating in educational activities. These were listed as more important than learning details and requesting more information (see Figure 22).
36 1.5
1.0 importance of level
0.5 Increased
0.0 ------labels Watch video Listen to audio importance Learn more details Read object cation
-0.5 Request more info. of Manipulating objects Participate in activities Read exhibit label copy level
Decreased -1.0
Figure 22. Changes in Level of Importance of Various Aspects of the Virtual Exhibit Experience Following the Viewing Virtual Exhibition (n=5)
In Figure 23, two line graphs indicate the changing opinions of five respondents with a virtual exhibit experience prior to the study. Regarding virtual exhibits, there were relatively consistent answers regarding manipulating objects, learning details and reading object caption labels. However, watching video, listening to audio, and participating in activities increased in level of importance. Compared with Group 1, who had never viewed virtual exhibits, both group’s responses after viewing the virtual exhibit were almost the same levels. That implied that overall responses regarding viewing the virtual exhibit revealed almost the same results in group with and without prior virtual exhibit experiences.
37 5
4
3
Manipulating objects Learn more details Mean of Score 2 Read object caption labels Read exhibit label copy Request more info. Listen to audio Watch video 1 Participate in activities Group 2 the virtual exhibit the virtual exhibit Group 2 after viewing Group 1 after viewing
Figure 23. Changes in level of importance of various aspects of the virtual exhibit experience following the viewing of the virtual exhibit
Observation Results
Observations of six study participants were made while they viewed the virtual exhibit. Fourteen detailed codes were created for capturing the variety of ways in which individuals acted and interacted in relation to a virtual exhibit. Observations were recorded every 5 minutes. The data from the observations was analyzed for simple frequencies in categories of responses. Participants displayed the following behaviors (the top 6 behavior are presented in order of frequency): a) interaction with exhibit, b) consistent attention, c) reading of labels, d) participating in games or activities, e) watching videos, f) bodily reactions, such as laughing and exclamations (see Figure 24).
38 Overall, those observed were most likely to participate in games or activities, watch videos and read labels with explanations by narrators. However, they did not seem to want to wait when loading of audio or video was required. The average viewing time for each website was 15 minutes. An important finding in the context of other instruments was that the icon design could affect the visitor’s virtual experience, because most students whom I observed often didn’t understand how to manipulate such tools. This result suggested icon design should clarify the meaning of each icon.
Games or Activities
Appeared tired
Watched video
Searched for objects
Showed frustration
Read out loud
Distracted by something
Listened carefully
Bodily reaction
Pointed some part of exhibit
Laughed
Read label
Consistent attention
Interaction with exhibit
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Frequency of Behavior
Figure 24. Frequency of Behavior Observed While Participants were Viewing Virtual Exhibits
Interview Results
In addition to the administration of the survey and observations, in-depth interviews were conducted. Five participants were interviewed to provide more detailed
39 information on their experience viewing the virtual museum exhibition. Interviews were transcribed in order to analyze data and uncover emergent themes (See Appendix B). Interviewees were asked about those aspects of the virtual exhibit that were most meaningful to them. They responded that the ability to zoom in and out, 3-dimensional virtual space, playing games, a large amount of graphics with bright colors, and audio- narration were all important. In the course of their visits to the virtual exhibit, interviewees learned about the exhibit, including the actual pieces of work on display and overall exhibit information. However, many complained about the difficulty in using both websites, particularly in regard to the clarity of video image clips and unclear icon design. According to the data from observations, most participants didn’t understand the meaning of some icons. The reactions of the interviewees to the overall virtual exhibit experience included the following: a) very interesting and unexpected, b) enhanced museum experience, c) very educational, d) facilitated visiting physical museum, e) great tool for teaching, f) reading information is very effective, g) personal enjoyment, h) ability to focus attention and direct stimulation. In addition, the suggestions to improve the websites they viewed included more activity programs related to the exhibit and clarifying icon design. One participant said that “If it were in the real museum, he/she would never be able to attend the exhibit, so the virtual exhibit provided the opportunity to have the experience remotely”. Finally, four out of five interviewees disagreed with the concept of doing away with physical exhibits in favor of virtual exhibits in the future. However, they felt that virtual exhibits are an effective way of communicating with visitors.
40 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION
This study explored the relationship between virtual museum exhibits and visitor opinions in order to identify the components of a well-constructed museum exhibit website. Two specific research questions were addressed: 1) What are the components of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibit? 2) How does visiting a virtual museum exhibit change visitor opinions of both physical and virtual museum experiences? Several conclusions can be drawn from the analysis of the survey, observation, and interview responses gathered for the study. First, the most valued components of a well-constructed virtual museum exhibit website were: a) audio explanations or narration, b) interactive tools to get visitors more involved, c) plenty of information, even though visitors may or may not click to access it, d) many attractive graphics using elements like bright color schemes, logos, icons, and illustrations, and e) clear and organized icon design. The frequency with which respondents identified these characteristics as important suggests they may constitute the beginnings of a set of guidelines for optimal development of virtual museum websites. Second, respondents' opinions of both physical and virtual museums were influenced by the frequency of their exposure to virtual museum exhibits. For example, more of those in Group 1 (who had never viewed a virtual museum exhibit prior to the study) than in Group 2 (who had viewed a virtual museum exhibit prior to the study) said they would consider exclusively viewing a virtual exhibit in the future. Interestingly, more of those in Group 2 than in Group 1 said they would prefer a physical museum visit to a virtual museum exhibit. Perhaps this result indicates that something attractive in the newness of one's first visit to a virtual museum "wears off" after later visits to similar sites. On the other hand, many of the comments of respondents in Group 2 indicate an acknowledgement of the ways in which virtual
41 exhibits enhance learning and appreciation in physical museum visits. It is also important to note that there were only five participants who had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to the study. A large sample may yield different results. In addition, respondents in Group 2 showed noticeable changes in their desire for more educational experiences after having viewed a virtual exhibit, such as willingness to participate in a docent-led tour in a physical museum. Compared with the opinions of Group 2, Group 1 showed greater change in the level of importance they placed on being able to view objects up-close and in person after viewing the virtual exhibit. However, respondents in both groups showed greater preference for reading object caption labels, listening to audio, watching video and participating in activities in the virtual exhibit after viewing the virtual exhibit provided. This implies that virtual exhibits can stimulate visitors’ educational interest, and enrich both virtual and physical museum experiences. The finding that Groups 2’s increasing level of the importance regarding manipulating objects, audio and information in virtual exhibits after viewing the virtual exhibit in comparison with their prior responses implies that the websites provided in the study were well-designed, demonstrating the characteristics of virtual museum websites described above that visitors find most useful. The conclusions of this study are consistent with those of previous studies. For example, Teather & William (1999) noted, “Our increasing understanding of the museum on the web will continue to enrich the ways in which we explore the totality of the museum experience both virtual and real” (p.142). A visit to a virtual exhibition website can be an especially valuable resource prior to a visit to a museum (West, 1998). Further, virtual exhibits have been shown to change museum visitor expectations of museum experiences (Marty, 2003). Constructivism, the theoretical perspective of this study, supports the conclusions as well. As discussed in Chapter 1, Constructivism is a learning theory where “learning is an active process in which the learner constructs meaning from experience” (Hein, 1998, p. 156). Participants were likely to utilize audio clips to hear explanations, watch video clips, and participate in games or activities in virtual museum exhibits. The overall satisfaction of respondents with the two virtual exhibits was high, an indication
42 that virtual exhibits can provide a rich environment in which visitors can reconstruct their knowledge. Overall, the respondents in this study saw virtual museum exhibits as very informative and educational. These findings are consistent with Hein (1998) who found that the virtual museum exhibit not only contributes to the ever-growing educational role of museums, but provides yet another rationale for the existence of museums in a climate of increasing pressure to justify one's institution in terms of market research. Aside from their educational role, museums are expected to be accessible. As shown in the interview results (see Appendix D), many respondents appreciated the ability of virtual exhibits to make themselves accessible to the public 24 hours a day. According to Rashid (1999), the principal architect at Asymptote Architects and producer of the Guggenheim Virtual Museum, “The virtual museum is an ideal space for the deployment and experience of art and events created specifically for the interactive digital medium where simultaneous participation, as well as viewing, is made possible for an audience distributed around the globe.” (www.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/virtual/virtual_museum.html) In summary, the conclusions drawn in this chapter point to opportunities for further study. Chapter VI considers some possibilities for such research.
43 CHAPTER VI RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
This study investigated visitor responses to virtual museum exhibits and explored the relationship between virtual exhibitions and visitor opinions in order to determine the components of a well-constructed museum exhibit website. This chapter will discuss the implications of the findings and make recommendations for future research and practice in the field of museum studies.
Recommendations for Practice
The implications of the findings of the study point to several recommendations for research and practice. First, because virtual museum exhibits are more accessible, the number of visits individuals make to virtual exhibits tends to be greater than to physical exhibits. Because virtual exhibits exist online, they can be visited repeatedly 24 hours a day. In this study, respondents reported an average of only two visits a year to physical museums. Thus virtual exhibits could be a powerful medium to increase the exposure of the public to museum exhibits. The effort and expense involved in creating virtual museum exhibitions, then, may prove useful for extending the reach of museums into a broader online community. Second, museums can collaborate more readily with schools through virtual museum exhibits. Because of the accessibility of virtual exhibits, teachers can easily use them in the classroom as teaching tools. Third, though most respondents said that virtual museum exhibits could never replace physical museums, the converse is true as well. Virtual exhibits not only enrich the experience of visitors to physical museums, but also provide a unique experience that cannot be duplicated in real life.
44 The study also points to the future role of interior design in virtual space or cyberspace. Virtual space can be seen as a non-physical terrain created by computer systems (www.webopedia.com). Unlike virtual exhibits simulated in physical museums, the virtual museum exhibit stands independent from a physical building and resides only on the Internet. Interior designers may use computer graphics to experiment with cinematic, animated, documentary, and walk-through approaches, and create unique and unexpected virtual museum designs. The demonstrated benefits of the virtual museum experience for the respondents in this study suggests that exhibition designers as well as interior designers explore virtual space to push the boundaries of an expanding field. Asymptote Architecture principals (1999) have high hopes for the future role of architecture in cyberspace as well stating, “ They think that current trends in Internet commerce are dull. And current technology does not interact as humans interact with real buildings”. For example, “a bookstore site might be designed to contain many of the features and richness of the real bookstore, the lounging around, the browsing through book sections, the chances of socializing” (Andia & Busch, 1999). Much in the same way, architects have a role in conceiving and constructing virtual museums in the future. In addition, interactive devices should be developed to provide visitors with more opportunities to become involved in the exhibition. Johnson (2003), a creative director of a web environment, noted, “ the evolution of interactive media means the story no longer focuses in one direction, from the one to the many. We provide the characters, the stage, music, information, imagery and atmosphere that visitors use to weave their own story”(www.secondstory.com). In this study, icon design as an interactive device was seen as crucial for navigating websites. Finally, the study implied that at this point, in time, museums should not be replaced by the Internet, because the museum represents an entire package of aesthetic experiences. However, virtual exhibits allow visitors to construct new experiences with museum exhibits, which in turn can enhance exhibit viewing in physical museums. Although 76% (combined 4 and 5 response on a 5-point Likert scale) of participants reported a preference for a physical museum exhibit, they also said that if the exhibition
45 only had been available for viewing in a physical museum, they would not have been able to see it due to the time, distance, and money involved.
Recommendations for Future Research
The data revealed that, overall, respondents enjoyed viewing the virtual museum exhibits. However, they still preferred to visit a physical museum, because of the ability to view objects up-close and in person there. This preference for greater intimacy with physical objects brings up the question, “How can virtual museum exhibits overcome the intimacy issue?” Such intimacy issues are not restricted to virtual museum exhibits, but also extend to online formats of other events, such as on-line conferences and online concerts. One interesting finding of the study was that the respondents' opinions of both physical and virtual museums seem to be influenced by the frequency of their exposure to virtual exhibits. In comparison with respondents who had never before viewed a virtual exhibit, respondents who had viewed a virtual exhibit prior to the study answered that they were not likely to visit an exhibition totally virtually in the future. Future research might reveal why the opinions of those who have seen a virtual exhibit more than once differ from those who have seen a virtual exhibition only once.
46 APPENDIX A HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL LETTER
47 48 APPENDIX B SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
49 Survey Questionnaire
Dear Respondents,
I am a graduate student under the direction of professor Lisa Waxman in the department of Interior Design at Florida State University. As part of my thesis, I am conducting a research study to explore the relationship between virtual exhibitions and visitors’ responses.
I am requesting your participation, which will involve viewing and interacting with a museum exhibition website and filling out a survey. This process should take 30 minutes, which will include your navigation of the website.
All answers will be kept confidential. The results of the study may be published, but your name will not be revealed.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty.
Your contribution will help to improve the area of new technology in museum exhibitions. I hope you will agree to participate.
Thank you.
Namjin Park Lisa Waxman Graduate Student Associate Professor of Interior Design of Interior Design
50 Part A
Answer the following questions by placing a check or writing the information in the space provided.
1. What is your gender? female ______male ______
2. What is your current major? ______
3. What is your age? ______
4. What degree are you currently pursuing?
Bachelor’s ______Master’s ______Ph. D ______Other ______If so, which degree ______
5. You will be viewing the ______website, which addresses ______.
Are you interested in the theme or subject of the exhibition that you will view?
yes ______no ______
51 For the purpose of this study, physical museum exhibitions exist in a building, while a virtual museum exists on-line.
6. Have you ever visited a museum? yes_____ no_____
IF NO, PLEASE TURN TO NEXT PAGE…
7. How frequently do you visit a museum (physically) in a year?
______times
Please rate your general experience of visiting physical museum exhibitions according to the following scales.
When I visit physical exhibitions, it is important to me that I : Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree/ Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 8 Can view art / artifacts in real life 1 2 3 4 5 9 Have the opportunity to observe art / artifacts up close 1 2 3 4 5
When I visit physical museum exhibitions, I : Never Almost never Sometimes Almost always Always 10 Read object caption labels (object titles) 1 2 3 4 5 11 Read exhibit label copy (explanations) 1 2 3 4 5 12 Use audio-guide (if free) 1 2 3 4 5 13 Use audio-guide (if not free) 1 2 3 4 5 14 Follow a docent-led tour (*a docent is a guide.) 1 2 3 4 5 15 Participate in educational activities related to the exhibit 1 2 3 4 5
52 16. Have you heard about virtual museum exhibits? yes_____ no_____
17. Have you ever viewed a virtual museum exhibit? yes_____ no_____
IF NO, PLEASE STOP QUESTIONNAIRE AND VIEW THE VIRTUAL MUSEUM EXHIBIT PROVIDED.
IF YES, PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS #18- #28.
18. How frequently do you view a virtual museum exhibit each year?
______times
Please rate your general experience of viewing virtual museum exhibitions according to the following scales.
When I view virtual museum exhibits, it is important to me that I Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree/ Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 19 Can manipulate art / artifacts (e.g. rotating or zooming) 1 2 3 4 5 20 Can learn more details about art / artifacts 1 2 3 4 5
When I view virtual museum exhibitions, I : Never Almost never Sometimes Almost always Always 21 Read object caption labels (object titles) 1 2 3 4 5 22 Read exhibit label copies (explanations) 1 2 3 4 5 23 Request more detailed information about art / artifacts 1 2 3 4 5 24 Listen to some of the Audio explanation 1 2 3 4 5 25 Listen to all of the Audio explanation 1 2 3 4 5 26 Watch some of the Video 1 2 3 4 5 27 Watch all of the Video 1 2 3 4 5 28 Participate in activities or games related to an exhibition 1 2 3 4 5
PLEASE VIEW THE VIRTUAL MUSEUM EXHIBIT PROVIDED NOW.
53 After viewing the virtual museum exhibition, please complete this portion of questionnaire Part B
Answer the following questions by circling or writing the information in the space provided.
Please indicate the degree to which you agree with the following statements relating to the quality of the virtual exhibit you viewed. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree/ Agree Strongly Agree 29 It was easy to navigate the exhibit. 1 2 3 4 5 30 The exhibit was well organized. 1 2 3 4 5 31 There were no technical problems. 1 2 3 4 5 32 The overall message of exhibit was effectively delivered. 1 2 3 4 5 33 The text was well written and informative. 1 2 3 4 5 34 The visual objects (art & artifacts) were informative and 1 2 3 4 5 effective. 35 The audio helped me to understand the exhibit effectively. 1 2 3 4 5 36 The video image clips helped me to understand the 1 2 3 4 5 exhibit effectively. 37 The ability to zoom and rotate objects was effective. 1 2 3 4 5 38 Overall, quality of the music and/or sound was 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. 39 The meanings of the icons were clear. 1 2 3 4 5 40 I enjoyed the art activities or games. 1 2 3 4 5 41 The overall quality of photographs was appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5 42 The color schemes were attractive. 1 2 3 4 5 43 The frame, format, or lay-out was appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5 44 The style of text font was appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5 45 The size of text font was appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5 46 The sounds that occurred when the web site started were 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. 47 The sounds that occur when buttons are selected were 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. 48 The sounds that occur when scenes change were 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. 49 The explanations by artist, curator, or narrator were 1 2 3 4 5 helpful.
54 Please answer the following question: Extremely dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neither satisfied / dissatisfied Satisfied Extremely satisfied 50 Rate your overall satisfaction with the virtual museum exhibit you just viewed. 1 2 3 4 5
Please rate the importance of being able to do the following:
It was important to me that I could Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree/ Agree Strongly Agree 51 Manipulate art / artifacts (e.g. rotating or zooming) 1 2 3 4 5 52 Learn more details about art / artifacts 1 2 3 4 5 53 Read object caption labels 1 2 3 4 5 54 Read exhibit label copy 1 2 3 4 5 55 Request more detailed information about art / artifacts 1 2 3 4 5 56 Listen to audio 1 2 3 4 5 57 Watch video 1 2 3 4 5 58 Participate in activities or games related to an exhibition 1 2 3 4 5
55 Please answer the following questions: Not likely Definitely 59 Would you have preferred to visit this exhibit physically? (Instead of on-line) 1 2 3 4 5 60 Would you consider viewing an exhibit totally virtually in the future? 1 2 3 4 5
Please rate the importance of the following to you in why and when you would choose a physical museum exhibition over a virtual museum exhibition.
It is important to me that I: Virtually Physically 61 Can view art / artifacts in real life 1 2 3 4 5 62 Have the opportunity to art / artifacts up close 1 2 3 4 5 63 Read object caption labels 1 2 3 4 5 64 Read exhibit label copy 1 2 3 4 5 65 Use audio-guide (if free) 1 2 3 4 5 66 Use audio-guide (if not free) 1 2 3 4 5 67 Follow a docent-led tour 1 2 3 4 5 68 Participate in educational activities related to an 1 2 3 4 5 exhibition
Thank you for completing the questionnaire! Please see the next page.
56 Part C
If you are willing to participate in a follow-up interview, please specify your name and email address. This interview will allow me to gain additional valuable insight into virtual exhibitions. It will take a maximum of 30 minutes and can be scheduled at your convenience.
Name______Email address ______
I appreciate your help!
57 Interview Questions
• What is the name of the program in which you are enrolled? What degree and /or certificate do you intend to earn? What is your career plan after graduating?
• Tell me about the visual images or elements that stood out as particularly interesting.
• What features would have made the virtual exhibition more meaningful to you?
• What parts of the show did you seem to have difficulty using?
• What have you learned from viewing this exhibition?
• What suggestions do you have for improving this virtual exhibition?
• Overall, how would you describe the virtual exhibition experience?
• Would you consider viewing an exhibit totally virtually in the future?
• Do you think virtual exhibition is an effective way of communicating with viewers? Why?
58 Observation Codes TIME Other Interact with exhibit Consistent attention Read label and text Laugh Point to some part of exhibit reactionBodily carefullyListening Distracted by something outReading loud Shows frustration
5
10
15
20
25
59 APPENDIX C
FREQUENCY & MEANS OF FINDINGS
60 1.What is your gender? n=25 Frequency Percent Female 23 92 Male 2 8
3.What is your age? n=25 Mean=22.4 Frequency Percent 20 5 20 21 5 20 22 5 20 23 1 4 24 1 4 26 2 8 27 1 4 29 2 8 33 1 4 34 1 4 38 1 4
4.What degree are you currently pursuing? n=25 Frequency Percent Bachelor’s 20 80 Master’s 3 12 Ph.D 2 8
5.Website viewed. n=25 Frequency Percent The Virtual Smithsonian 12 48 The Ball Game 13 52
5-1. Are you interested in the theme or subject of the exhibition that you will view? n=22 Frequency Percent The Virtual Yes Smithsonian No The Ball Yes Game No
6. Have you ever visited a museum (physically)? n=25 Frequency Percent Yes 25 100 No 0 0
61 7. How frequently do you visit a museum (physically) in a year? n=24 Mean = 2.29 Number of visits / year Frequency Percent 1 11 45.83 2 5 20.83 3 4 16.67 4 2 8.33 5 1 4.17 9 1 4.17
When I visit physical exhibitions, it is important to me that I: 8. Can view art / artifacts in real life. n=25 Mean = 4.04 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 3 12 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 1 4 Agree 4 10 40 Strongly Agree 5 11 44
9. Have the opportunity to observe art / artifacts up close. n=25 Mean = 4.00 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 4 16 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 1 4 Agree 4 7 28 Strongly Agree 5 13 52
When I visit physical museum exhibitions, I: 10. Read object caption labels. n=25 Mean = 3.84 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 8 32 Agree 4 13 52 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
11. Read exhibit label copy. n=25 Mean =3.68 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 11 44 Agree 4 11 44 Strongly Agree 5 3 12
12. Use audio-guide, if free. n=25 Mean=3.16 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 4 16 Disagree 2 3 12 Neither 3 7 28 Agree 4 7 28 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
62 13. Use audio-guide, if not free. n=24 Mean= 2.29 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 9 37.50 Disagree 2 5 20.83 Neither 3 5 20.83 Agree 4 4 16.67 Strongly Agree 5 1 4.17
14. Follow a docent-led tour. n=25 Mean= 2.68 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 2 8 Disagree 2 8 32 Neither 3 12 48 Agree 4 2 8 Strongly Agree 5 1 4
15. Participate in educational activities related to the exhibit. n=25 Mean= 2.48 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 5 20 Disagree 2 9 36 Neither 3 5 20 Agree 4 6 24 Strongly Agree 5 0 0
16. Have you heard about virtual museum exhibits? n=25 Frequency Percent Yes 11 44 No 14 56
17. Have you ever viewed a virtual museum exhibit? n=25 Frequency Percent Yes 5 20 No 20 80
18. How frequently do you view a virtual museum exhibit each year? n=5 Number of views / year Frequency Percent 1 3 60 2 1 20 5 1 20
When I view virtual museum exhibits, it is important to me that I: 19. Can manipulate art / artifacts. n=5 Mean= 3.80 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 40 Agree 4 2 40 Strongly Agree 5 1 20
63 20. Can learn more details about art / artifacts. n=5 Mean= 4.20 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 1 20 Agree 4 2 40 Strongly Agree 5 2 40
When I view virtual museum exhibitions, I: 21. Read object caption labels. n=5 Mean= 3.60 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 40 Agree 4 3 60 Strongly Agree 5 0 0
22. Read exhibit label copies. n=5 Mean= 3.80 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 40 Agree 4 2 40 Strongly Agree 5 1 20
23. Request more detailed information about art / artifacts. n=5 Mean= 3.20 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 4 80 Agree 4 1 20 Strongly Agree 5 0 0
24. Listen to some of the Audio. n=5 Mean= 3.40 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 4 80 Agree 4 0 0 Strongly Agree 5 1 20
25. Listen to all of the Audio. n=5 Mean= 2.40 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 3 60 Neither 3 2 40 Agree 4 0 0 Strongly Agree 5 0 0
64 26. Watch some of the Video. n=5 Mean= 3.40 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 20 Neither 3 2 40 Agree 4 1 20 Strongly Agree 5 1 20
27. Watch all of the Video. n=5 Mean= 2.60 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 20 Disagree 2 1 20 Neither 3 2 40 Agree 4 1 20 Strongly Agree 5 0 0
28. Participate in activities or games related to an exhibition. n=5 Mean= 2.40 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 20 Disagree 2 2 40 Neither 3 1 20 Agree 4 1 20 Strongly Agree 5 0 0
29. It was easy to navigate the exhibit. n=25 Mean= 4.32 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 0 0 Agree 4 14 56 Strongly Agree 5 10 40
30. The exhibit was well organized. n=23 Mean= 4.22 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 8.70 Agree 4 14 60.87 Strongly Agree 5 7 30.43
31. There were no technical problems n=24 mean= 3.33 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4.17 Disagree 2 6 25 Neither 3 3 12.50 Agree 4 12 50 Strongly Agree 5 2 8.33
65 32. The overall message of exhibit was effectively delivered. n=24 Mean= 4.17 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 8.33 Agree 4 16 66.67 Strongly Agree 5 6 25
33. The text was well written and informative. n=24 Mean= 4.17 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4.17 Neither 3 0 0 Agree 4 17 70.83 Strongly Agree 5 6 25
34. The visual objects were informative and effective. n=25 Mean= 3.96 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 15 60 Strongly Agree 5 5 20
35. The audio plays helped me to understand the exhibit effectively. n=25 Mean= 3.92 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 2 8 Neither 3 5 20 Agree 4 7 28 Strongly Agree 5 10 40
36. The video image clips helped me to understand the exhibit effectively. n=25 Mean= 4.20 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 9 36 Strongly Agree 5 11 44
37. The ability to zoom and rotate objects was effective. n=25 mean= 3.60 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 12 48 Agree 4 8 32 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
66 38. Overall, quality of the music and / or sound was appropriate. n=25 Mean= 4.00 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 3 12 Agree 4 12 48 Strongly Agree 5 8 32
39. The meanings of the icons were clear. n=25 Mean= 3.92 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 16 64 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
40. I enjoyed the art activities or games. n=24 Mean= 3.88 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4.17 Neither 3 7 29.17 Agree 4 10 41.67 Strongly Agree 5 6 25
41. The overall quality of photographs was appropriate. n=25 Mean= 4.16 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 1 4 Agree 4 16 64 Strongly Agree 5 7 28
42. The color schemes were attractive. n=25 mean= 4.28 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 1 4 Agree 4 16 64 Strongly Agree 5 8 32
43. The frame, format, or lay-out was appropriate. n=25 Mean= 4.16 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 2 8 Agree 4 14 56 Strongly Agree 5 8 32
67 44. The style of text font was appropriate. n=25 Mean= 4.16 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 8 Agree 4 17 68 Strongly Agree 5 6 24
45. The size of text font was appropriate. n=24 Mean= 3.96 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 2 8.33 Neither 3 3 12.50 Agree 4 13 54.17 Strongly Agree 5 6 25
46. The sounds that occurred when the website started were appropriate. n=25 Mean= 4.08 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 1 4 Agree 4 14 56 Strongly Agree 5 8 32
47. The sounds that occur when buttons are selected were appropriate. n=25 Mean= 3.84 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 6 24 Agree 4 10 40 Strongly Agree 5 7 28
48. The sounds that occur when scenes change were appropriate. n=25 Mean= 3.92 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 12 48 Strongly Agree 5 7 28
49. The explanations by artist, curator, or narrator were helpful. n=25 Mean= 4.00 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 2 8 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 11 44 Strongly Agree 5 8 32
68 50. Rate your overall satisfaction with the virtual museum exhibit you just viewed. n=25 Mean= 3.88 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 2 8 Neither 3 3 12 Agree 4 16 64 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
It was important to me that I could 51. Manipulate art / artifacts. n=25 Mean= 4.04 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 6 24 Agree 4 12 48 Strongly Agree 5 7 28
52. Learn more details about art / artifacts. n=25 Mean= 4.24 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 3 12 Agree 4 13 52 Strongly Agree 5 9 36
53. Read object caption labels. n=25 Mean= 4.08 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 15 60 Strongly Agree 5 6 24
54. Read exhibit label copy. n=25 Mean= 3.92 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 5 20 Agree 4 14 56 Strongly Agree 5 5 20
55. Request more detailed information about art / artifacts. n=25 Mean= 3.60 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 7 28 Agree 4 14 56 Strongly Agree 5 2 8
69 56. Listen to audio. n=24 Mean= 4.00 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4.17 Disagree 2 2 8.33 Neither 3 2 8.33 Agree 4 10 41.67 Strongly Agree 5 9 37.50
57. Watch video. n=25 Mean= 4.12 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 4 16 Agree 4 11 44 Strongly Agree 5 9 36
58. Participate in activities or games related to an exhibition. n=25 Mean= 3.76 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 2 8 Neither 3 11 44 Agree 4 3 12 Strongly Agree 5 9 36
59. Would you have preferred to visit this exhibit (or parts of it) physically? n=25 Mean= 3.96 Frequency Percent Not likely 1 2 8 2 3 12 3 1 4 4 7 28 Definitely 5 12 48
60. Would you consider viewing an exhibit totally virtually in the future? n=25 Mean= 3.00 Frequency Percent Not likely 1 5 20 2 4 16 3 6 24 4 6 24 Definitely 5 4 16
It is important to me that I: 61. Can view art / artifacts in real life. n=25 Mean= 4.72 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 0 0 Disagree 2 0 0 Neither 3 2 8 Agree 4 3 12 Strongly Agree 5 20 80
70 62. Have the opportunity to art / artifacts up close. n=25 mean= 4.44 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 1 4 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 2 8 Agree 4 3 12 Strongly Agree 5 18 72
63. Read object caption labels. n=25 Mean= 2.88 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 8 32 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 6 24 Agree 4 6 24 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
64. Read exhibit label copy. n=25 Mean= 3.04 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 6 24 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 9 36 Agree 4 4 16 Strongly Agree 5 5 20
65. Use audio-guide, if free. n=25 Mean= 2.92 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 8 32 Disagree 2 1 4 Neither 3 8 32 Agree 4 1 4 Strongly Agree 5 7 28
66. Use audio-guide, if not free. n=25 Mean= 2.48 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 9 36 Disagree 2 2 8 Neither 3 10 40 Agree 4 1 4 Strongly Agree 5 3 12
67. Follow a docent-led tour. n=25 Mean= 3.20 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 3 12 Disagree 2 2 8 Neither 3 11 44 Agree 4 5 20 Strongly Agree 5 4 16
71 68. Participate in educational activities related to an exhibition. n=24 Mean= 2.67 Frequency Percent Strongly Disagree 1 5 20.83 Disagree 2 3 12.50 Neither 3 13 54.17 Agree 4 1 4.17 Strongly Agree 5 2 8.33
72 APPENDIX D
INTERVIEW RESULTS
73 Major Visual image Meaningful features Difficulty using Learning experience Suggestions for improving Virtual exhibit experience Exhibits totally virtually in the future Effective way of communicating? Comment #1 Zoom in and Easy When I tried to General history More technical It seems to be No. It should co- No. It may be The Virtual Art education out device that accessibility use video of Smithsonian development that the virtual exist with for personal Smithsonian and Museum help us look at program, Museum. needed, exhibition physical enjoyment Studies in 1year very minute 24 hours open to Some of image Lots of E.g. my own enhances museum. It has to detail of the the public didn’t provide information of collection program visitor’s visiting play a role as artwork. video program museum to physical visit facilitator for Comfortable. collections. to real museum. visiting physical museum. #2 3-D space as a Being able to No Actual pieces of More range in what Interesting, I No, Yes, it was If I have a The Virtual Interior Design- representative visit of artwork, artwork they have, more never thought I wouldn’t go to informative and chance, I Smithsonian Track V of door way of pretty neat, look fine arts about it. real museum, I helpful. would go to the museum. like a textbook. definitely choose real Ability to zoom virtually. I enjoyed Smithsonian. in and out, easy reading stories Motivation. to navigate. It wouldn’t be as and texts. * But, whole great. benefit of it in person (physical exhibit)
#3 The game was The voice over I wasn’t clear How to make Make it more It was interesting Yes, Yes, viewers that The Interior Design, fun, guy was more when to click rubber and direct… where to and I learned a If it were a have short Mesoamerica Grad. informative, recognizable and on icons to find where it comes click and when lot. museum, I attention spans Ballgame and not a monotone. out more from thought I would (?) will learn stimulating. information. never be able to more from direct attend. stimulation of the graphics. They won’t have as many opportunities to get distracted. #4 Interior Design- Watching the It was No. Context and View artifacts, Never see before No. Yes, large The Track III game informative and messages, how pre-information. audience, Mesoamerica (She had viewed I learned a lot. they perceived Good to be able to accessibility Ballgame the virtual exhibit The activity that Artifacts see before go to prior to the wearing clothes actual museum study) by clicking icon #5 Lots of Learned a lot Missing some of Different I like audio play. Very positive for Personally, I do think The Interior Design- graphics, from it. Icon. Culture. Let your mind in it educational museum should effective way. Going to Mesoamerica Track V bright Color, Seeing it visually Instead of (Involvement). purposes. never replace by I highly museum is Ballgame (She had viewed logo, icon, helps understand. scattered, she It was It is tool. Internet. recommend it entire package the virtual exhibit interactions For educational suggested that informative. Make them more in If physical would be good experiences. prior to the purpose, easier icons are in it. exhibits would Virtual exhibits learning tool for study) It wouldn’t be understand. order in left- be live concerts, are not living school system. boring. Instead of hand side. That virtual exhibits house. Using website is looking, It helps way, students could be listing another kind of go through stuff. won’t skip over to radio. tool for teaching. questions. 74 REFERENCES
Andia, Alfredo & Busch, Claudia. (1999). Architects design cyberspace and real space for the NYSE. The Architecture of Cyberspace (On-line), http://www.asymptote- architecture.com/frameset.html.
Alexander, E.P. (1979). Museums in motion: an introduction to the history and functions of museums. The American Association for State and Local History.
Appelbaum, R. (1996). Activating public space to echo a museum’s message and provoke multiple levels for response. In R. S. Wurman (Ed.), Information Architects. Graphis Press Corp.
Belcher, M. (1991). Exhibition in museums. Smithsonian Institution Press.
Besser, H. (1997). The transformation of the museum and the way it’s perceived. In K. Jones-Garmil (Ed.), The wired museum: Emerging technology and changing paradigms. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Museums.
Bitgood, S. (1993). Putting the horse before the cart: a conceptual analysis of educational exhibits. In S. Bicknell and G. Farmelo (Eds.), Museum visitor studies in the 90s, science museum. Exhibition Road:London.
Borysewicz, S. (1998). Networked media: The experience is closer than you think. In S. Thomas & A. Mintz (Eds), The virtual and the real: Media in the museum. Washing, D.C.; American Association of Museums.
Caulton, T. (1998). Hands-on exhibitions-managing interactive museums and science centres, London and New York: Routledge.
Delson, S. (2002). Wiring into a changing climate-museums & digital art. Museums News. March / April 2002, 51-55, 63.
Diamond, J. (1999). Practical evaluation guide tools for museums and other informal educational settings; AltaMira Press.
Fahy, A. (1995). New technologies for museum communication. In E. Hooper- Greenhill (Ed.), Museum, Media, Message. New York: Routledge.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design & evaluate research In education-fourth edition; McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
75 Hafner, K. & Lyon, M. (1996). Where wizards stay up late-The origins of the Internet. Simon & Schuster: New York, NY.
Hein, H. S. (2000). The museum in transition- A philosophical perspective. Smithsonian institution press.
Hein, G. E. (1998). Learning in the museum. London: Routledge. Henderson, A. & Watts, S. (2000). How they learn: the family in the museum. Museum News. November / December 2000, 41-45, 67.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2000). Museums in the Interpretation of Visual Culture. London: Routledge.
Johnson, B. (2003). Secondstory: Interactive design firm website. http://www.secondstory.com.
Johnson, S. (1997). Interface culture: How new technology transforms the way we create and communicate. HarperCollins.
Leedy, P. D. (2001). Practice Research: seventh edition. ; New Jersey : Merrill Prentice hall
Lewis, G. D. (1984). Collections, collectors and museums: a brief world survey. In: J.M.AThompson and others (eds.), the manual of curatorship (133), 7~22. London: Butterworths.
Marty, P. F. (1999). On-line exhibition design: the socio-technological impact of building a museum over the world wide web. In D. Bearman and J. Trant (Eds), Museums and the Web 1999: Selected papers from an international conference. Archives & Museum Informatics, 207-215.
Marty, P. F. (2003). Museum informatics. In B. Cronin (Ed) Annual Review of Information Science and Technology Vol. 37 : New Jersey, Information Today.
Mintz, A. (1998). Media and museums: A museum perspective. In S. Thomas & A. Mintz (Eds), The virtual and the real: Media in the museum. Washing, D.C. : American Association of Museums.
Schwarzer, M. (2001). Art & gadgetry: the future of the museum visit. Museum News. July / August 2001, 36-68.
Serrell, B. (1998). Paying attention: Visitors and museum exhibitions. American Association of Museums. Washington, DC.
76 Teather, L. & Wilhelm, K. (1999). “Web musing” evaluating museums on the web from learning theory to museology. In D. Bearman and J. Trant (Eds) Museums and the Web 1999: Selected papers from an international conference. Archives & Museum Informatics.
Watts, B. J. (1999). Interactive media in museum environments: Perceptions about its use. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Wayne State University; Michigan.
West, S. E. (1998). Art museum web sites as resources for educators and students; Development, utilization, and evaluation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University: Florida.
Whitney, B. (1998). An investigation into the use of world wide web technologies within interior design programs in higher education. Unpublished master’s thesis, Florida State University: Florida.
Woodhead, P. and Stansfield, G. (1989). Keyguide to information sources in museum studies. London and New York: Mansell.
Wurman, R. S. (1996), Information Architects. Graphis Press Corp.
77 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Her academic background includes BFA and MFA degrees in Interior Design at the Ewha Womans University in Seoul, South Korea. She has recently completed her second master’s program at the Florida State University. Studying at the Florida State University has allowed her many opportunities including teaching experiences and preparing for new responsibility as a researcher in Interior Design field. In her professional life, she worked for the Lotte department store as a visual merchandising designer and at Samsung Museums as an exhibition designer. Her work at these museums included the master planning of the Samsung Children’s Museum as a design coordinator. Furthermore, in 1998 she worked for the team at the Rodin Gallery in Seoul, an experience, which gave her the opportunity to work with individuals from different countries and professional backgrounds. She will be teaching at the Savannah College of Art & Design in fall 2003 as an Interior design instructor. She is a member of IDEC.
78