Interpretation Preferences: How 40,000 museum-goers prefer to experience museums

Reach Advisors welcomes first-time blogger and newly-minted Reach Advisors Fellow Ken Bubp.  Ken is the COO of Conner Prairie Interactive History Park, and is delving into some of our research findings as well.  You can expect more posts from Ken over the coming months.

So, we’ve got some really rich data here about what sort of experiences people who already visit museums prefer.  

In last week’s post on how family audiences and adult audiences differ, we explored the results of our recent study of 40,000 museum-going households at a top level, in their relationship to different types of museums (art, science, history-based, children’s, etc.). It’s time to dive deeper into one of the most interesting questions—how people prefer to experience museums—and, specifically, to look through the lens of these different types of museums.

The responses are more than a little surprising.

First, we asked respondents how they prefer to experience museums and historic sites. Respondents were given a list of options, and could choose more than one (to see the full question and list, please scroll down to the bottom of this post).

Let’s look at this from two angles: which types of experiences have the highest priority within each type of museum, and how do the different types of experiences compare across genres?

First, what are the top four preferences for each type of museum?

 

	Type of museum visitor
	Art museum	Science museum	History-based museum	Children's museum
Preference #1	On our own (72% prefer)	Hands on activities (70% prefer)	On our own (60% prefer)	Hands on activities (76% prefer)
#2	Viewing objects/object-based exhibits (48%)	On our own (62%)	By talking with staff (59%)	On our own (61%)
#3	Attending programs/ events (45%)	By talking with staff (42%)	Viewing objects /object-based exhibits (48%)	Attending programs/ events (34%)
#4	Audio tours (38%)	Attending programs/ events (42%)	Attending programs/events (46%)	Viewing objects (32%)
	Gray shaded boxes = items rating at greater than 50% of respondents.

A few observations:

• Self-curated experiences:  Majorities of museum-goers across genres want to explore on their own, with little/no staff facilitation. This response appears in one of the top two boxes across every type, with notable consistency. In fact, no other preferred interpretation approach appears more than twice in the top two boxes. We found that art museum visitors had the strongest preference for experiencing the museum on their own, with nearly three-quarters saying so.
• History-based museums want to be on their own and to interact with staff. These visitors enjoy self-guided experiences, but they want staff around to spur those experiences on. Is this contradictory? Not necessarily when you consider that the granddaddy of all staff-based visitor experiences—the guided tour—appears nowhere in the top four for history-based museums (or anywhere else). This group wants staff to interact with, but not to direct their visit. Too many “I’m being held hostage by my guide!” bad prior experiences?
• For children’s museums, after the top two preferences, everything else is a distant preference. Visitors here want to guide their own visit, with lots of hands on activities—and nothing else really is comparably as important. As we posted previously, 88% of all respondents in this category were parents with children, which most certainly drives the responses here.
• Interacting with a computer: This does not appear in any of the genres in the top four. The highest score for this preference was with science centers, but still we found that fewer than 1 in 5 Core Visitors to science centers indicated this as a preference. This is consistent with our previous research: that overt computer technology at museums is generally unimportant to visitors (technology-as-technology, if you will), but integrated, seamless, or “unnoticed” technology holds a higher standing precisely because it is not overt. Parents in particular express a desire for a place where their kids can be unplugged.  Keep in mind, however, that this was a survey of Core Visitors to museums.  We do not know how less frequent visitors, or the general public, feels on this issue.

 

And here’s an unexpected finding: Viewing objects and object-based exhibits (including pieces of artwork, dioramas, or artifacts) does not seem to be that important to museums-goers, in their overall hierarchy of importance.

Let that sink in.

OK, perhaps it’s no real surprise that people visiting children’s museums prefer hands-on activities that engage their children, and that just less than 1 in 3 in this group expressed a preference for viewing objects. But the importance of viewing objects to those in all other categories is still less than 50%. Fewer than half of all respondents—no matter the museum type—said that viewing objects or object-based exhibits was important to them. Surprising. Before we collected the data, we expected this number to be at least 70% for art and history-based museums. This is a fascinating puzzle to try to unwind, especially in light of the centrality of objects in childhood museum memoires, so we’ll be exploring this further in future posts. 

The implications of all of this on museum work are huge, from strategy development to how we deliver day-to-day experiences. We’ll keep peeling back the onion here, and examine the interpretation preferences among family audiences and adult audiences next week.

-  Ken Bubp, 2010 Reach Advisors Fellow

What do you think?  To share, simply click on “comments” below.  (If you are reading this from your e-mail subscription to the blog, please go to our blog's website to add a comment.)

 

Exact survey question:

How do you prefer to experience museums and historic sites?  (Choose the answers most important to you.)

• Guided tours
• By talking with staff, such as explainers, costumed interpreters, scientists, historians, or docents
• On our own, but with text panels and/or brochures or books
• Audio tours (including podcasts and cell phone tours)
• Through hands-on activities
• Viewing objects and object-based exhibits, like a piece of art, historic artifact, or diorama
• Watching theatre performances
• Through role-play
• By attending programs and events
• By watching video clips or movies
• By interacting with a computer, that has more information, databases, or games
• None of the above
• Other, please specify in 7 words or less

Comments

[Robert]

Maybe I'm not understanding something. What's the difference between being "on our own" and "viewing objects and object-based exhibits"? If you're on your own, aren't you doing something? I think the implication of "with text panels and/or brochures" is that you're viewing an exhibition (of some variety) with interpretation. If they want interpretation with no objects, then aren't they looking for a library?

It seems to me that there are two different categories here. Items such as tours (guided and audio) and being on your own are the ways individuals choose to consume content. Items such as exhibitions, programs, movies, podcasts and theater are the ways in which the museum presents content. It makes sense that when you ask "How do you prefer to experience museums and historic sites?", people are first going to think about the choices they make, not the choices they all too often never see being made.

[Ken Bubp]

Robert,

Good observation. One way I thought about the difference between "on our own" and "viewing objects and object-based exhibits" was reflecting on a recent trip to a children's museum. Lots and lots of moms (and some dads) appeared were on their own interacting with the exhibits, but the objects in the exhibits (what few there were in this particular exhibit) were not at all central parts of the experience for those moms and their kids. They were comfortable being "left alone" and exploring on their own.

This seems a little harder to explain when it comes to art or history-based museums, especially since "on our own" and "by talking with staff" were preferred to the same degree. Still, it seems plausible that people here (as well as at children's museums) want self-curated/self-guided/on my own experiences to play a significant role.

One last thought: Because people could select multiple options when answering this question, the gap between "viewing objects" and "on our own"--as well as the other options--tells us something about their conscious, stated preferences. They might appear inconsistent as you point out (What are they doing, then, while they are on their own??), but these are their stated preferences. Thanks for starting the conversation trying to unpack what seems a bit out of order at first blush.

[Amelia]

I think the way the category of viewing art/exhibitions is worded might be part of the reason for the low results it got in the survey. The word "object" and especially "object-based" is museum jargon. When ordinary visitors talk about seeing art or historic artifacts, they don't use the word "objects" - they say words like "antique" or "painting." While the category is somewhat explained ("like a piece of art, historic artifact, or diorama"), I think the word "object" is off-putting and vague. I wonder if a category like "visiting special exhibitions" or "viewing works of art and artifacts" would garner the same results.

[Susie Wilkening, Reach Advisors]

Thanks for the comments.

When we design surveys, we always try to second-guess ourselves to make sure we are asking things the right way. Robert, your comment on two different categories is something we were quite conscious of. But we also know that while, within the field, we see those different categories, we also know from previous testing of this question with museum-goers that they do not perceive it the same way. That is, this list, for the vast majority of museum goers, is one cohesive group of different things they may experience at a museum. And since this is a survey of museum goers, we have to work within their framework, not an internal one.

A few more thoughts on perceptions by museum goers of what "on our own" means.

1 - Many exhibits, like Ken pointed out, are not object-based. He covered this very well, so I won't!

2 - Many things we consider exhibits and objects are not perceived the same way by visitors. In particular, outdoor spaces are not perceived to be exhibits of objects by many visitors, affecting how botanical gardens, arboretums, zoos, and historic sites are perceived. That visitors may be seeing loads of objects, but they don't think of them as objects, and in this case, indicating visiting on own, but not marking objects as a preferred experience, is not at all inconsistent to many visitors.

3 - The social aspect of visits is also key. That is, groups of friends, family groups, etc., may want to visit on their own as a social outing, and again objects are not the focus. And they also want to indicate a minimum of facilitation by staff, as that may affect the social nature of a visit (think guided tour, audio tour, etc.). We'll be exploring these motivations in more detail in the coming months.

Amelia - I like the way you worded "viewing works of art or artifacts." When we designed this question, we looked back at previous versions of the question we have utilized and/or tested, and we also looked at the words respondents to museum surveys in the past used when entering in written-in comments. The word "objects" was very much used by museum respondents in the past, indicating to us that it is not museum jargon at all. (Another word commonly used is . . . "stuff." Really. We also see "things" a lot.) We never see the word "collections," so that is the true jargon term.

That being said, that doesn't mean that the way we worded it is the best. Our surveys are continually evolving over time, as we refine, test, analyze, refine, and test. It is quite likely that next time we test a survey we'll borrow your phrase and list "viewing works of art, historic artifacts, dioramas, or other objects" as an option.

Thanks again for the comments!

[Lisa Falk]

All very interesting. Recently I got a grant for a museum outreach program to K-12 schools. In the proposal I called the program "Object Stories." Reviewer comments highly recommended a change in names saying this didn't sound exciting and engaging. So there's another take on the term "objects."

The stated differences between those who go to science centers and children's museums and those who visit art and history museums is also generational as you noted in a previous post (with grandparents being the bridge to all). If you are an art or history museum and want to reach out to new audiences, then some of the techniques (hands-on/programs etc) will help draw those folks to your museums (which they may assume is stuffy or high brow). I did an evaluation study of our family (intergenerational programs--some attendees come without children) programs and found that they attract a lot of new visitors, who say they will later come back to see the exhibits, and repeat visitors who have seen the exhibits but came back for the programs. And for minority visitors, the programs were often their first introduction to the museum. Nearly all respondents stated as a result of their visit to the museum (for the program) that they were mere likely to visit other museums and come back. The study is available on the Eric database if you're interested. Search under my name: Lisa Falk.

[Gillian]

Viewing objects rated low? I agree that this sounds like an artefact of your survey and not clearly related to the real world, espcially in art museums or history/heritage museums.

At the Australian War Memorial, the dioramas (old and finely crafted) are the most-loved exhibits. Art exhibitions are valued because they show the real thing, not reproductions.

Sure, visitors want to understand the relevance and hear the overall story, but art and history museums are expected to offer authentic objects in a taken-for-granted kind of way.

I have just visited Hong Kong and it was a bit disconcerting to see the number of illustrative objects in exhibitions that were labeled 'replica'. One or two would be OK, but this was 8 out of 10 in some sections.

I still remember the visitor who, in a focus group, came to tears describing how he felt when he saw genuine moon rock in an exhibition years before.

The power of the authentic object is pervasive. If your research is not capturing this, I'd suggest that you look at the way you are asking the question, or the way you are interpreting the responses.

Sometimes it feels like very large surveys reduce the data to a large, homogenised and meaningless lump.

The notion that one form of presentation is 'better' than another (i.e. "viewing objects does not seem that important to visitors) seems simplistic, when the best exhibitions are a blend of various approaches.

I'm not sure how strongly you stand behind your comment versus just throwing it out to be provocative. Sorry if I have taken you literally if you did not intend it that way.

[Ken Bubp]

Gillian,

Your comments are exactly why we wanted to share this data. It is interesting - surprising - shocking (?) even. And it is especially interesting to find these responses among people who could fit in the "Core Visitor" category--people who are predisposed to museums, enough so to sign up for a museum mailing list. Yes, it is provocative, but that was not my primary intention in writing it: I was trying to be faithful to the data. It does seem that other ways of experiencing museums are preferred when compared to viewing objects and object-based exhibits.

And your comment about a focus group participant talking about how important objects are in museum memories - yes, this is something this study also points to, and something we'll be unpacking here in a future post. Objects do seem to play a significant role in early museum memories. You have hit on something important there.

All of that said, I would reiterate what Susie said in a comment above about how the question was worded, which is based on previous survey responses. And that we did not ask people to say which interpretation methods were better/best, just the ones that represented how they preferred to experience museums. They could select multiple options from the list to create their own "menu" of preferences, so this provides us with a sense of the relative value placed on each of the interpretation methods. Like you, we were surprised when we found a much lower than expected percentage of respondents, especially at art and history-based museums, indicating their preference for viewing objects and object-based exhibits. Thanks for your comments reminding us of just how surprising this is. We're eager to continue "turning the kaleidoscope" to get different views as to what is happening here.

[Karen L. Daly]

I'd love to see the data for the other responses--those that didn't make it into the top 4. As a historic house museum director, I'm most interested in where the "guided tour" wound up among the historic site preferences.

I wonder, too, why we hold on so tightly to the guided tour model in the historic house museum field, if indeed our visitors prefer something else. Is it just because this is how we've always done it? Or are there compelling reasons why we retain this guided tour model, despite the visitor response? (Security pops to mind as one possibility.)

[Susie Wilkening, Reach Advisors]

Hi Karen -

The guided tour post is coming up - I promise! But yes, I do think that cost-effectiveness and security are reasons it has been retained . . . though I wonder if there is a vicious circle going on.

That is, we do guided tours because they are cheaper, but complain about people not coming, and people don't come because we do guided tours, so we have no money to do something else. And so on and so forth.

So stay tuned. That post will be coming . . .

[Ron]

I have to agree with previous posts about the way this poll approached the centrality of objects to the visitor experience. Many people choose to respond to survey options that stir their passions. They feel, this is MY chance to be heard about something important. I read these results not as a dismissal of objects, but as a loud cry of frustration over the guided tour experience. The results of this survey display a clear mandate to leave us alone unless we have a question, or a combination of "on our own" and "talking with staff." I do not interpret the low response rate to "Viewing objects" as a sign of dispassion toward an object based experience. Rather, going to museums to view objects is such an obvious concept that it failed to stir a passionate response. Equally obvious is that people do not go to museums to look at bare walls on their own while talking with staff. I suspect that if the question had been worded "What aspects of a museum are most crucial to your visitor experience?" objects would have ranked much higher.

[Francois]

I would like to know more about two aspects of your survey:

- do young adults -16 to 24 - go to museums. I am asking because in the UK they tend to be very much under represented as a group.

- what is the attitude towards watching video clips or movies and interacting with a computer or a handheld device? by age group? by gender?

Thanks

Francois

[Susie Wilkening, Reach Advisors]

Hi Francois -

Two things to keep in mind. First, our survey was of adults who were already engaged with the museum by virtue of being on the e-mail list. So the research is not of the general public (something we hope to move forward on pending funding). We do have samples of adults under 30, but they should be considered "Core Visitors" to museums, not the general public as well.

Second, younger adults in our sample are generally less likely to prefer to experience technology in the museum than older adults. We did a guest post on Paul Orselli's blog on this topic, http://blog.orselli.net/2010/06/screened-out-preferences-for-technology.html.

Thanks for the questions!

[Gene Beverly]

Hi,
I was wondering if there was a difference by age groups particularly for senior citizens. The majority of our visitors seem to be senior citizens, they seem to indicate a preference for guided tours. Is this unusual for our site or does it apply across the board?