I always want to ask whether the visitors got it wrong or the exhibit designers got it wrong. If you design an exhibit that has only one path that visitors must follow, there should be very clear and unambiguous signage and structure that leads visitors on that path. But we know that many visitors rebel against linear exhibition experiences no matter what we do, and prefer to explore at their own pace and in the order that they choose. One answer to this problem is to design exhibitions that don't require one set pathway and that allow visitors to choose different ways to experience the content. That way visitors can't be "wrong" and curators won't be frustrated.
Many years ago, I realized that the cafeteria line ( a linear way to select lunch) was giving way to islands and stations. If patrons preferred to choose lunch in this more random environment, it made sense that they would also choose to experience museum exhibits in a less linear fashion.
Museum exhibitions seem more and more akin to websites with random access and multiple access points rather than a sequential book-like narrative. Especially as we look toward younger generations of visitors, we need to rethink our need for a linear sequence and consider the needs and preferences of visitors.
It might be interesting to survey your visitors and find out how they are using the exhibit, what they are taking away and whether there are other ways to enhance their visit, rather than simply directing them along the intended path.
------------------------------
Barbara Franco
[Harrisburg] [PA]
GettysburgGettysburgGettysburg
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-26-2017 02:51 PM
From: Joe Elliott
Subject: Unintended Visitor Flow Pattern
Hi, Lisa!
Thank you for starting this thread! Getting to think about this, and reading the comments from several "big names" in the field...this is like participating in a seminar!
So, to echo some questions: why was the originally planned flow-direction "intended," the way it was? and, have y'all found any reasons that the visitors are "naturally" or "intuitively" flowing the way they are?
Thanks!
------------------------------
Joe Elliott
PhD student
Galveston TX
jmelliot@utmb.edu
Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2017 05:14 PM
From: Beverly Serrell
Subject: Unintended Visitor Flow Pattern
Underlying the discussion in this marvelous thread are several basic assumptions that museum professionals make about visitor behavior. Research has helped clarify or dispel commonly held notions about visitors' interests, motivations, time, and values. Below are some that I believe are worth focusing on.
--Assume that visitors are there for the first time and do not have any special interest, knowledge, or training in the subject of the exhibition. Assume they do have some interest―after all, they are there. But they are not specialists. "I'm just interested."
--Visitors arrive with a limited amount of time and attention to devote to viewing the exhibit. Spending a brief amount of time (less than 20 minutes), stopping at fewer than half of the exhibit elements, and feeling overwhelmed by too much to see or do are common behaviors/feelings when exiting an exhibition. "I just breezed through. There's so much to see. I'll have to come back." But they probably won't or can't.
--Assume a continuum of interest that visitors bring with them that can be encouraged or discouraged by the designed environment of the exhibition. Assume that most are "strollers" who have the potential to pay attention, become more engaged, and spend more time if/when/because you have planned, designed and prototyped exhibit elements that are likely to provide personally meaningful experiences (benefits) for the effort (cost) required.
But back to the question at hand: how to get visitors to enter the exhibition at the beginning instead of the end when the architecture or traffic flow intuitively directs them otherwise? Previous comments in this thread are helpful when considering the answer.
- How important is it to the visitor experience to follow the intended pathway? If it's not, don't worry about it.
- If it is, use all the cues at your disposal to communicate where the entrance is located, e.g., signs, arrows, visitor service people, maps, stanchions, walls, banners, floor treatments, lighting.
- Feeling lost is not an option for visitors who use, like, or need orientation. Give people the most effective directions possible to allow them to know what the intended path is, and then let them decide for themselves.
- Research has shown that many visitors' exhibit experiences are confusing, frustrating, effortful, or missed due to poor orientation―physically, psychologically, mechanically and/or conceptually. Lack of orientation is the most common complaint or reason in recommendations for improvement in summative evaluations of exhibitions.
- Questions lurk in the backs of visitors' minds in the exhibit environment, such as, Where should I go? What do I do here? How does this work? What's it about? So what? Exhibit planners need to address these questions with context and designs that intuitively provide the answers and let visitors choose which ones they want to engage with.
- Suggested routes do not force visitors to take them. We need to give visitors ways to make intelligent choices about where to spend their precious time. We need to be transparent about our hopes and intentions so that they can satisfy their own.
And finally, a plug for the Big Idea. Visitors can use an exhibition briefly, out of sequence, and incompletely and still get a sense of what it's about and why it might be important if the exhibition is planned with an underlying and meaningful thesis statement. The natural behavior of visitors is best accommodated by exhibitions that are not too big and are held together conceptually and contextually by an idea of importance to the intended audience.
------------------------------
Beverly Serrell
Director
Serrell & Associates
Chicago IL
baserrell@gmail.com
serrellassociates.com
Original Message:
Sent: 10-12-2017 01:26 PM
From: Sandra Bonnici
Subject: Unintended Visitor Flow Pattern
Hello
I am facinated by this question and challenge. Children's Museums tend to think of unintended visitor flow very differently (pun intended)
I'm curious as to what the learning might be in why visitors are engaging in alternative ways. Is there something that is drawing them and is that constructing a different or deeper engagement? Is it telling a different story from a unique perspective?
Truly curious to hear more on this topic.
Sandra
------------------------------
Sandra Bonnici
Associate Director of Education, Diversity and Inclusion
Madison Children's Museum
Madison WI
Original Message:
Sent: 10-11-2017 10:42 AM
From: Lisa Simmons
Subject: Unintended Visitor Flow Pattern
In-gallery visitor flow observations at our museum have revealed that visitors experience the permanent collection galleries in an alternate flow-pattern than intended. At this time, we cannot manipulate the architecture of the space or re-hang the permanent collection and so have been brainstorming ideas that might remedy this, such as:
A numbering system on entry panel wall labels or hanging from entryways
Arrow-stickers on the ground (not ideal)
Gallery numbers on the museum map
Have other museums successfully tackled this issue? In general, do any forum folks have ideas about how to address this?
Thank you!
--
Lisa Simmons | Assistant Curator of Youth & Adult Education
National Museum of Wildlife Art of the United StatesP.O. Box 6825, Jackson, WY 83002 | 2820 Rungius Rd, Jackson, WY 83001
lsimmons@wildlifeart.org | 307-732-5435