Arcellana Exhibit Case Study: Breakdown Of Visitor Behavior
Apart from the objects in the display tables, Arcellana‘s formal jacket was another three-dimensional object in the exhibit. Eighteen visitors made a stop by the jacket. Arcellana‘s family photos which were posted on the last few wall panels were viewed by 12 visitors. The exhibit item which gained the least attention was Arcellana‘s portrait which stood by the jacket; 11 visitors stopped by the portrait.
Breakdown of Visitor Behavior
The design of the Arcellana exhibit was not an interactive one. Visitors could explore the exhibit area on their own without the need of a guide or a docent There were enough exhibit labels to identify all the exhibit objects on display. The space allotted for the exhibit was small enough for one visitor to visit all exhibit sections in a minute or less. There were only limited ways of interacting with the exhibit because of its size and design. The list of actions that were observed during the …show more content…
Seven visitors were observed discussing the exhibit. The first group consisted of two visitors and the second was a group of five people. Among the 81 exhibit visitors, 23 people or 28.39% went in the exhibition with another person while the rest came in alone. These 23 people were divided into 8 different groups; only two out of eight had members who appeared to discuss something about the exhibit. If there was more than one person in the exhibit but neither or none of them seemed to know each other, those people were not counted as part of a group and their data was recorded individually. People who came in together and appeared to know each other were classified as a group. A group was recorded as discussing something about the exhibit if at least two members were seen talking with each other while their attention was visibly turned to the exhibition (e.g. heads turned towards a display table, one visitor pointing at an exhibit object while talking to
Breakdown of Visitor Behavior
The design of the Arcellana exhibit was not an interactive one. Visitors could explore the exhibit area on their own without the need of a guide or a docent There were enough exhibit labels to identify all the exhibit objects on display. The space allotted for the exhibit was small enough for one visitor to visit all exhibit sections in a minute or less. There were only limited ways of interacting with the exhibit because of its size and design. The list of actions that were observed during the …show more content…
Seven visitors were observed discussing the exhibit. The first group consisted of two visitors and the second was a group of five people. Among the 81 exhibit visitors, 23 people or 28.39% went in the exhibition with another person while the rest came in alone. These 23 people were divided into 8 different groups; only two out of eight had members who appeared to discuss something about the exhibit. If there was more than one person in the exhibit but neither or none of them seemed to know each other, those people were not counted as part of a group and their data was recorded individually. People who came in together and appeared to know each other were classified as a group. A group was recorded as discussing something about the exhibit if at least two members were seen talking with each other while their attention was visibly turned to the exhibition (e.g. heads turned towards a display table, one visitor pointing at an exhibit object while talking to