Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Title
Liam Templeton
0704913
University of Glasgow
1
Abstract 2
Introduction 2
QR Codes 2
Methods 2
Generating QR Codes 2
Collection of Data 2
Results 2
Devices 2
Preference 2
Navigation 2
Discussion 2
Preference 2
Navigation 2
Limitations 2
Museum 2.0 2
Conclusion 2
Acknowledgments 2
Bibliography 2
Websites 2
Appendix 2
2
Abstract
Museums have held a high standard of cultural and scientific significance for centuries.
First serving as a store by which specimen of all descriptions could be catalogued and
studied and secondarily as a platform for public outreach and the communication of
are often overlooked in place of human development the purpose of institutions such
individuals and how they consider the natural world. Current museum displays are
limited as to the amount of information they are able to display and unable to
possible solution although the use of technology may represent a large investment on
the part of the museum which is often open to abuse. By incorporating a system which
employs the use of user owned technology it could act to alleviate any such
investment. This study explores the use of quick response (QR) codes as a cost
effective means to accommodate a digital system made available for internet enabled
mobile devices (i.e. “smartphones”) in the hope to offer a more rewarding and
interactive experience to visitors while at the same time establishing a means by which
3
Introduction
Museums of Natural History perhaps more so than any other represent a platform not
only for public outreach and education but for the study and exploration of biological
systems and diversity (Winker, 2004). Historically this mission could be considered the
primary role of museums of this nature though as natural sciences progressed with the
involvement and observation. This is perhaps most apparent in the Natural History
Museum in London which was only made publicly accessible in 1881 (Stearn, 1981), to
which Bill Bryson commented "by making the Natural History Museum an institution for
everyone, Owen transformed our expectations of what museums are for" (Bryson,
2004). This relates to the idea that it may function not only for the pursuit of a further
understanding of the natural world but also to promote an active interest in those that
might otherwise not be aware of such phenomena. An outreach program such as this is
as vital now more than ever as fewer considerations are given to the state of our
schools fail to it falls on the shoulders of public education in the media and through
institutions like museums to captivate the imaginations of the public in order to help
cultivate an interest in the hope to effectively direct action toward the understanding
and conservation of the natural world. Perhaps in doing so a revision in the way that
museums are operated is required where visitor participation is favoured over curatorial
the public curatorial staff can hope to more effectively convey themes in biology to
visitors. One limiting factor in the designing of museum exhibits is the nature of content
which should be included. Typically one can expect a wide range of visitors from
differing educational backgrounds and institutions such as this should aim to not
4
alienate any potential visitor. Displays should be relevant and informative but not so
restricted. Another potential challenge that exists is that visitors may feel intimidated if
confronted by large bodies of text, and so may be less likely to retain any information
they are faced with (McManus, 1989). One way to overcome this challenge would be to
host a digital source of information which would then allow visitors to selectively view
that which interests them most. In doing so it is hoped that a wider audience be
reached with the inclusion of interactive forms of media. However criticisms do exist in
that some forms of interactive technologies are thought to detract from the true nature
of the object and so limiting the overall appeal of that exhibit (Fleming, 2005). Doing so
would also require some investment in order to install and maintain the required
technologies, which may at first seem unattractive on the part of the institution. By
facilitating the use of user owned technology we can hope to alleviate any financial
Another challenge in curating exhibits of this nature is that our knowledge of that which
could perhaps be said to be occurring more rapidly than in any other discipline.
Because of this some areas of content may be found to be outdated shortly after being
put on display. As few institutions have the resources to revise displays on a regular
basis, at least not at the rate at which new discoveries are made, it would appear as
though there is a need for a more adaptable platform on which content can be hosted.
which content could be hosted. The nature of which would mean that updating displays
would require as little action as editing a block of text. This would act to ensure that the
content provided was relevant and current and may even pose as an opportunity to
include user generated content, a concept which will be explored later in this study.
5
Previous Attempts to Monitor User Navigation
the processes by which visitors navigate throughout a museum curators, and those
involved in the design of museum displays, can then use this information to design
future exhibitions that relate to the patterns of interest expressed by any key
assumptions made based on visual observations. The use of closed circuit television
systems may pose a suitable aid in doing so though the analysis of the footage
retrieved might prove to be incredibly tedious to say the least. Multiple attempts have
since been made by inferring the use of sophisticated technologies and advanced
statistical modeling to predict visitor interest (Bohnert et al, 2009). However in doing so
it may also pose further complications and uncertainties to an already poorly explored
area of research.
One such attempt of doing involved the use of radio-frequency identification (RFID)
whereby visitors were provided with passive RFID tags to be worn throughout the
duration of their visi (Baldwin & Kuriakose, 2009). Exhibits were then coupled with an
antenna for the purpose of receiving data relating to visitor proximity and navigation.
Though arguably discrete the process of distributing and then recollecting RFID tags to
and from each individual visitor may seem inappropriate in that it is directly invading
that person’s privacy. If confronted by an alien device visitors may feel intimidated and
prone to unnatural behaviour (Simon, 2009). A system such as this also poses
somewhat of a financial risk in that if not properly monitored the devices may then be
open to abuse. While RFID tags themselves are said to be relatively inexpensive for
this purpose this might still be considered an unnecessary investment for a permanent
installation.
6
This too can be resolved by employing the use of user owned technology. Mobile
phones carry features that would allow for the use in monitoring user navigation. The
bluetooth devices fixed to exhibits. This would rely heavily on the assumption that
users would have bluetooth enabled on their device, the likelihood of which might not
be very high being that it’s function has been somewhat subsided by more advanced
wireless technologies. Other more active means of employing the use of user owned
devices might on the surface appear intrusive and require some form of activity on the
part of the user. Under this assumption a user would have to actively view an exhibit
using their device for it to be recognised by the system. A way to influence a visitor to
do so might be to offer some form of incentive. In the case of this study that incentive
can be thought of as the prospect of gaining access to exclusive web hosted content
of accessing the content using an internet enabled device. In order for this to be
effective the delivery of such content would have to be almost seamless. In this case a
QR Codes
readable by remote devices. Unlike bar codes which are limited to encoding numerical
data QR codes can be made to represent letters and other symbols. This feature
makes them attractive for use in a number of practical applications. First developed by
Denso-wave in 1994 for use in the car manufacturing industry their purpose was mainly
that of a logistical tool (www.denso-wave.com). Since then they have been adopted for
numerous uses. With the advancement of mobile devices a more commercial use has
become available to explore. The nature of the codes and their ability to directly link
information to mobile devices almost instantaneously has made them attractive for use
in fields such as advertising and public relations. Poster and television advertisements
are now commonly coupled with codes relating viewers and observers to
7
supplementary information hosted online. It seems only natural that they would be
adapted for use in museums and throughout the public education sector to better
enrich the experience of visitors in a way that is discrete and poses little financial
More recently a recreational use of QR codes has begun to be explored. One such
exploration is a concept proposed by the website Tales of Things whereby users are
encouraged to generate and contribute online content relating to physical objects that
bear some significance to them. These objects are then coupled with a QR code so
that others who encounter them in real life can be made aware of any interesting
aspects of that objects history and personal significance. This idea supports the
related to previous experiences and knowledge of that object we can seek to establish
a forum of content which is not limited to that dictated by the curatorial staff but which
relates to visitors on all levels of interest, and in doing so collapsing the telescopic
Another example of this type is that of the website and mobile application My Personal
sorts which can then be subscribed to by users for free via their mobile devices using a
easily and effectively relate digitally stored information to physical objects but also has
been extrapolated for use in outside tours by employing the use of in-device global
positioning systems (GPS). In this system users are prompted to view a building or
object of interest by push notification when in close proximity to that building or object
and then supplied with information relating to that site. The use of QR codes in this
This method fully supports the idea of user participation in that all content is user
generated and so allows the construction of tours tailored specifically for varying levels
8
of interest (Borggrewe, 2009). One limitation is that currently the MyTour mobile
Some of these concepts were briefly outlined in an article featured in New Scientist
(Giles, 2010) in which the idea of employing the use of QR codes in museums by
curators was put forward, though to my knowledge has yet to have been implemented
in a way similar to that outlined in this study. The MyTour application was released via
the Apple app store in December 2010 and so was not suitable for use in the
The aim of this experiment is to integrate a digital system into the current collection of
the Hunterian zoology museum, the purpose of which is to provide a more engaging
and ultimately rewarding experience for the user and to allow the passive collection of
that user information can be tracked in a way that might prove useful for the design of
future museum exhibits relating to apparent user interest. A null hypothesis can be
9
Methods
For the purpose of this experiment a group of exhibits were selected from within the
current collection at the Hunterian zoology museum at the University of Glasgow. A set
give a sample size of adequate statistical integrity and manageability. Also taken into
consideration was that the sample size be of a sufficient number to ensure that the
specimen included would not simply be considered a novelty by the visitors, but not so
many that making content for each would become laborious and unmanageable. When
selecting specimen to be included in the study certain considerations were taken into
account. These considerations included various aspects of the biology of the specimen
(i.e. taxonomy and geographic distribution), the nature both of the display and the
specimen and the relative position of that exhibit in the museum. It was desirable that
the set included an even number of specimen of each description. This consideration
was given in the hope that the data collected could be extrapolated to pertain to various
aspects of user navigation and to some extent preference. In practise this hope was
disproportionate number of mammals and birds than it does amphibians and reptiles
etc. With this in mind it was decided that the most important aspect of selection be that
which considers the spatial distribution of specimen throughout the museum, and that
any other aspect be considered but only of secondary importance. A complete list of
Once the set was confirmed a series of online content was required with a page
relating to each of the specimen included. A format for the web page was established
with each page featuring the name of the specimen (both common and binomial), an
10
image of a specimen of the same species, a paragraph of text relating to that animals
outlining the distribution of that animal. All images and the basis for text were taken
from Wikipedia. Maps were taken from the IUCN red list where available, and
otherwise illustrated onto a blank map based on information from the same source.
It was recognised that content sourced primarily from Wikipedia was perhaps not
entirely suitable for use in a museum but also that for the purpose of this experiment it
could be considered a fair compromise. This was justified by the point that the content
could be considered to be secondary to the function of the system and that the system
itself was intended to act as a pilot study on various aspects of the use and
functionality of the system. If such a system was to be adapted for a more permanent
use then it was appreciated that a higher level of content would be required.
Construction of the pages was done using the application TextWrangler for Macintosh
computers. A universal theme was created using the jQuery mobile online application
(jquerymobile.com). This theme made it so that the content was compatible and
aesthetically pleasing when being viewed on different types of mobile device. Once
complete the content was hosted on a local server on the museum premises. It was
recognised that some mobile devices failed to receive a mobile internet reception
required to operate the system. For this reason a local wi-fi network was established in
Generating QR Codes
Upon completion of the online content individual QR codes were generated to relate to
the URL on which each page was hosted. This was done using the Kaywa online QR-
inputed URL. A truncated URL was also generated using the online URL shortener
bit.ly. It was proposed that these truncated URLs might work to allow access to pages
11
for those without the relevant QR reading software. However it was soon recognised
that such URLs require access to an external server, which the established wi-fi
network does not allow. For this reason the shortened URLs were abandoned. The QR
codes generated were downloaded as an image format before being resized into
Word. In this format they were also coupled with a text label specifying the name of the
specimen to which the code relates. The codes were then printed and cut to size. Each
individual code was mounted to the display of the relevant specimen using single sided
adhesive film. For most of the specimen this involved attaching the code to the outside
of the glass display case relative to the position of the specimen within that case,
though for other more open displays positioning and attachment of labels required a
As soon as the system was considered to be operational an email was composed and
sent to members of staff and senior students associated with the department of
ecology and evolutionary biology situated in the same building as the zoology museum
inviting those who were able to use the system. A poster was also constructed for the
attention of the public informing them of the aims of the project and a guideline to the
proper use of the system which was placed near the entrance of the museum. An
Following a collection period of approximately 14 days it was observed that the system
had received little attention from visitors. In response to this it was decided that an
event be hosted in the museum where the project might be explained in person and
that visitors be offered some incentive of reward for their participation. An event page
was created on the social networking site Facebook encouraging those that were
interested to attend and advertise the event to their friends. This was also advertised
via an email sent to the same individuals as outlined previously and mentioned loosely
12
on various other social networking platforms such as Twitter. A short questionnaire was
composed for use during the event in an attempt to gain user feedback in terms of
ease of use of the system, the apparent effectiveness of the system and overall
perception of the system. Other questions included user age and device owned. A
space was also given for additional comments to be made. The results of which were
omitted from the final study as they were considered to be of little value.
It was also decided that a visual representation might be necessary so that users might
associate the codes with their purpose. For this a number of codes were coupled with a
cartoon image depicting a mobile device scanning a QR code and receiving additional
Collection of Data
A recording system was established so that data points were collected and logged on a
database each time the code of a specimen was scanned. This system used a script
on the host web server to identify the browser cookies of visitor owned devices to
identify and track individual devices. In doing so, information could be viewed relating
to the time at which a code was scanned and the type of device which was used. As
well as this the individual identity of the visitor could also be monitored. By inferring
data on the order of scans as well as the number it was made possible to extrapolate
of each device was also retrieved searched for using the lookup feature in Network
Utility on a Macintosh computer. This allowed for the source to be recognised and the
nature of their internet connection to be identified. The data used in this study was
13
Results
A total of 28 visitors took part in the study over a period of approximately 25 days
generating a total of 262 hits to the exhibit sites. The entire database retrieved from the
Devices
Of the 28 visitors the distribution of the device type used can be viewed as follows:
Chart 1
From Chart 1 we can see that the most prevalent devices used by visitors are
Blackberry, iPhone and those which support the Android 2.2 operating systems. As
shown here the three of these represent an equal proportion of visitor devices used,
however if the different versions of Android software were to be considered as one then
14
Seven unique IP addresses were recognised as having been used by visitors, the most
prevalent of which was that of the wi-fi network provided for the purpose of this
suggesting that many visitors were able to access sufficient 3G coverage in the
museum to operate the system without the need for the wi-fi network. The distribution
Chart 2
Although of all those listed in Chart 2 the museum wi-fi is the most commonly used it is
clear that most visitors were able to operate the system to a satisfying degree using
15
Preference
A total of 262 hits were received over the collections period, though some of these
were recognised as being repeat hits by individuals on some exhibits leaving a total of
234 individual hits. A histogram outlining the distribution of those individual hits among
Graph 1
The x-axis relates to the number of individual hits received in total while the X-axis lists
the latin name of the exhibits included in the study. From Graph 1 we can see that the
sloth exhibit (B. tridactylus) received the most hits overall and the porcupine exhibit (C.
16
The overall apparent popularity of exhibits of the same taxa was also considered. The
following histogram shows the distribution of hits among the different taxonomic groups
Graph 2
Again, the x-axis represents the total number of individual hits received but this time
relating to a number of exhibits grouped by their taxonomy. Graph 2 would suggest that
mammal exhibits received significantly more attention than other exhibits, and
17
However, it should be recognised that a total of eight mammal exhibits where included
while only two amphibian and two fish exhibits were included and four of every other.
With this in mind these results were then calibrated to give the values as seen in the
following histogram:
Graph 3
Graph 3 would suggest that in fact bird exhibits received the most attention and that
fish actually received relatively more attention that invertebrates in comparison to that
Further to this point a chi sqaured test was performed to test whether there was any
significant bias displayed by visitors toward any group of exhibits based on the logic
that if the mammal exhibits represent 1/3 of the museum collection then we would
expect those exhibits to receive 1/3 of the hits. The results for which are shown in the
following table:
Table 1
18
Taxonomic Observed Expected Chi Squared Probability
Group Popularity Popularity
Reptiles 39 39 0 P=1
From that which is shown in Table 1 none of these values are at all significant
suggesting there is little bias in how a visitor selects which exhibits to view.
Similarly these values were generated relating to other aspects of exhibits (such as
display type etc.) and the effect they may have on their popularity. The results for each
are as follows:
Table 2
Table 2 shows the chi squared values for the display type of exhibits. Display types
were grouped separately as being either open or closed, in that the the physical
specimen is either contained within a glass case or displayed openly, and as being
grouped or solitary. These values also show no significance of display type in visitor
preference.
Table 3
19
Region of Observed Expected Chi squared Probability
Origin
Table 3 shows the same, this time with respect to the region in which the displayed
organism is typically found. Though still of little statistical significance it would appear
One final consideration was given to the nature of the specimen exhibited in terms of
follows:
Table 4
Similarly these factors are shown to have little significance on the influence on the
preference of visitors.
A full table outlining the categorisation of each exhibit can be found in the appendix.
20
Navigation
A basic floor plan of the Hunterian zoology museum was constructed based on a
previous hand drawn version supplied by the curator. It can be viewed as follows:
Plan 1
Each blue dot indicates the approximate location of a specimen that was included in
the study. Dots are labelled with the initial of the specimen which they relate to. This is
to be used as a reference for the following charts. A key for the abbreviations can be
found in the appendix. This was done by calculating the points of each exhibit on the
floor plan and then generating a scatter plot relative to these points. The resulting chart
was then imposed onto the floor plan to outline the relative position of the exhibits.
21
Onto this plan the relative popularity of each exhibit could be visualised using a bubble
chart where the size of the bubble occupying the relative position of an exhibit is
indicative of the number of hits it received over the collection period. This can be
viewed as follows:
Plan 2
Plan 2 visualises that which was displayed in Graph 1 to show the relative popularity of
exhibits with relation to their spatial distribution throughout the museum. Towards the
bottom right we can see that relating to the Robber Crab (Birgus latro) exhbit which
appears to be significantly larger than that of any other invertebrate exhibit. Another
notable point is that of the Sloth (Bradypus tridactylus) exhibit which received the most
22
Using this same plan the navigation of individual visitors could be tracked by inferring
the relative position of each exhibit and the order in which they were viewed by that
individual. The following diagram illustrates a compilation of all individual visitor paths
Plan 3
Lines shown in bold represent the paths most commonly taken by visitors. From this it
can be seen that visitors typically navigate themselves around the periphery of the
museum walls, but also that there is significant amounts of crossing over that occurs
23
The individual paths taken by visitors were also generated using the same method,
though this was only relevant for visitors who viewed three or more of the exhibits
throughout the museum. A total of 20 visitor path plans were generated, an example of
Plan 4
The starting point of the visit is indicated by the letter x. From here the visitor can be
seen to have taken a clockwise route loosely following the outside wall of the museum.
An animated .gif showing the reaminder of the plans can be viewed at the following url:
http://iphylo.org/~rpage/museum/report/.
24
Using a similar technique a series of star charts was compiled. These charts relate to
the exhibits which were viewed by visitors after having viewing a particular exhibit. An
Plan 5
Plan 5 is shown to have the relative position of the Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus)
exhibit located at the centre of a star plot. The lines protruding from this relate the
positions of those exhibits that visitors viewed next. If we were to take north as facing
upwards, shown here we can see the Tarsier (Tarsius tarsier) exhibit due south of this
position, the Sloth (Bradypus tridactylus) exhibit south by southeast, the Dolphin exhibit
(Delphis delphinus) southeast, and the Gian Anteater (Myrmecophaga tridactyla) to the
northeast.
25
The relative distance between these points were also calculated and imposed onto the
charts as well as the average distance traveled by visitors after having viewed that
Plan 6
Shown in Plan 6 is the distance chart for the Royal Python exhibit (Pythos regius). The
value shown at the centre of the star represents the average distance traveled by
visitors to reach the next exhibit. Using the same compass analogy as above to the
southwest of this point we can again see the Sloth (Bradypus tridactylus) exhibit, to the
northwest the Tarsier (Tarsius tarsier) exhibit, north by northwest is the Dolphin
africana) exhibit, and to the southeast the Merlin (Falco colombarius) exhibit. The
distance travelled from the starting point to the dolphin and elephant exhibits
respectively is seen to be equidistant. The same can be said of the distances shown of
26
It should be noted that as the floor plan was not drawn to scale distances can be taken
as being represented in map units, where one map unit is equal to one centimeter
when viewed at size A4. This can be used to infer some sense of how far a visitor is
The proportion of visitors that chose to a particular exhibit next was also inferred for
each individual exhibit. This can be used to estimate the likelihood of a visitor viewing a
Plan 7
Plan 7 shows that from viewing the Tarsier exhibit 28.6% of visitors went on to view the
Sloth exhibit, while 57.1% of visitors viewed the Koala exhibit next, and only 14.3%
viewed the Giant Anteater. This supports the notion that visitors may be inclined to
view exhibits that are spatially closely associated with that which they are currently
27
A full set of these figures can be found in an animated .gif format at the following url:
http://iphylo.org/~rpage/museum/report/
Discussion
Data retrieved relating to the manufacturer and operating systems of the devices
recorded may prove useful in the further establishment of content included in the
pages. Some content including other forms media and interactive features may require
specific drivers for different device types and so any considerations made to this effect
would then allow for the development of more engaging and interactive content that
would seek to exclude the fewest number of visitors possible. As seen in the results the
most prevalent of the devices used were those using Android and iPhone operating
Of the IP addresses recognised it was observed that the majority of visitors which took
part in the study where able to satisfactorily operate the system without the aid of the
wi-fi network provided. It was originally assumed that sufficient mobile internet
reception was unavailable in the museum and so for the purpose of this experiment a
dedicated wi-fi network had been established. This assumption was based on
observations made on the function of my own device (an iPhone 3GS), though it would
address recognised can confidently be said to have come from within the museum. The
function of this system as a tool by which to effectively measure visitor interest and
navigation relies heavily on the assumption that a visitor is located in the vicinity of a
particular exhibit when viewing a web page related to that object. This was largely
28
facilitated by the exclusive association of a specific QR code with a physical object (i.e.
with no alternative means of accessing a page). This may have been somewhat
confounded by the fact that a visitor is potentially able to gain access to a page from
information stored in their browser history after their initial visit. By identifying a visitor
with an IP address other than that of the dedicated wi-fi network it was thought that it
could be assumed that they were viewing a page from outwith the museum. However,
it was observed that many of these foreign addresses were coming from the mobile
networks of those with mobile devices capable of receiving adequate signal and so
Preference
The chi squared values generated show that there is little significance in the effect that
the various aspects of exhibit type identified have on which exhibits visitors decided to
view. This would suggest that there are no factors which affect the preference of
visitors towards exhibits of any particular type and so lead us to accept the null
hypothesis proposed earlier in this document. This would then suggest that visitors are
particular group of exhibits and instead considering all of those equally. Any effect of
bias may potentially have been confounded by the small number of exhibits included in
the study, whereby visitors operated under the consideration that all those included are
equal in that each represents a novel function when compared to other exhibits which
There is perhaps some small observable bias of preference in relation to the spatial
distribution of exhibits throughout the museum. See that of the Robber Crab (Birgus
latro) which was seen to have received more hits relative to any other invertebrate
exhibit included in the study. This may be because it is situated close to the entrance of
the museum and so visitors would be more aware of this particular exhibit upon first
arriving in the museum. Contrary to this point is that of the Common Frog (Rana
29
temporaria) which received relatively fewer hits than many of the other exhibits. This
could be because it is situated toward the far right corner of the museum in an
unexposed corridor. Consideration to this effect with respect to the spatial distribution
of exhibits may offer an explanation to the small amount of preference observed toward
some exhibits over others, although the nature of this study does not allow for any full
Navigation
The compilation floor-plan shown in the results indicates that most visitors favoured
paths which outlined the periphery of the museum. This would indicate that there is in
fact some factor of influence in how visitors choose to navigate themselves throughout
the museum, though the nature of which is not fully understood. This notion is further
illustrated by the individual floor plans observed. While some may appear more erratic
in their navigation, and other more brief visits somewhat obscure in themselves, the
majority of those clearly indicate a route which follows a logical outside path. Perhaps
quite obviously this may be the case as there are few exhibits that where included in
the study which are situated toward the centre of the museum. What this does indicate
though is that users are not simply drifting autonomously from one exhibit to the next
but are instead directed by some governing factor. With inference of the information
shown by star charts and their respective distances we can then make the assumption
that visitors are most likely to feel an inclination to view exhibits that are spatially quite
closely associated to their current position. This tendency may also be influenced by
the visibility of neighbouring exhibits, though the data collected does not permit the
testing of such an effect. While this is perhaps to be expected it does pose as an issue
in that a visitor may simply be searching for a tag as opposed considering their purpose
30
Although the floor-plan is not drawn to scale and the positions of individual displays are
not precise it still serves a purpose in that it conveys the relative position of users at the
time of scanning and the relative distance travelled between displays. As well as this
the plan fails to acknowledge various physical barriers that occur throughout the
museum. Often the paths assumed by this process are unlikely to have been taken in
reality due to physical obstructions present throughout the museum. Despite this the
charts still act to convey some aspect of association between displays in terms of their
general proximity to one another with moderate success. Such barriers include tables
and chairs which may act to obstruct some displays and pathways between displays.
Most notably are those facing the Merlin (Falco colombarius) and Three-toed Sloth
(Bradypus tridactylus) displays. An arch of tables surrounding the Tree Frog (Litoria
caerulea) tank may also have served as a physical obstruction. Also present
throughout the collection period of this study were a pair of large storage containers
which acted to block a direct path between the Tarsier (Tarsius tarsier) and the Koala
(Phascolarctos cinereus) displays (to the far left of the floor plan). The presence of
these, though temporary, may have influenced user navigation throughout the
collection period of the study. Also missing from the floor plan provided is the insect
installation which resides between the Koala and the Giant Anteater (Myrmecophaga
tridactyla) displays, which might also be taken into consideration when considering the
paths chosen by visitors relative to this area. Incidentally the contents of which were
omitted from the study entirely, and in doing so effectively excluding an entire animal
group which may have been of potential interest to a number of visitors. The initial logic
behind this was that the installation is apparently more recent than the other displays
and in itself represents a newer and more interactive way to view the exhibits which it
Paths were first assumed to originate from the entrance and progress throughout the
31
from the department these paths may have originated from a number of points
throughout the museum. More to this point on the day of the event visitors were
engaged at a small stall that was set up next to the Elephant Bird (Aepyornis) exhibit,
where the nature of the experiment was explained to them and they were offered a
reward for their participation. From here the participants would most likely have initiated
their recorded visit starting from exhibits closely associated to this point. This could
a visitor would be expected to scan a code near the entrance to mark the start of their
visit. Upon doing so they could be informed of the various exhibits included in the
project and directed from this point. One issue that a system such as this might pose,
as well as the nature of the event itself, is that this may act to influence the navigation
was originally hoped that data points be collected passively and without any form of
intrusion, though as the collection period progressed it was made clear that some form
of intervention was necessary to in effect guide users in the correct use of the system.
In doing so this may have effectively corrupted the data retrieved, though undoubtedly
it is still in some way representative of that which it was hoped to have been achieved.
It should also be noted that the paths shown are based on the sequential scanning of
displays and do not necessarily represent the true navigation of visitors but rather an
the time spent between displays we can speculate as to the nature of the distractions
and deviations encountered in between scans. Though the data retrieved does in effect
permit doing so this particular aspect was not explored in the study. The reasons for
which are that several instances were recorded where visitors were apparently viewing
two or more exhibits within the space of a single recorded minute, and thus calculating
the time between sequential scans as effectively zero. One means of correcting this
would be to record data relating to time on a scale which includes time in seconds. It
was originally hoped that time spent between scans could be extrapolated as a means
32
to gauge interest in a particular exhibit (Bohnert et al, 2008), although from this it would
appear that visitor interest in some cases is minimal, and that visitors often scan an
exhibit in the hope of receiving some form of instant gratification (i.e. to view an image
or a map etc.). This attitude may have been accommodated by how the system is
viewed by visitors. By including so few exhibits in the study visitors might have viewed
those with a tag as representing a form of novelty. This effect may have been less
apparent if more exhibits had been included, although it is likely that the main issue lies
within the content provided for each exhibit. If the visitor were to be provided with some
aspect of interactivity when viewing an exhibit we might then expect that their
engagement be held for a longer period of time, and thus be able to better gauge their
level of interest.
Limitations
One can expect that if implemented on a more permanent basis the results generated
would be considered generally more robust. The results generated throughout this
relatively short period of time. As a result little can be said about the trends displayed in
the results as they occur in such little abundance that they may not be considered of
The success of the experiment may have been somewhat confounded in that use of
the system is limited to those who own a device able to operate it. What was first
considered to be a lack of interest might have merely been a lack of user compatibility.
There may also be a bias in those who are most likely to own a device of this nature.
One way to rectify this would be to provide visitors with task specific QR readers for the
purpose of viewing the content during their visit, though in reality such a solution
represents an investment on the part of the museum. In doing so this might also
challenge the user by introducing an alien device and novel behaviour, thus limiting the
33
popularity of such (Simon, 2009). What is more is that throughout the conducting of the
suitable device but were unaware of this particular function. This could have been
remedied in part by better publicity of the new system coupled with a demonstration of
proper use or a more comprehensive review of the software available. Although users
were prompted to seek out the relevant software before participating, and given some
guidance on how to do so, it was often the case that unfamiliarity on the part of the
owner limited the number of those who were in the end able to participate.
Another limiting factor was that the network on which the wi-fi was hosted only allowed
access to locally stored information, meaning that if a willing participant was to arrive
who was in possession of a capable device but without the suitable software it is
unlikely that they would be able to download and install that software on the premises.
This was a particular disadvantage when trying to include members of the public. The
success of the system relied on the notion that the user would arrive with the relevant
reading software pre-installed. As there was little effort made in terms of public
relations other than a poster at the entrance of the museum it is likely that few
members of the public were able to contribute. It was suggested that the system be
next installment of which was not due until after the data collection period for
experiment had ended. Given this and the fact that the experiment was most
successfully advertised among the senior students and staff of the department of
ecology and evolutionary biology it could be said that the results may have been further
confounded by the nature and occupation of the subjects. Any indication given to
interest or familiarity with the museum layout and content. For instance one user had
expressed her dismay at the lack of amphibian specimen included in the study. Though
this was not apparent in the results it still represents some threat to the overall
experimental design.
34
Such issues encountered with the poor network coverage available also meant that the
nature of content included in web pages was limited to that which could be stored
locally and with relative ease. It was originally hoped that video and audio content
sourced from websites such as YouTube may be imbedded into pages so as to further
enhance visitor experience. Although on the current network settings this is not
impossible doing so would require downloading the desired material and hosting it on
the local server which could be considered an unnecessary hassle that could be
otherwise mitigated with a more reliable and open network. Although the practical
make it is largely open to abuse and may pose other security issues.
One drawback of introducing this system to a preinstalled museum is that codes and
labels had to be mounted onto existing displays. This often meant placing them of the
surface of glass displays which poses a potential issue in that they are subject to
vandalism and may act to obscure parts of displays from a given perspective. If this
could be given to the placement of codes by integrating them into the displays
themselves. One limiting factor with this approach is that in order to successfully scan a
code the image must be of a suitable size or distance from the device so to satisfy the
processing software. This means that codes would ideally be placed on the surface of
displays unless they were made to be very large which itself would pose somewhat of
an issue.
The nature of this study meant that only a small fraction of exhibits in the museum were
included. Generating content and mounting codes for each individual exhibit may be
desirable but poses several issues of practicality. Exhibits which are housed in display
cases are often closely associated with one another. Mounting a QR code for each
might act to confuse the visitor and also act to further obscure other parts of the
35
display. Mounting a code as an aside may limit the success to which a visitor relates it
menu coupled with the display. Perhaps the most attractive solution to this problem
would be to provide only a single code for a display case which would then relate to a
digital menu in which the user could navigate and select specimen of interest from
within that display. This would allow the same consideration of user navigation and
specimen.
One can imagine that if adapted for use on a more permanent basis these
considerations could be met with ease. The nature of this study allows only for the
system to be implemented in a relatively basic form. That being said other ideas that
were hoped to have been explored could well have been accommodated. One such
idea would be to actively influence user navigation by indicating related exhibits to that
which they are currently viewing in terms of the ecology, geography, or taxonomy of
that exhibit. For instance if the user were to view the porcupine display (Coendu
prehensilis) they could then be made aware of other arboreal animals, animals from
south america, or of any other mammals in the museum. This would then allow
assumptions to be made on how user navigation is influenced and what is about that
animal’s biology that interests the visitor most. An expansion of this idea could be the
identification of returning visitors upon which they are made aware of any changes to
the museum based on their previous interactions. This would allow a form of public
relation that is conducted on a personal level, offering news and information provided
As far as enhancing displays for use as an educational tool goes a system such as this
could be set challenges to find and identify exhibits that share a common defining
36
visitor could then be asked to identify another specimen in the museum which is
extinct, receiving points for a correct answer and unlocking content such as awards
and trophies as they progress. Features such as this would work to create more
engaging experiences for visitors in the hope that they might retain the information
Museum 2.0
The concept of Museum 2.0 is based on the same underlying criteria on which Web 2.0
is defined (O’Reilly, 2005). Here a definition is made which acts to differentiate web
hosted content which allows only observation and that which encourages user
participation. These same principles apply when we consider the nature and purpose of
museum displays. Where a traditional museum only allows user participation on the
level of spectator Museum 2.0 would actively involve visitors with the hope of engaging
an interest that has otherwise been neglected. Currently displayed content is restricted
to that which is dictated by curatorial authority. The 2.0 equivalent of this would be to
effectively create circumstances by which users are able to generate their own content
based on their own knowledge and experience. This would in effect directly challenge
the idea that exhibits are unchanging in their content and display. In the most basic
form this may simply mean that visitors are invited to rate or comment on exhibits
based on how much they enjoyed it, serving as a further measure of exhibit popularity
developments of this might include allowing the display of user generated content
including forms of visual media and written text. One obvious risk posed by offering a
service such as this is that if not moderated properly then any user generated content
would be widely open to falsification and other forms of digital vandalism. Conversely
the process of moderating user generated content could be said to defeat the purpose
of offering such a service in the first place. Though this is an understandable dilemma it
is thought that if invited to contribute any form of content most visitors would strive to
37
create something of value based on the knowledge that it would be viewed by others.
This content could then be reviewed by subsequent visitors and so acting as a form of
that is of some worth (Simon, 2007b). The success of web content of this nature is
applied to museums.
Although the system described in this study does not fit the criteria of the Museum 2.0
it does represent a platform for which a system such as that could be realised. An
interest has been expressed by several members of staff at the university who had
inquired about the system and the possibility of hosting content relating to the history
and significance of the exhibited specimen. It is well known that the University of
Glasgow boasts an active exploration society through which several student lead
expeditions are led every year. It was commented by one participating member of staff
that the pages of specimen could be linked to a series of tagged content relating to
expeditions that are related to the country of origin of the animal displayed in that
exhibit. Take for instance the Giant Anteater (Myrmecophaga tridactyla) exhibit.
Content hosted on this page could relate to user uploaded video and photographs as
expedition to Bolivia. This would then effectively act as a means of advertisement for
the society. With regards to specimen history, this represents an entirely new realm of
information relating to that object which transcends any biological interest and
Conclusion
Though the potential of implementing a system such as this is clear it can perhaps be
said that it was not fully realised in this case. That being said the possibilities that it
poses and those which are continuing to arise are almost boundless. At present the
38
system represents a tool for monitoring visitor feedback that might otherwise be
technology and novel behaviour. The provision and maintenance of these technologies
may also prove costly to the proprietor. By employing the use of user owned
technology we can facilitate a service such as this without the need of such burdens. It
is not so much a hope as an inevitability that as time progresses systems of this nature
and the devices required to use them will become more prevalent in all reaches of our
everyday life. As this happens we can so too expect a similar pattern in the familiarity
of users toward these systems and thus be able to make better use of them. One can
imagine that if the use of QR codes were to be introduced for more practical everyday
purposes people might cease to see them as a novelty and embrace their full potential.
Acknowledgments
I would firstly like to thank my project supervisor Professor Roderic Page for his
guidance and technical expertise. I would also like to thank Maggie Reilly, curator of
zoology at the Hunterian Museum of the University of Glasgow, for her advice and
insight into the various curatorial responsibilities. Finally I wish to my express gratitude
toward those who were willing to take part in this experiment and offer their own
39
Bibliography
Baldwin, T., Kuriakose, L.T., “Cheap, Accurate RFID Tracking of Museum Visitors for
Bohnert, F., Zuckerman, I., Berkovsky, S., Baldwin, T., Sonenberg, L., “Using Interest
Bohnert, F., Zukerman,I., Schmidt, D.F. "Using Gaussian Spatial Processes to Model
Intelligent Techniques for Web Personalization and Recommender Systems, pp. 13-19,
2009
Dusseldorf, 2009
Fleming, D., “Managing Change in Museums”, The Museum and Change, November
Giles, J., “Barcodes help objects tell their stories”, New Scientist, issue 2756, 14 April
2010, pp. 20
vom Lehn, D., Heath, C., Knoblauch, H., “Configuring Exhibits: The interactional
production of experiences in museums and galleries”, Verbal Art Across Cultures: The
McManus, P.M., “Oh, Yes, They Do: How Museum Visitors Read Labels and Interact
with Exhibit Texts”, Curator: The Museum Journal, Vol. 32, Is. 3, pp. 174-189,
September 1989
40
O’reilly, T., “What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next
Simon, N., “Beyond Hands On: Web 2.0 and New Models for Engagement”, Hand to
Simon, N., “Discource in the Blogosphere: What Museums Can Learn From Web 2.0”.
Museums and Social Issues, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2007, pp. 257-274, Left Coast Press
Simon, N., “Going Analog: Translating Virtual Learnings into Real Institutional Change”,
Museums and the Web, 2009, Toronto: Archives & Museum Informatics
Stearn, W. T., “The Natural History Museum at South Kensington: a history of the
Wang, Y., Stash, N., Aroyo, L., Hollink, L., Schreiber, G., “Using Semantic Relations
Winker, K., “Natural History Museums in a Post-Biodiversity Ear”, BioScience, Vol. 54,
Websites
bit.ly
www.talesofthings.com
www.mypersonaltour.com
www.iucnredlist.org
www.jquerymobile.com
www.mobile-barcodes.com
qrcode.kaywa.com
www.denso-wave.com
41
Appendix
A copy of the poster that was erected to advertise the project to members of the public
An example of the visual aids provided for visitors to help relate the codes to their
42
A table of exhibits included and associated categories can be viewed as follows:
43
Sphenodon Reptile Enclosed/Gro Skeleton Australasia 11
punctatum uped
44