WHEN-Why –WHAT-HOWCommunication ISSUES<br />Paolo Paolini : HOC-LAB, Politecnico di Milano, IT<br />1<br />
Authors<br />Marco Franciolli<br />Director of “Museo Cantonale d’Arte”, Lugano, CH<br />Elisa Rubegni<br />TEC-LAB, USI: ...
RESEARCH QUESTION(s)<br /><ul><li>When is the best timing to deliver “in depth” info?</li></ul>Related questions:<br /><ul...
Whywe should deliver this info?
What are we trying to achieve?
Howshould we deliver it? What’s the best medium?</li></ul>3<br />
CENTRAL QUESTION: WHEN<br /><ul><li>Before a visit
During a visit
After a visit
Independently from a visit
 …..
 A combination of the above</li></ul>4<br />
USER STUDIES<br /> Two exhibitions at Museo Cantonale d’Arte<br /> “Enigma Helvetia” : spring-summer 2008<br />    (in con...
ENIGMA HELVETIA- First User Study : 1<br />  When user utilized the MM narrative, had they visited the exhibition?<br /> 3...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

MW2010: Paolo Paolini et al., Multimedia Communication Issues: Why, What, and When

1,938 views

Published on

A presentation from Museums and the Web 2010.

This paper is about a fundamental, three-fold issue concerning interactive multimedia communication. What is the best timing for providing information about an exhibition? And, depending on the answer: what should be the goal(s) be? What kind of information should be provided? We want to challenge the implicit assumption that ’before the visit’ is the best time for delivering synthetic, promotional and practical information, while ‘during the visit’ is the best time for providing in-depth information. We propose here that two additional important segments should be considered: users who have already visited the exhibition, and users who will never visit it at all. We suspect that ’after the visit’ could be a suitable time for pursuing a strong cultural impact (providing in-depth content, multimedia material, links to interesting sources, etc.). Moreover, past visitors are usually easy targets to reach: they bought tickets! Also, non-visitors could be interested in receiving in-depth communication. Our discussion is based on observations and data collected during two extensive user studies (involving more than 250 users) conducted on the occasion of the exhibition Enigma Helvetia, held at Museo Cantonale d’Arte and Museo d’Arte Moderna, in Lugano (Ticino, Switzerland) in 2008. Additional observations are drawn from a third user study, still ongoing, for the exhibition Look at me, at the same museum.

Published in: Technology
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,938
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
156
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

MW2010: Paolo Paolini et al., Multimedia Communication Issues: Why, What, and When

  1. 1. WHEN-Why –WHAT-HOWCommunication ISSUES<br />Paolo Paolini : HOC-LAB, Politecnico di Milano, IT<br />1<br />
  2. 2. Authors<br />Marco Franciolli<br />Director of “Museo Cantonale d’Arte”, Lugano, CH<br />Elisa Rubegni<br />TEC-LAB, USI: University of Italian Switzerland, CH<br />Paolo Paolini<br />HOC-LAB, Politecnico di Milano, IT<br />TEC-LAB, USI: University of Italian Switzerland, CH<br />2<br />
  3. 3. RESEARCH QUESTION(s)<br /><ul><li>When is the best timing to deliver “in depth” info?</li></ul>Related questions:<br /><ul><li>What the info should be about?
  4. 4. Whywe should deliver this info?
  5. 5. What are we trying to achieve?
  6. 6. Howshould we deliver it? What’s the best medium?</li></ul>3<br />
  7. 7. CENTRAL QUESTION: WHEN<br /><ul><li>Before a visit
  8. 8. During a visit
  9. 9. After a visit
  10. 10. Independently from a visit
  11. 11. …..
  12. 12. A combination of the above</li></ul>4<br />
  13. 13. USER STUDIES<br /> Two exhibitions at Museo Cantonale d’Arte<br /> “Enigma Helvetia” : spring-summer 2008<br /> (in conjunction with the city “Museo d’Arte”)<br />Swiss identity and stereotypes<br />2 user studies: 201 surveys<br /> “Look at me”: winter 2009-2010<br />Faces, seeing, staring, …in the last 50 years of art<br />1 user study: 84 interviews<br />5<br />
  14. 14. ENIGMA HELVETIA- First User Study : 1<br /> When user utilized the MM narrative, had they visited the exhibition?<br /> 32% not visited yet and may be would visit; BEFORE<br /> 48% not visited and no plan for a visit; INDEPENDENTLY<br /> 20% already visited ; AFTER<br />6<br />
  15. 15. ENIGMA HELVETIA- First User Study : 2<br /> No important difference for consultation time!!!<br />7<br />
  16. 16. ENIGMA HELVETIA- First User Study : 3<br />AFTER<br />“Visitors”<br />Find the MM narrative more interesting than the others!!<br />8<br />
  17. 17. ENIGMA HELVETIA- First User Study - 4<br />AFTER<br />“Visitors” slightly outperform “non visitors” <br />9<br />
  18. 18. ENIGMA HELVETIA- Second User Study<br />2 MONTHS AFTER THE END OF THE EXHIBITION!<br />An overall high appreciation<br />People who “totally missed” the exhibition seem to appreciate the narrative<br />Also “visitors” seem to appreciate “reenacting” the experience<br />10<br />
  19. 19. Look at me - User Study<br />Interviewing VISITORS<br />“I do not want to be prepared for my visit”<br /> “I like to be surprised by the exhibition and get the info later”<br /> “After the visit I’ll know what to look for”<br />11<br />
  20. 20. Conclusions : questions<br />Are we focusing on the proper “timing” and goals?<br />Focusing on AFTER and INDIPENDENTLY would our “multimedia products” be the same?<br />What for?<br />12<br />
  21. 21. Current and future work<br />Focusing on AFTER: giving in depth info to people who had visited the exhibition (easy to identify)<br />Improve the research methodology<br />We would like to cooperate with cultural institutions in different contexts (avoiding specific production bias)<br />13<br />
  22. 22. Contact: paolo.paolini@polimi.it<br />We are looking for cooperation!<br />14<br />

×