The probability of us meeting each other is 0.00487, so......give me a bit more time :)Museums are often considered as the representation of science authorities. So you may wonder:
Is the design process expert-centered?
The answer is no. As you continue reading, you’ll see the heavy proportion of user research and how we managed to integrate the insights into the final design. In this four-month project, our team of three attempted to trigger visitors’ awareness of the interdependent relationship between food, nature, and human through the lens of an apple.
Our final exhibit:
My contribution: actively participated in every step, with major contributions in SME interview with CMNH’s exhibit designer, research analysis of PMM study and SME interviews, initiated contextual inquiries, visitor experience map, digital & physical prototyping, and testing data analysis.
1. Intro: what's unique about 'exhibit design'?
Designing an exhibit has much overlapping with developing a technical product in a business company, but there are also differences that make ‘exhibit design’ unique.
Informal learning setting
The educational values are highly attached to museum visits, which consequently influences visitors’ motivation and expectations, as well as the assessing methods to evaluate whether the exhibit is a success.
Context is critical
- values of ‘museum’ as a concept
- themes of the exhibits
- physical space, e.g. surrounding exhibits, people, architecture style
- visitor profile is both unified (as ‘museum goers’) and diverse (as individuals)
This course project was completed in close collaboration with the Carnegie Museum of Natural History (CMNH). The goal is to enrich the current exhibit series ‘We Are Nature’ which explores the impact of human behaviors on the environment in the past, present, and future (also referred to as ‘Anthropocene’).
Context and constraints
‘We Are Nature’ exhibit series are developed under the Anthropocene Generation 2 Interpretation Framework, the five meta values contained in which are the guidelines as well as the scope for our exhibit design.
Deciding which value(s) we want to pick is a process of finding the overlaps between our desired topics and desired values. We respectively brainstormed some topics and interaction methods we’re interested in exploring, and finally decided to center around ‘food & nature’ under the values ‘systems thinking’ and ‘human stewardship’.
Project timeline: How to design an exhibit for CMNH under the theme ‘Food & Nature’?
2. Preliminary research
There are three categories of information we want to gain from the research:
2.1 Understanding the context
2.1.1 'museum' as a concept: social functions, values, and more
1. Museums provide unique spatial and sensory experiences, dialogues, and informal learning. It’s hard to assess learning outcomes as used in school environments, which marks its value in triggering motivation and interest in further knowledge exploration.
2. Science is not neutral; exhibits represent the standpoint of the museum and curators behind the curtain.
3. The values of exhibits are transmitted to both visitors and museums. Curating exhibits helps museums accomplish the mission of populating science and guarding the authorities, which is a rewarding process as well.
4. ‘Anthropocene’, as a concept, is not yet widely acknowledged by academia, but CMNH is confident to take a step forward to arousing discussions, framing it as the relationship between humans and nature.
5. Frame cultural narratives: by documenting the development of ongoing scientific changes, museums contribute to reimagining the boundaries of scientific authority, which in turn helps shape the scientific identity of each visitor.
‘Confronting complex topics doesn’t mean that museums will lose their credibility. Rather, it shows that they have become active and self-aware scientific, social and public spaces.‘
–Oliveira, G., Dorfman, E., Kramar, N., Mendenhall, C. D., & Heller, N. E. (2020).
2.1.2 Observation study part 1: museum environment
Using three dimensions of observation, each of us immersively observed one interactive setting in CMNH for hours to get a first impression of the exhibit design.
Detailed findings will be shown in 2.3 ‘understanding exhibit design’, but besides this, the observation helped us learn the interior architecture and generally how visitors spend their time inside the museum.
Key insights:
1. CMNH’s Botany hall seems a fit space for our exhibit.
2. The majority of visitors won’t stay long in front of each exhibit. –›bear this notion in mind when designing prototypes, but engage visitors as much as we can
2.1.3 SME interview with environmental science professor
PURPOSE: To learn about the popular topics as well as some important messages we can deliver through the exhibit.
Key insights:
1. Young audiences have more potential to be educated about the values of ‘We Are Nature’.
2. Food production involves the nitrogen cycle, which is just as important as the carbon cycle.
3. Vegetarian diets are better for the environment.
The analysis of three SME interviews will be presented in 2.3.
But in order to decide what knowledge to present, we shouldn’t only rely on the opinions of professionals.
Understanding visitors—their prior knowledge, willingness to accept new knowledge, preferences of exhibit elements, etc–is equally important.
2.2 Understanding visitors
2.2.1 Visitor profile
Existing research has explored the motivation of museum visitors. Generally speaking, museum visits build and support personal identity. (Understanding musem visitors’ motivations and learning, Dr. John h. Falk)
1. explorers: curiosity-driven, have generic interest in the content of the museum
2. facilitators: enable the experience and learning of others in their accompanying social group (e.g. parents)
3. professional/hobbyists: have a close tie between the content and their professional or hobbyist passions
4. experience seekers: perceive the museum as an important destination
5. rechargers: seek a contemplative, spiritual and/or restorative experience
• Things that supported their entering needs and interests.
• Things that were novel.
• Things that had high emotional content for the individual.
• Things that were supported by later experiences.
Although visitors can and do respond to new and novel experiences, they primarily attend to those things that help them accomplish their original visit goals.
So what are visitors’ ‘interest’ and ’emotional content’ in the field of ‘Food & Nature’? That’s how we were led to the ‘personal meaning map’ study.
2.2.2 Personal meaning map (PMM) study
We successfully recruited 10 participants and managed to balance demographics. Immediately after they completed the mind maps, we asked two follow up questions to probe into their thoughts on ‘Food & Nature’:
- What concerns you about this topic personally?
- How much does the environment factor into how you choose your food?
→ Map analysis
As a group, we studied all of our collected maps and coded the concepts they addressed. As we were synthesizing the concepts…
a triangle relationship emerged!
As for the quantitative analysis, we coded and reviewed each personal meaning map from four aspects:
- Extent: how many concepts in total did they note down?
- Structure: how many levels of branches did the map contain?
- Depth: how deep were the concepts? Here we used a 3-point scale to measure depth: 1 represents abstract word, 2 represents everyday STEM language, 3 represents scientific terminology.
- Breadth: how many categories of concepts did the map contain? The categories come from the coding book that we generated together.
Key findings & insights:
1. The maps generally lack breadth of concepts and branches–›Present informative content with robust knowledge to engage visitors in scientific learning.
2. There’s a tendency of thinking about concrete everyday objects instead of scientific concepts–>everyday objects or activities are good entries for abstract and thoughtful issue.
→ Post interviews analysis
As we were reviewing the interview notes,
the relationship triangle was once again emerging from the data!
Analyzing perspective 1: Patterns emerging from the triangle model
Analyzing perspective 2: Comparison between interview notes and PMM data
- More considerations behind food choices (e.g. internal, external).
- More aspects of human behaviors (e.g. family, school).
- The interrelationship (more obvious than shown in the maps).
- The long-term impact of the school education
- Living & upbringing environments shape our perceptions.
- Sense of community (e.g. buy food from local farms).
- The disconnection between humans, food, and nature (think less about the origins).
Altogether, the data harbored three couples of binary dimensions:
- organic & affordability: organic food is healthy and environmental friendly, but it’s expecnsive for many people.
- health concerns & availability: the categories of healthy food we can choose is sometimes limited.
- disconnection & interrelationship: this is the most prominent tension we’ve observed. People don’t bear the notion that they’re highly connected to food and nature.
We think that finding the gaps between these binaries can be an entry point for design.
Key insights
1. Address the forms of ‘nature’ that weave into our everyday life (e.g. garden, neighborhood, community, city…).
2. Triggering family discussion is a good starting point to approach ‘human stewardship’
3. Provide recommendations on what people can actually do in daily life.
2.2.3 SME interview with CMNH's project coordinator
Together with the demographics data gathered from previous surveys, this interview helped us learn more about CMNH’s visitors profile, which made our future design more accurately targeted.
Key insights
- Consider relating the content to the Pittsburgh community.
- Make sure the content is digestible and accessible to the general public.
- Most popular visitor group: 2 parents with a couple of children→echos the previous finding that triggering family discussion is necessary.
2.3 Understanding ‘exhibit design’
2.3.1 Observation study part 2: exhibit setting
Key insights:
- Shorten the distance between ‘science’ and everyday life by involving objects we are familiar with.
- Magnifying the visual results.
- Placing several interactives together can trigger the communications among the audience.
2.3.2 SME interview with CMNH's exhibit designer
We probed into the typical process of designing the exhibit in CMNH, including the considerations and constraints. We also learned about the decisions behind what content to present when the field is controversial in nature (e.g. Anthropocene).
Key insights:
- Break the big idea down when deciding what content to cover.
- Accessibility is crucial for exhibit design.
- Consider the budget and space limitation while designing the physical setting.
Important design implications derived from the entire research phase
- Systematic thinking: encourage people to reflect on the nature, food, and themselves as a whole.
- Provide recommendations on actionable practices.
- Zoom in on the ‘immediate natural surroundings’ (serves as the entry point).
- Some factors to trigger family discussions.
- Consider accessibility, budget, space.
3. Ideation & further research
3.1 Ideation Phase
Based on the findings we got from previous research, we came up with two ideas to address the Anthropocene values.
→ Idea One: Shop for good
This idea was generated through a backward process.
There are three essential elements we know we should incorporate into the interactive: daily scenarios, tangible contribution, and discussion triggers. So we picked three distinct daily scenarios that can reflect different impacts on the environment: supermarket, local food market, and backyard. These familiar places are relatable to both adults and teenagers, which consequently serve as entry points for family discussions.
→ Idea Two: Journey of an Apple
Aiming at invoking system thinking, the second idea emerged from a question about visual metaphor: how can we use the exhibit’s physical appearance to present the value of system thinking?
Enlightened by some previous exhibits, we brainstormed the major visual format: a map-style sandbox with transportation routes and locations. A digital screen is erected behind the map sandbox showing detailed information about each spot. Visitors will move the apple along the route and see detailed information about each spot on the digital screen.
→ Moving forward with one idea
So now the question is, which idea should we pick? Luckily, we received very valuable feedback from museum professionals during the mid term presentation, and we were able to move forward with one idea.
Generally speaking, our audience liked both ideas, but they expressed more concerns over the first idea about its feasibility and time-consuming characteristics. Visitors have to experience a complete cycle of interactions to grasp the ideas we want to deliver, which is not appropriate for museum settings. Therefore, we decided to build upon idea two and revised it based on the feedback.
3.2 Further research I: contextual inquiries
Why contextual inquiries at this point?
Part of our goals for designing the interactive is that visitors can practice Anthropocene values in daily life. But the user data we collected so far all comes from the museum setting. So we initiated to conduct contextual inquiries in the supermarket to learn people’s reasons for certain food they chose.
Leading questions:
1. for supermarket staff: Where were the apples stored before arriving the supermarket?
2. for customers: Why do you select this type of apple?
3. our own observation: 1) How does the market display different types of apples? 2) How does the package display the origins or organic information of apples?
We visited two local large supermarkets and managed to talk with one staff member and three (groups of) customers.
Insights:
- Apples have the most variety among all the fruits in both supermarkets, and therefore is appropriate to be the center of design.
- Before arriving in supermarkets, apples were transported from the packing house and warehouse.
- Customers we encountered understood that being local and organic is better, but the considerations of price and limitations of categories still remain.
- Supermarkets are slowly taking actions towards environmental issues, such as offering more organic choices nowadays.
3.3 Further research II: literature research
Leading questions:
- What are the typical types of farm where apples grow?
- What environmental impact can the process of apple growing and shipping bring?
The result of the research was presented in detail on the digital prototypes. Besides these, we kept seeking inspiration from some previous exhibits related to food or apples, which informed our prototyping in the next stage.
4. Prototyping
4.1 Visitor experience map
We first used the visitor experience map to elaborate on the entire interaction process.
4.2 Content creation
Based on the visitor experience map, our team worked together to brainstorm and elaborate detailed elements in the exhibit.
1. Locations and routes
In order to visualize the journey routes, we decided to put the route on a U.S. map so as to create cultural responsiveness. We also discussed the optimal number of spots in the journey and agreed to use three distinct origins to differentiate the impact from food choices. We picked California as the starting point where lots of fruits grow because it’s easier to emphasize the impact of distant transportation, and picked Pittsburgh as the destination to involve local communities (as discovered in the SME interview).
revised sketch:
emphasize less on other states by using lighter colors and strokes, and exaggerate the locations and routes.
2. The apple
Considering there wouldn’t be museum staff or volunteers facilitating the exhibit, we decided that visitors can only slide the apple along the route on the map so that the apple cannot be taken away.
The reason why we chose apple as the main character is that it’s a commonly seen everyday object which is accessible to everyone. As shown in the contextual inquiry visit, it has the most variety of package and origins, which perfectly fits our intention. Although other fruits may be more suitable for addressing the negative impact of transportation (e.g. avocado), we decided to show less subjective opinions and be cautious about bringing up too much tension.
3. Content on digital screens
The majority of information in our exhibit is displayed on the digital screen, and we created 5 pages for the 5 spots in the journey. As visitors move the apple to each location, the screen content will change accordingly (sensed by technology). We organized the information into digestible knowledge pieces accompanied with visuals.
4. Overall style
Most of the elements in the prototypes are presented in a sketch and simplified style. This is because we want the exhibit to keep a certain distance from real life, so as to make it easier for visitors to accept the Anthropocene values.
5. Accessibility
- We estimated the physical size of the map and the height of the table in order to allow visitors of different height to easily move the apple around.
- Multi-sensory: currently the prototypes include tactile and visual sensory channels, and we expect the formal version to also include auditory and olfactory channels such as sounds in nature and scents of fruits.
- The content does not target any specific type of visitors (or visitors from Pittsburgh only), and the transportation chain applies nationwide.
- The texts on both paper stands and screens are visually accessible to people.
- The exhibit is placed in the center of the Botany Hall, which would not impede visitors’ regular visit route.
5. Testing, iteration, & evaluation
5.1 First round of testing & iteration
5.1.1 Testing process
In order to mimic the ideal exhibit idea that the content changes as the apple moves to each spot, we performed ‘wizard of oz’ by manually controlling the computer.
Leading questions:
- Do visitors interact with our exhibit as we expect?
- Do visitors show interest in the exhibit?
- What are visitors’ takeaway from our exhibit?
Follow-up questions:
- What are your immediate thoughts after interacting with this prototype?
- How easy or difficult was it to understand what was going on?
- Did you learn anything new?
5.1.2 Data collection and analysis
We took notes of visitors’ major behaviors and what they said during the interaction process. Then we transcribed the notes as stick notes in Miro board, and clustered the sticky notes. Visitors’ feedback was clustered into three major categories: interaction, exhibit design, and learning outcomes.
5.1.3 Findings
Generally, visitors showed interest and positive affection for the exhibit, and the overall interaction was intuitive to visitors. But there were a few problems, which provided us design implications.
| Problems |
|---|
Visitors generally thought the pages had too much text. |
Visitors only read texts on the takeaway cards but didn’t want to take the cards away. |
Visitors didn’t feel like discussing the content. |
The current design can invoke system-thinking, but not much human stewardship. |
| Implications |
|---|
Decrease texts, use animations and intriguing illustrations to enhance the ‘aha moments’. |
Change the takeaway cards to flip cards while keeping the original graphics and information. |
Design conversation triggers. |
Emphasize actionable practices in daily life. |
5.1.4 Changes we made
- We added quizzes after introducing each location.
- We added a separate and consistent section to present the real-life environmental impact.
- We changed the takeaway cards to flip cards.
- We rearranged the layout and colors to add contrast, making the screens more reader friendly.
5.2 Second round of testing & iteration
Besides addressing the design implications listed above, we also targeted more on evaluating the learning goals of the exhibit in the second round of testing.
1. Enhance visitors’ understanding of the agricultural production and travel process.
Museum visitors will:
1.1 develop an understanding of how apples come from the origin to the grocery store.
1.2 increase understanding of the relationship between food systems and environment.
2. Increase visitor awareness of the environmental impact from food systems.
Museum visitors will:
2.1 realize the environmental impact of different choices of food.
2.2 recognize actionable food-related methods to improve sustainability.
5.2.1 Other changes in prototypes
- We dug out the routes on the foam board, and made a lego apple to replace the real apple to mimic the real experience.
- Make the flow of prototypes smoother by 1)adding an apple cartoon figure as guidance to the quizzes; 2)allowing visitors to uncap the leaf on the apple to jump to the quizzes.
- Added an animation of a food truck running on the road as visitors slid the apple on the route.
(link to the finalized prototype)
5.2.2 Data collection and analysis
Currently, we have three sources of data to collect for evaluation: observation, quiz results, and interviews. But we came up with another activity to enhance visitors’ reflection on daily behaviors: vote for the type of apple you want to purchase in the supermarket. The voting result is also an important type of data we can collect.
We recruited 8 visitors this time (2 family groups, 2 adult groups, 1 teenager group, and 3 individuals), and took notes based on a ‘learning behaviors’ framework adapted from Barriault, C., & Pearson, D. (2010).
Learning behavior framework: a way to categorize behaviors based on levels of engagement
Three major categories: invitation + transition + breakthrough
We organized notes using the affinity diagram, focusing on interactions with each element of the exhibit, and any signals suggesting visitors’ reflection on Anthropocene values.
The voting results were surprisingly varied, with equal participants buying local and organic. The two who bought conventionally grown apples admitted to the price being their most important factor.
5.2.3 Findings
The changes we made to the second round of prototyping clearly aroused more interest in participants. Visitors actively participated in taking quizzes and read the information of every type of farm. There were also signs of visitors’ systems thinking, such as noting that their voting choices were influenced by the exhibit.
But there was one critical mistake we made: we failed to consider the logistics and technical stability.
- The size of the TV screen and map are both very big, and carrying all the materials to the museum was not easy.
- The lego apple was more fragile than we expected. The lego blocks, especially the leaf, fell apart as visitors held and dragged the apple along the route.
- The TV screen couldn’t work after we tested with two groups of visitors, and the rest of the testers had to read the content on the laptop screen.
- There was some confusion over language used.
- There was some confusion over which direction to slide the apple, especially when the apple did not start at one of the farms.
5.3 Final showcase
Before the presentation showcase, we made further changes to the content and also bought a plastic apple to replace the lego one. Accordingly, we changed the way of revealing the quizzes–visitors now pull up a magnet on the map to see the quiz and put it back to check the answers, which is a creative decision with considerations of low budget.
For the final presentation session, we set up our third round of prototypes and a poster in the CMNH. Museum faculties and some audience from the professional field took turns exploring each group’s prototype and gave feedback.
Our final exhibit received a lot of affirmation and positive feedback from museum faculties.
- The interacting experience was smooth and went as expected.
- The digital and physical interactions were well combined together and consisted of an intuitive and engaging experience.
- The quizzes aroused cautious thinking and discussion in the audience group. The design of the magnet successfully added amusement to the activity and contributed to many ‘aha moments’.
‘This is my favorite exhibit (in the poster session)!’
‘I love how you combine the physical and digital parts together.’
‘This (design of the quiz magnet) is really creative, and you successfully deliver the point.’
Future work
- Turn the map and locations into more vivid 3D models;
- Make the digital screen bigger;
- Find a more sustainable presentation for the voting area: how to keep the record of many visitors’ votes? For example, enlarge the voting area to contain separate tubes or boxes.
Besides, we got some really valuable suggestions from professional audience.
- ‘If I don’t read carefully, can I take away anything from the voting activity?’
While there is rich content on the digital screen, there lack key takeaways standing out to visitors considering visitors’ short attention span.
- ‘Botany Hall has fewer visitors. How do visitors know your exhibit is there? How can your exhibit fit in the large museum context?’
One solution could be expanding the scope of our exhibit from a standalone installation to an assembly. For example, signs about food and nature can be set up at the front door of Botany Hall to attract more visitors, and we can also use social media to encourage visitors to discuss their opinions on the food topic.
6. Reflection
What went well
Our team has proactively conducted each research session, including the contextual inquiries we initiated ourselves, and carefully analyzed all the data. We always strived to recruit more visitors than required and managed to balance the demographics.
Both of our physical and digital prototypes were delicately made. We leveraged creativity to make the best use of each material and iterated our physical prototypes using the least budget.
We managed to gain a deep understanding of the tension people face during daily purchases and addressed this issue in the final prototype.
Throughout the project, we luckily received feedback and suggestions from multiple stakeholders, including our instructor, TA, museum staff, visitors, and so on.
Our team has maintained comfortable and collaborative working dynamics, not only because we are familiar with each other as classmates but also because all of us are passionate about the topic and willing to devote ourselves to the project.
What needs improvement
There are two challenges we didn’t carefully address:
The map has to present all the possible routes at the same time, which causes some confusion such as ‘should I slide along only one route?’ Also, the apple can stay at anywhere when a visitor approaches the exhibit, so sometimes visitors have to slide the apple backward, which doesn’t make sense.
The content we’ve prepared is very rich, but if visitors don’t have time to finish interacting with all the elements in the prototypes, they should still be able to take away some key Anthropocene values.
Final thoughts: exhibit design & UX design
So now let’s look back at my initial concern: is ‘exhibit design’ expert-centered? Is ‘exhibit design’ related to UX design in any way?
Here are my current answers: exhibit design is indeed built upon educational value, which requires a lot of expert input to assure the authority of science and museum as a public figure. But it doesn’t aim at leading us to one single truth—it explores multiple perspectives and possibilities of ‘what might be right’. This results in the similarity between exhibit design and UX design: nobody knows everything, so we have to respect what general people think and find out the sweet spot in between.
Before this project, I didn’t expect there would be so many learning opportunities during the research phase, but it turned out that this was one of the best research experiences ever.