MUSETECH Evaluation Criteria by Cluster

From CLIO

Overview

Label important.png

The MUSETECH Model[1] posits that in order for museums to successfully utilize technologies, there are three stakeholder perspectives that must be considered. Throughout all stages of a museum technology project, these perspectives offer views that complement and inform the others in a way that can build institutional synergy. This model also states that there are four primary stages or constituents of a museum technology project. These quartiles contain evaluation criteria per perspective, grouped by thematic categories, which allows for a granular overview of the considerations throughout each stage of the technology project.

Design Quartile

This phase corresponds to the initial phases of the technology project, where the central problem is defined and answered.

Quartile Clusters Cultural Heritage Professional Museum Visitor
Design D1. Design and Product Ideation D1Pa. Design Concept D1Ma. Level of Innovation and business intelligence D1Va. Co-design, front-end evaluation and visitor acceptance
D1Pb. Integration with Exhibition D1Mb. Brand name, uniqueness, originality
D1Pc. Integration with other ICT D1Mc. Integration with other ICT
D1Pd. Balancing Physical with Digital D1Md. Budget
D1Pe. Understanding the Fabrication Process D1Me. Staff acceptance
D1Pf. In-house technical knowledge
D2. Experience Design and Narratives D2Pa. Experience added value D2Ma. Interpretive, educational and learning potential D2Va. Engagement
D2Pb. Relevance to audience D2Mb. Personalization potential D2Vb. Personalization
D2Pc. Tailored content D2Mc. Public outreach and communication D2Vc. Learning, entertainment and edutainment
D2Pd. Attentional balance D2Md. Big data potential D2Vd. Attentional balance
D2Pe. Social interaction D2Ve. Affective impact
D2Pf. Before and after the visit support D2Vf. Social interaction
D2Vg. Ability to follow usage on other platforms
D2Vh. Sense of belonging to a community
D3. Interactions, Affordances and Interaction Metaphors D3Pa. Quality of Affordances D3Ma. Follow-up usage on other platforms D3Va. Utility, usability and ease of use
D3Pb. Suitability of interaction metaphors D3Mb. Brand name, uniqueness and originality D3Vb. Intuitiveness, learnability and learning curve
D3Pc. Interface design D3Vc. Responsiveness
D3Pd. Clarity of navigation D3Vd. Clarity of navigation
D3Pe. Follow-up usage on other platforms D3Ve. Personalization
D3Pf. Multisensoriality D3Vf. Social interaction
D3Vg. Ability to follow-up usage on other platforms
D3Vh. Presence of Multisensoriality
D4. Aesthetics, Look and Feel, and Visceral Qualities D4Pa. Look and feel D4Ma. Brand name, uniqueness and originality D4Va. Look and feel

D1. Design and product ideation

Cultural Heritage Professional

D1Pa. Design concept

The main goal or concept that is to be achieved with a specific technology idea or application. Cutting edge or novel technologies without an established use may be difficult to fully conceptualize[2].

D1Pb. Integration with exhibit

This criteria is about how well the technology will or can be integrated into the exhibit or other things on display.

D1Pc. Integration with other ICT

This criteria relates to how well the technology integrates with other Information and Communication technologies. Can this technology be used with other on-site, off-site or online technologies used by the institution?

D1Pd. Balance of physical with digital

This criteria relates to the balance between physical and digital elements within an exhibit or display. Certain technologies can "overshadow" a visitors connection with an exhibit or the objects on display[3].

D1Pe. Clear understanding of the fabrication process

This criteria is about the clarity and understanding of the fabrication, installation and deployment process for the technology by Cultural Heritage Professionals.

D1Pf. Level of in-house technical knowledge

This criteria considers whether there is enough in-house technical knowledge to independently manage the project, or if support and consultation will be required by external contractors to fully manage this project.

Museum Institution

D1Ma. Level of Innovation and business intelligence

What value does this technology and this specific approach add for your institution?

D1Mb. Brand name, uniqueness, originality

This criterion is about whether the technology used serves the museum's brand and reputation[4].

D1Mc. Integration with other ICT

This criterion evaluates how the new technology or project would integrate into the existing digital framework of the institution.

D1Md. Budget

This criterion is about the financial considerations that may be associated with a technology project, including a cost versus benefit analysis.

D1Me. Staff acceptance

This criterion relates to the staff of the institution and their willingness to adopt and embrace the new technology, or if it will merely be tolerated.

Visitor

D1Va. Co-design, front-end evaluation and visitor acceptance

This criterion is related to initiatives that include visitors in the early design and evaluation phases[5].

D2. Experience design and narratives

Cultural Heritage Professional

D2Pa. Experience added value

This criterion relates to how the technology mediation relates to the application it is being used it, because different technologies offer different visitor experiences.

D2Pb. Relevance to audience

This criterion relates to the relevancy of the content on display to the intended audience.

D2Pc. Tailored content

This criterion relates to how a Cultural Heritage Professional might tailor the content and narrative to different visitors' profiles.

D2Pd. Attentional balance

This criterion relates to the attentional balance of the technology and physical elements of an exhibit.

D2Pe. Social interaction

This criterion considers the role this technology can have in fostering and facilitating social interaction in real and virtual spaces.

D2Pf. Before and after the visit support

This criterion relates to the potential of the technology linking pre- and post-visit activities.

Museum Institution

D2Ma. Interpretive, educational and learning potential

This criterion relates to the interpretive, educational and learning potential that the technology project may provide.

D2Mb. Personalization potential

This criterion relates to the museum's potential for providing personalized content for visitors through a customization, context-awareness or adaptivity mechanism. This is distinct from the "tailored content" provided by Cultural Heritage Professionals.

D2Mc. Public outreach and communication

This criterion relates to the potential of a museum using this technology to connect with their communities[6].

D2Md. Big data potential

This criterion relates to the big data potential provided by some technology solutions that can offer useful insight into visitor preferences.

Visitor

D2Va. Engagement

This criterion refers to the opportunities offered to visitors to engage them on a physical, emotional, intellectual, social, cognitive or proprioceptive level[7].

D2Vb. Personalization

Personalization of content and narratives for specific visitors should increate engagement.

D2Vc. Learning, entertainment and edutainment

Edutainment is both instructive and fun, providing both learning and entertainment[8]. Pleasant and positive memories are favored over unpleasant memories[9].

D2Vd. Attentional balance

This criterion relates to how a visitor balances their attention between the physical object and the technology.

D2Ve. Affective impact

This criterion relates to the emotional resonance that a digital resource may invoke from a visitor. A number of studies have highlighted the increasing importance of emotion and affect for learning[10][11].

D2Vf. Social interaction

This criterion considers the role this technology can have in fostering and facilitating social interaction in real and virtual spaces.

Related Criteria: D2Pe

D2Vg. Ability to follow usage on other platforms

This criterion is about how a visitor may follow up with or access something they initially experienced in a different context.

D2Vh. Sense of belonging to a community

This criterion relates to empowering visitors to feel that they are part of a local, regional, national or international community[12].

D3. Interactions, affordances, and interaction metaphors

Cultural Heritage Professional

D3Pa. Quality of Affordances

Affordances are the intrinsic properties of a thing that provide clues about how it can be used[13].

D3Pb. Suitability of interaction metaphors

This criterion is related to the efficacy of an interactive's physical form to communicate it's function.

D3Pc. Interface design

This criterion relates to how clean, clear and comprehensive the interface is, regardless of the form it takes.

D3Pd. Clarity of navigation

This criterion relates to how intuitively and successfully someone can navigate within contents or the physical space being augmented.

D3Pe. Follow-up usage on other platforms

This criterion is about how a visitor may follow up with or access something they initially experienced in a different context.

D3Pf. Multisensoriality

This criterion refers to the inclusion of additional senses beside seeing, reading or hearing.

Museum Institution

D3Ma. Follow-up usage on other platforms

This criterion is about how a visitor may follow up with or access something they initially experienced in a different context.

D3Mb. Brand name, uniqueness and originality

This criterion is about how an interactive communicates the brand identity of the museum.

Visitor

D3Va. Utility, usability and ease of use

This criterion looks at what meaning the visitor can achieve through using the technology interactive. After it has been established to have utility, it is important to ensure that it usable and easy to use.

D3Vb. Intuitiveness, learnability and learning curve

This criterion relates to the initial learning phase associated with the interactive. It is recommended to use familiar affordances and interaction methods that the visitor can learn quickly. The time span a visitor will spend understanding an interactive is very small[14].

D3Vc. Responsiveness

This criterion relates to how responsive the device or application is to the feedback of a user. It can help to provide visual or audio feedback to inform users their input was recognized[15].

D3Vd. Clarity of navigation

This criterion relates to how easily and intuitively a visitor can navigate through the digital interface, as well as physical spaces if used to augment a visit.

D3Ve. Personalization

This criterion refers to how well the content covers the visitors needs, interests and motivations when used through a personalization mechanism.

Related Criteria: D2Pc, D2Mb

D3Vf. Social interaction

This criterion considers the role this technology can have in fostering and facilitating social interaction in real and virtual spaces.

D3Vg. Ability to follow-up usage on other platforms

This criterion is about how a visitor may follow up with or access something they initially experienced in a different context.

D3Vh. Presence of Multisensoriality

This criterion relates to the potential of interactions and engagement that use multiple or different senses that sight and hearing.

D4. Aesthetics, look and feel and visceral qualities

Cultural Heritage Professional

D4Pa. Look and feel

This criterion relates to the physical properties of the technology that make up the look and feel of the final product, such as weight, colors, and materials.

Museum Institution

D4Ma. Brand name, uniqueness and originality

This criterion relates to the potential for the aesthetics and intrinsic qualities of the design to overlap with vision and brand of a museum.

Visitor

D4Va. Look and feel

This criterion relates to the look and feel of the interactive, which might be of great importance to the visitor's overall experience.

Content Quartile

Content can be consumed through a range of medias, platforms, and devices that are used in many different locations. This content needs to be easy to create and update in the future.

Quartile Cluster Cultural Heritage Professional Museum Visitor
Content C1. Content Creation C1Pa. Utility, usability and ease of use C1Ma. Continuity of usage C1Va. Perceived content quality
C1Pb. Learnability and learning curve C1Mb. Logging C1Vb. Visitor-created content, creation and curation
C1Pc. Personalization and adaptation
C1Pd. Multilingualism
C1Pe. Community support
C1Pf. Technology knowledge and support in the house
C1Pg. Interoperability
C2. Content Maintenance C2Pa. Ability to make changes in-house C2Ma. Staff acceptance C2Va. Personalization
C2Pb. Potential for documenting and archiving C2Mb. Interoperability and modularity C2Vb. Social interaction and sharing
C2Vc. Continuity of usage

C1. Content creation

Cultural Heritage Professional

C1Pa. Utility, usability and ease of use

This criterion relates to the utility, usability and ease of use for content creation within the new technology project.

C1Pb. Learnability and learning curve

This criterion relates to how quickly a cultural heritage professional can master the content creation system for the new technology project.

C1Pc. Personalization and adaptation

This criterion relates to mechanisms or approaches that allow content to be adapted to different visitors' profiles.

C1Pd. Multilingualism

This criterion relates to the technology projects ability to utilize learning resources in multiple languages.

C1Pe. Community support

This criterion relates to support provided by communities both inside and outside of the institution itself.

C1Pf. Technology knowledge and support in the house

More cutting edge or complex technologies may require contracting specialists or training staff. It is important to identify everything that is required to manage the content creation process.

C1Pg. Interoperability

This criterion relates to the technologies ability to work across different systems or applications.

Museum Institution

C1Ma. Continuity of usage

This criterion relates to the interoperability of the technology, but also has the added dimension of time. Can the content be accessed at different times, such as before, during or after a visit?

C1Mb. Logging

This criterion relates to the technology's capabilities for creating data useful for analytic purposes, such as gleaning visitor patterns.

Visitor

C1Va. Perceived content quality

Content created for an audience is synthesized by the visitor through a unique process that ascribes personal meaning, resulting in them judging it as more or less relevant.

C1Vb. Visitor-created content, creation and curation

This criterion relates to the visitor's available to create and curate content through the interactive.

C2. Content maintenance

Cultural Heritage Professional

C2Pa. Ability to make changes in-house

This criterion relates to the potential for cultural heritage professionals to update the content within the interactive without needing to involve an outside contractor.

C2Pb. Potential for documenting and archiving

This criterion relates to the potential for cultural heritage professionals to archive, document and preserve content that is created for this system.

Museum Institution

C2Ma. Staff acceptance

For any content creation and management system to succeed, it needs to be accepted by the professionals who will be using it the most.

C2Mb. Interoperability and modularity

Interoperability is important from the museum perspective and also includes modularity, which provides the option of re-using resources.

Visitor

C2Va. Personalization

Content is personalized is cater more specifically to a unique visitors' profile.

C2Vb. Social interaction and sharing

This criterion is about monitoring social interaction and engagement across different digital communication channels such as social media during and after a visit.

C2Vc. Continuity of usage

This criterion is about catering to the different times and ways someone may visit a museum or their resources.

Compliance Quartile

Quartile Cluster Cultural Heritage Professional Museum Visitor
Compliance MP1. Health, Safety and Accessibility MP1Pa. Accessibility MP1Ma. Safety MP1Va. Accessibility
MP1Pb. Appropriateness MP1Mb. Emergency management MP1Vb. Appropriateness
MP1Pc. Safety MP1Mc. Disposal and recycling MP1Vc. Safety
MP1Md. Hygiene, cleaning and maintenance
MP2. Logging and Monitoring MP2Pa. Logging and monitoring MP2Ma. Log storage, access, privacy and analytics MP2Va. Personalization
MP2Vb. Legal compliance
MP3. Ethics and Legal Issues MP3Pa. Protecting audiences MP3Ma. Other legal issues MP3Va. Trust and confidence in museum
MP3Pb. Data gathering and protection

MP1. Health, safety and accessibility

Cultural Heritage Professional

MP1Pa. Accessibility

This criterion relates to the accommodations provided to visitors to increase their access to your project.

MP1Pb. Appropriateness

This criterion covers the appropriateness of the technology and content for the professionals it is being used by.

MP1Pc. Safety

This criterion refers to the cultural heritage professional's safety while engaged with the museum technology experience.

Museum Institution

MP1Ma. Safety

Safety issues can raise corporate and institutional accountability concerns.

MP1Mb. Emergency management

This criterion relates to any procedures that would be required to handle emergencies related to the interactive.

MP1Mc. Disposal and recycling

This criterion relates to the disposal and recycling of technology components used by the project.

MP1Md. Hygiene, cleaning and maintenance

This criterion relates to cleaning and hygiene maintenance that would be required by the interactive, such as single-use protective covers or disinfecting procedures.

Visitor

MP1Va. Accessibility

Accessibility is a complex interplay between the three perspectives, and this one covers the accommodations made directly to visitors by the interactive.

MP1Vb. Appropriateness

This criterion covers the appropriateness of the technology and content for the visitors it is being used by.

MP1Vc. Safety

This criterion refers to the visitor safety while engaged with the museum technology experience.

MP2. Logging and monitoring

Cultural Heritage Professional

MP2Pa. Logging and monitoring

When logging, monitoring, recording, analyzing or sharing data related to a visitor, there needs to be strict rules regarding legal and ethical guidelines.

Museum Institution

MP2Ma. Log storage, access, privacy and analytics

There is a shared ethical responsibility between the museum as an institution and the professionals that access and use visitor data for analytics purposes.

Visitor

MP2Va. Personalization

The visitor needs to be made aware when data is collected about them for personalization purposes.

MP2Vb. Legal compliance

The visitor should be reassured about the legal compliance regarding their personal data.

MP3. Ethics and legal issues

Cultural Heritage Professional

MP3Pa. Protecting audiences

Cultural heritage professionals protect audiences by acting as advocates for the visitors of an institution.

MP3Pb. Data gathering and protection

Data that is collected for analytic and audience research purposes must be handled with the utmost care and in complete compliance with relevant regulations.

Museum Institution

MP3Ma. Other legal issues

This criterion relates to other legal concerns surrounding the project, such as intellectual property, copyright, licensing and data protection laws.

Visitor

MP3Va. Trust and confidence in museum

This criteria relates to the effect on a visitors' trust and confidence in the museum as a result of the above mentioned issues.

Operation Quartile

Quartile Cluster Cultural Heritage Professional Museum Visitor
Operation O1. Deployment and setting-up O1Pa. Ease of use for installation O1Ma. Set-up and start up O1Va. Visitor experience quality and customer care
O1Pb. Distance monitoring O1Mb. Modularity and interoperability O1Vb. Visitor-owned devices
O1Pc. Workflow O1Mc. Staff and front-desk training
O1Pd. In-house technical knowledge O1Md. Distribution, recovery and guarantee
O1Pe. Additional staff training
O2. Robustness and Maintenance O2Pa. Environmental contraints O2Ma. Storage cost O2Va. Robustness
O2Pb. Robustness O2Mb. Level of maintenance O2Vb. Responsiveness
O2Pc. Maintenance required O2Mc. Loss, deterioration, theft and replacement O2Vc. Stability
O2Pd. Updating and replacing O2Md. Reusing and disposing O2Vd. Speed and speed of recovery
O3. Power and Energy O3Pa. Day to day running and maintenance O3Ma. Interventions in the exhibit space O3Va. Prevent feelings of failure and frustration
O3Pb. Stability
O4. Costs O4Pa. Workforce, time and additional staff O4Ma. Financial costs and investments O4Va. Costs (value for money and time)
O4Mb. Running costs
O5. Additional Resources O5Pa. Instructions and how-to guides O5Ma. Adopting, financing and sponsoring O5Va. Uptake

O1. Deployment and setting-up

Cultural Heritage Professional

O1Pa. Ease of use for installation
O1Pb. Distance monitoring
O1Pc. Workflow
O1Pd. In-house technical knowledge
O1Pe. Additional staff training

Museum Institution

O1Ma. Set-up and start up
O1Mb. Modularity and interoperability
O1Mc. Staff and front-desk training
O1Md. Distribution, recovery and guarantee

Visitor

O1Va. Visitor experience quality and customer care
O1Vb. Visitor-owned devices

O2. Robustness and maintenance

Cultural Heritage Professional

O2Pa. Environmental contraints
O2Pb. Robustness
O2Pc. Maintenance required
O2Pd. Updating and replacing

Museum Institution

O2Ma. Storage cost
O2Mb. Level of maintenance
O2Mc. Loss, deterioration, theft and replacement
O2Md. Reusing and disposing

Visitor

O2Va. Robustness
O2Vb. Responsiveness
O2Vc. Stability
O2Vd. Speed and speed of recovery

O3. Power and energy

Cultural Heritage Professional

O3Pa. Day to day running and maintenance
O3Pb. Stability

Museum Institution

O3Ma. Interventions in the exhibit space

Visitor

O3Va. Prevent feelings of failure and frustration

O4. Costs

Cultural Heritage Professional

O4Pa. Workforce, time and additional staff

Museum Institution

O4Ma. Financial costs and investments
O4Mb. Running costs

Visitor

O4Va. Costs (value for money and time)

O5. Additional Resources

Cultural Heritage Professional

O5Pa. Instructions and how-to guides

Museum Institution

O5Ma. Adopting, financing and sponsoring

Visitor

O5Va. Uptake

References

  1. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3297717
  2. Areti Damala and Nenad Stojanovic. 2012. Tailoring the Adaptive Augmented Reality (A2R) museum visit: Identifying Cultural Heritage professionals' motivations and needs. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality - Arts, Media, and Humanities (ISMAR-AMH). Atlanta, USA, IEEE, 71-80.
  3. Merel Van der Vaart and Areti Damala. 2015. Through the Loupe: Visitor Engagement With a Primarily Text-Based Handheld AR Application. In Proceedings of the IEEE Digital Heritage 2015 Conference, vol. 2, 535-544. doi: 10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7419574
  4. Jane Finnis. 2017. Let’s Get Real 5: What’s the Brand? Culture24
  5. Susie Ironside. 2013. Glasgow Museums. In Museum Practice 15.01.2013, Museums Association: London. Retrieved from: https://www.museumsassociation.org/museum-practice/youth-panels/15012013-glasgowmuseums
  6. Elena Not and Daniella Petrelli. 2018. Blending customisation, context-awareness and adaptivity for personalised tangible interaction in cultural heritage. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 114 (2018): 3-19.
  7. Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi and Kim Hermanson. 1999. Intrinsic motivation in museums: Why does one want to learn. The educational role of the museum, Routledge: London, 146–160.
  8. Isabelle Astic, Coline Aunis, Areti Damala, and Eric Gressier-Soudan. 2011. A ubiquitous mobile edutainement application for learning science through play. In Museums and the Web 2011 Proceedings. Retrieved from: https://www.museumsandtheweb.com/mw2011/papers/a_ubiquitous_mobile_edutainment_application_fo. html
  9. John Falk and Lynn Dierking. 2018. Learning from museums. Rowman & Littlefield.
  10. Areti Damala, Eva Hornecker, Merel van der Vaart, Dick van Dijk, and Ian Ruthven. 2016a. The Loupe: Tangible Augmented Reality for Learning to Look at Ancient Greek Art. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry. 16, 5 (2016), 73–85.
  11. Sara Perry, Maria Economou, Hilary Young, Maria Roussou, and Laia Pujol-Tost. 2017. Moving beyond the virtual museum: Engaging visitors emotionally. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Virtual System & Multimedia (VSMM), IEEE, 1-8. doi:10.1109/VSMM.2017.8346276
  12. Luigina Ciolfi, Areti Damala, Eva Hornecker, Laura Maye, and Monika Lechner. 2018. Cultural Heritage Communities: Technologies and Challenges. Routledge.
  13. Donald Norman. 1999. Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions 6(3), 38-43.
  14. Eva Hornecker. 2008. “I don’t understand it either, but it is cool”-visitor interactions with a multi-touch table in a museum." In 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal interactive human computer systems, IEEE, 113-121.
  15. Judy Diamond. 1991. Prototyping interactive exhibits on rocks and minerals. Curator: The Museum Journal, 34(1), 5-17.