EmcArts Inc. 127 West 122nd Street New York, NY

Transcription

1 Whitney Museum of American Art MUSEUM AUDIO GUIDE TECHNOLOGIES A Survey and Examination of Current Usage and Trends Final Report July 9, 2008 Report prepared by EmcArts Inc. EmcArts Inc. 127 West 122nd Street New York, NY

2 EmcArts Inc. EmcArts Inc. is a social enterprise for learning and innovation in the arts. In response to the needs of the arts and culture sector, we have created a tax-exempt consulting firm with the potential to transform organizations, communities, and whole fields of endeavor. With our clients, EmcArts creates solutions that stimulate real, long-term change. Our programs generate knowledge, develop networks, increase the effectiveness of local cultural systems, and build high-performance organizations. Team for the Whitney Museum of American Art Audio Guide Research Project: Mikola De Roo, Communications Manager Kurt Richards, Technology Solutions Manager Izabella Waszkielewicz & Mark Peterson, Data Analysts & Researchers Eileen Farrell & Kelly Burdick, Project Coordinators

3 CONTENTS Introduction & Brief Project History 1 Evaluation Methodology 1 Summary of Principal Findings & Possible Recommendations for the Future 3 Summary of the Purpose and Structure of This Study 3 Key Findings 4 Overall Observations & Possible Recommendations 6 Round 1 Analyses: Summer of Love Exhibit Survey & Museum Professionals Survey and Interviews 10 Survey Analysis: Visitors to Summer of Love Exhibit 10 Survey Analysis: Museum Professionals 19 Interview Analysis: Museum Professionals 26 Round 2 Analyses: Biennial Exhibit Survey and Interviews 34 Survey Analysis: Visitors to the Biennial Exhibit 34 Interview Analysis: Visitors to the Biennial Exhibit 50 Appendices Appendix A: Summer of Love Survey Questions Appendix B: Summer of Love Survey Results Appendix C: Summer of Love Survey Demographics Appendix D: Museum Professionals Survey Respondents Interviewees Appendix E: Museum Professional Survey Questions Appendix F: Museum Professional Interviews Line of Inquiry Appendix G: Biennial Exhibition Device Survey Questions Appendix H: Biennial Exhibition Survey Results Appendix I: Biennial Exhibition Survey Demographics

4 INTRODUCTION & BRIEF PROJECT HISTORY In Spring 2007, the Whitney Museum of American Art commissioned EmcArts Inc. to research and investigate current usage and emerging trends in the deployment of interpretive technologies in art museums, with a specific focus on audio tour devices. From its inception, the scope of this project was intentionally focused on how audio tour content is delivered via different audio systems/devices, rather than evaluating or assessing a given tour s actual content. This report contains the comprehensive findings of our investigation. A Brief History of the Audio Guide First introduced in the late 1960s, the museum audio guide has become a ubiquitous supplement in nearly every major museum worldwide. Since its inception, the technology has seen two significant advances: the introduction of the compact cassette in 1980 and the revolutionary shift from analog to digital formats and devices starting in The transition to digital information not only broke the 45-minute time limit on content, it liberated museum visitors from the sequential, linear experience demanded by tape. Digital audio easily allows visitors to jump from work to work, from segment to segment, freeing them to design their own custom tour as they go, if they so choose. Like many other museums, The Whitney Museum of American Art has offered audioguides to museum attendees for many years. A hallmark of the Whitney s audio interpretation program is artist-centered content, which it has archived and to which it holds renewable usage rights. The content has been delivered free of charge via a standard audio device obtained at the museum for use during one s stay at the museum. The most current devices with digital audio in the form of mp3 players, ipods, cellphones, and more have dramatically expanded the choices of hardware platform that museums can use to deliver content. In addition, some devices bring other technologies into the mix, including video and GPS location tracking. Add to this museum website downloads for pre-, post-, or even virtual visit reference, and the field of possibilities for connecting with the potential audience becomes almost limitless. Therefore, one of the key questions guiding EmcArts overall survey of audio guide technologies has been, how might the Whitney continue to invest in this important exhibition interpretation content wisely? Finding possible answers to this question took on an increased urgency in Fall 2007, when initial planning for a new Whitney building site in the Meatpacking District in downtown Manhattan began, as these decisions will inform what space, technical support, and hardware requirements will be needed in the new location. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY In order to bring benefit to the Whitney Museum s future audio-guide plans, EmcArts conducted an evaluation running from June 2007 to July The instruments and Page 1

5 models used, described below, were designed to survey the current use of audio tour technology, particularly the delivery systems (devices and their related technologies) in art museums; to determine the Whitney s current position along the continuum of art museum audio tour technology currently in use; to test delivery system options new to the Whitney during an exhibit; and to synthesize data gathered and recommend an outline roadmap, or possible roadmaps, for the Museum s future use of audio tour technology, both short- and medium-term. Fundamental Investigative Questions EmcArts survey of museum audio guide technologies for the Whitney was driven by the following underlying investigative questions: 1. What are the delivery systems and/or devices that are currently in use by art museums and how long have they been offered? 2. How readily have newly offered delivery systems/devices been used by museum attendees? What have been the barriers, to as well as successes of, usage? 3. How is effectiveness of new delivery systems/devices being measured? 4. What was the investment of resources (funds, time, staff) required to change/add a new delivery system/device? Instruments and Models As part of establishing the Whitney project framework, EmcArts developed and used the following analytical models: ROUND 1 [Spring and Fall 2007] a survey of Whitney Summer of Love exhibit attendees, examining their visiting behaviors and preferences in regard to audio guide devices, and a subsequent analysis of those responses a concurrent online survey of museum professionals on staff at major museums worldwide regarding their experience with and their knowledge of audio guide devices, technologies, and trends, and a subsequent analysis of those responses interviews with seven museum professionals who participated in the online survey ROUND 2 [Spring 2008] a third survey of Whitney Biennial exhibit attendees, examining their visiting behaviors and preferences in regard to audio guide devices, and a subsequent analysis of those responses. In contrast to the first Summer of Love exhibit survey, these visitors were able to choose one of three available audio guide technologies: the standard Antenna Audio museum audio guide device in current wide use at the Whitney, a cellphone tour (using the visitor s personal cellphone), and a new Antenna Audio XPVision multimedia device. The first two devices offered identical audio tour content, but the tour content on the new multimedia device introduced a single Biennial installation on view in the Whitney s lower gallery. Although survey Page 2

6 respondents were not given the option of taking the tour using Apple ipods 1 or other mp3 players, some survey questions were also geared toward gauging respondent familiarity with these devices as well as their receptivity to audio tours available in this format.* interviews with 31 participants in the Biennial exhibit survey * SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL FINDINGS & POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE This section of EmcArts final reports summarizes the main findings of the Whitney Museum audio guide study. Further details on each finding can be found in the main body of the report. Data has been extracted using the results from the two rounds of exhibition surveys administered to Whitney visitors, a survey of and interviews with museum professionals, and interviews with Biennial 2008 exhibition attendees. Summary of the Purpose and Structure of This Study At present, the Whitney Museum offers audio tours free of charge using customized devices leased from Antenna Audio, the museum and exhibition audio-guide company; the Whitney spends thousands of dollars annually on the leasing fees for these devices. This platform and business model worked well for many years, but with the advent of newer, commercial technologies (cellphones, ipods, multimedia devices, and devices with WiFi capacity), it has become increasingly clear that content can be delivered to visitors, both in the Museum and online, via a number of available devices and systems. At the outset, the purpose of this study was to survey current audio tour technology in the larger museum field, to test new delivery options, and to make recommendations for how the Whitney might move forward in its future plans for education interpretive devices. Which platform to adopt became an even more pressing question this past fall (Fall 2007), when initial planning for a new Whitney building site in the Meatpacking District in downtown Manhattan began, as Museum decision makers need to know what space, technical support, and hardware requirements will be needed in the new space. 1 For the purposes of this investigation, the term ipod will be used to refer to any and all generations of the ipod Classic and nano. * Note: The original plan for Round 2 was to survey and interview attendees of the October 2007 exhibit Kara Walker: My Complement, My Enemy, My Oppressor, My Love. Again, visitors to the exhibit were to be given a choice of three available devices, the standard device, cellphones, and ipods. The decision to delay the second survey and gear it instead to 2008 Biennial attendees arose, in part, out of the pending availability of a multimedia device from Antenna Audio. In addition, Antenna Audio was an active participant in the drafting of the surveys for Round 2 (but not Round 1), and ipods were not used as one of the device choices. One consequence of these shifts is that the surveys for Rounds 1 and 2 are aligned on some, but not all, questions. As a result, the scope of the comparisons and analyses that can be drawn between the two attendee pools was limited to data common to both survey Rounds. Page 3

7 Key Findings Both the Summer of Love and Biennial survey pools were relatively technologysavvy across almost all age groups, reporting fairly high familiarity with current technology devices from cellphones to portable mp3 player devices and regular usage of these devices. One of the most surprising statistics is that 73% of surveyed Summer of Love visitors said they own an ipod or other mp3 player device, and more than half said they regularly download audio tracks onto their computers or devices. Furthermore, nearly 40% carry their devices with them every day. Similarly, over three-quarters (76%) of Biennial respondents said they own an ipod or other mp3 player device, and of those who owned such a device, more than half (52%) had it with them. Interestingly, ipod/mp3 device ownership trends are becoming common regardless of age. Even in older groups, most Biennial visitors reported owning such a device: 68% in the group, and 54% in the age bracket. In addition, Museum staff reported anecdotally that visitors in general seem to be open to learning about technology as part of their museum visits. Whitney visitor survey respondents from both exhibitions reported using the Museum s website predominantly to look up visiting hours or current exhibition information. Thirty-nine percent of Summer of Love survey respondents visited the Whitney website at some point in time, most commonly to look up museum hours or find out what exhibitions were currently on display. Only 4% of those who visited the website did so to listen to podcasts or other audio content. Likewise, 41% of Biennial visitors went to the website to find visiting hours or exhibition information. However, when asked, 74% of Biennial respondents said they would be interested in accessing free downloadable audio tour content from the Whitney website. Of those who expressed an interest in this content, 59% said they would prefer to access it before visiting the exhibition, 25% said they would prefer to wait until after seeing it, and 16% said they would prefer to download it at the Museum right now. Both Summer of Love and Biennial visitor respondent pools felt the tour content enhanced their museum exhibit experiences. Of those who took the Summer of Love audio tour a music tour collecting an array of late 1960s music nearly 90% felt the informational content was interesting, and 89% also stated that it enhanced their experience of the exhibition. Similarly, nearly three-quarters (72%) of Biennial survey respondents said their level of understanding/appreciation of the art would have been lower if they had not taken the audio tour. The survey of and interviews with museum professionals revealed that there is no industry consensus on what single approach to audio tour technology was most effective. Many museums are experimenting with new platforms, with some offering several different platforms and delivery systems to reach their audiences. Page 4

8 Both exhibition survey pools were disinclined to and disinterested in using cellphone tours; among Biennial respondents, the standard audio guide was the preferred platform, but a substantial numbered picked an ipod/mp3 player as their device of choice. Only 2% of Summer of Love respondents had ever used a cellphone for a museum audio guide tour; of those who had never used one for an audio guide tour, 46% were not interested in trying one, and another 31% were not sure if they would use one. The majority (58%) said they would be disinclined to using one because they do not want to use their call plan minutes. Although Biennial respondents were specifically asked to evaluate their Biennial tour experiences, the surveys asked them about general audio guide platform preferences as well (irrespective of the platform they used for the exhibition tour): 1. In this hypothetical context, the standard museum device was the platform of choice for 49% of Biennial respondents. A significant number of respondents (38%), however, preferred some kind of ipod/mp3 audio player. This group was split into two equal camps about whether they preferred to use a personal device with content downloaded from home or a pre-loaded museum-owned ipod. 2. As with Summer of Love visitors, the cellphone was the least preferred device, with less than 10% of Biennial respondents picking it as their audio guide platform of choice. In addition, of those who used a cellphone tour, 57% said they would have listened longer if they were using another device. 3. Biennial visitors who used the multimedia device tour were more likely to prefer mp3 player and Apple-created devices as their audio guide platform of choice than either the standard device users and cellphone users. 4. The same general platform preferences of Biennial respondents, examined by age group, yielded some interesting trends with regard to the younger age brackets. The age group preferred the pre-loaded museum ipod over all other devices, with 33.3% picking it as their preferred platform. And although the traditional audio player was the preferred platform for the age group, with 32.7% choosing it, an almost equal number (30.8%) preferred downloaded museum content played on a personal mp3 player. Biennial survey participants who used the standard device or a cellphone for their tours were asked for their ideas about what kind of content they would like to have on a device that offered both images and/or video. The two most popular choices were seeing other works by the artist or other works that influenced the artist. Other common choices were seeing a picture of the artist or seeing video of the artist making or installing the work. Page 5

9 Evaluations of the Biennial tours by device platform revealed that the standard audio device scored high with visitors, with 89% of Biennial survey respondents saying the tour enhanced their exhibition experience. The cellphone tour scored quite low by comparison, however. Cellphone users accessed the same Biennial tour content used on the standard audio guide, but only 53% said that the tour enhanced their visit. Moreover, 20% of cellphone respondents said that the tour did not enhance their experience, more than double the comparable figures for multimedia users and nearly seven times that of standard device users. In all likelihood, this may be due to the fact that 57% found holding the phone up to their ear uncomfortable, and 40% reported problems with phone functionality (signal strength or poor reception, both attributable to the Whitney s stone building). Museum staff also reported that visitors exhibited a notable reluctance to take the cellphone tour to begin with for a number of reasons (e.g., calling plan minute usage, phone battery life, and foreign cellphone). The multimedia tour also scored high with visitors, with 77% of Biennial respondents saying it enhanced their exhibition experience. Hearing the artist speak about his installation was the most popular reason that users liked the multimedia player; other popular reasons were the device s interactivity and learning about other components of the project. Most multimedia users (80%) stated that their reason for taking the tour was to try it out. Overall Observations & Possible Recommendations Most Whitney visitors who opt to take an audio tour regardless of what medium is used for the tour find the content interesting, useful, and enjoyable, a genuine enhancement to their museum exhibit experience. The Whitney website might be reorganized to better display and promote its podcasts and other online content offerings. When asked, Whitney visitors were receptive to the idea of accessing downloadable content from the Museum site, but in practice, most visited the site for basic information on museum hours and exhibits. These contradictory points imply a lack of awareness by visitors that free audio tours and other exhibition-related content are available on the Whitney site. This disconnect might be bridged by adding links to this content on the well-trafficked site pages (such as those displaying museum hours and current exhibits). At present, the standard museum audio device is the preferred medium of choice for museum audio tours, both as a hypothetical preference and based on the actual experiences of survey participants who took an audio tour. Page 6

10 Of all possible audio-tour device choices, from the point of view of museum visitors, cellphones present the most problems and the lowest ratings and are therefore not recommended as a future device platform. While the cellphone seems on the surface to offer some distinct advantages as an audio-tour platform device, this was the central area in which museum professionals were somewhat off the mark in their assessment of the medium. Their appeal to professionals in the field is that they are a ubiquitous technology that almost all visitors already own and know how to use; they cost museums nothing by way of device purchasing, leasing, or maintenance; and they seem to potentially offer an experience similar to that of the current standard museum audio device. However, in practice, the quality of the cellphone audio tour experience is significantly lower than it is for any other device on every evaluation criteria point: the sound quality is lower, the technical problems (reception and/or signal strength) are more numerous, and the physical set-up is cumbersome (either using a headset or holding the phone to one s ear). Perhaps because of these factors, those who used cellphone tours had a more limited attention span for tour content and made fewer stops than their counterparts who used a standard museum audio device. More important, only just over one-third of those who took a Biennial cellphone tour said they would choose the device again in the future, whereas comparable figures for the other two devices were healthy majorities, both exceeding 75%. In addition, while cellphones seem to offer a cheap option to museums, the cost of a cellphone tour for visitors the call-plan minutes that are used during the tour and the draining of the visitor s cellphone battery may be a real issue to museum visitors. The multimedia device works fairly well as an exhibit tour device, but the advantages it offers may not strike enough of a chord with visitors to recommend it as a (higher-tech) replacement for an audio-based device. The multimedia device overall received high ratings and, in and of itself, can be seen as a viable device platform. However, some of the more detailed evaluation points and nuanced comments by interviewees indicate that the multimedia experience may not be as desirable or as effective when compared with the simplicity of a standard audiobased tour. Perhaps the most telling finding was that the advantages such a device offers the variety of media; a tour that integrates audio, video, and images; and interactivity may produce diminishing returns, actually detracting from the visitor experience of a museum exhibit rather than enhancing it. A number of visitors found it distracting to be using a device that competed with the actual exhibit for their visual attention, and interestingly, of all the specific content offerings the medium presented to visitors (hearing the artist talk, seeing artwork close-ups and other images, etc.), the most popular by a large margin hearing the artists voice was the one that was also available in an audio-only format. The popularity of ipod/mp3 players among surveyed Whitney Museum visitors and the flexibility it could offer the Museum as a future device platform warrants further investigation and device testing. While Round 2 survey did not offer an ipod/mp3 player device as an audio tour platform, based on the data that was Page 7

11 included about Whitney visitor comfort with them and about preferred audioguide platforms in general these devices actually may represent the future of audio guide technology in terms of the range of functionalities and flexibility they offer. They offer the same functionality and high-quality experience of a current standard museum device, while offering flexibility in a number of other areas in both the short and long term. For museums, their primary advantage over a vendor-based device is that they can offer a platform that is more flexible and compatible with other commercial devices and mediums. Their shelf-life in terms of currency is also likely to be longer; for example, newer versions of ipod/mp3 player devices have, for some time now, included the capacity to view images and watch video, so they will remain viable even if museum tour content expands and shifts in the future to include these other media. Perhaps most important, these devices are not only already popular with museum visitors, but in fact, they are almost as popular as the standard museum device (49% of Biennial survey respondents chose the standard museum device as their preferred platform, but 38% preferred an mp3 player device format, even though it was not offered as a platform for the Biennial tour). Finally, they are popular across almost all age groups except for those over 65. While it would be premature to move from standard museum players to commercial ipod/mp3 players, given the above trends, further investigation on the use of the latter for audio guides is warranted and recommended in three major areas: a future survey that tests a museum exhibition tour using both an ipod (which uses the m4a file format) and another commercial player (one that uses the common mp3 format) along side a standard museum player to assess and compare visitor experiences with each a survey of museum professionals who have worked with all three devices mentioned above perhaps of Whitney staff mounting the content for the above surveyed exhibit and a more granular survey of other professionals at other institutions to determine specific pros and cons of each platform from an internal organizational perspective (staff capacity, technical problems, etc.). Issues might include time spent adapting and converting content (file compatibility issues), device storage, and device maintenance, among others. a cost analysis of each device as an audio guide platform, including comparisons on purchasing (or leasing) costs, device maintenance, technical support, security, flexibility, ongoing device currency, and content creation Other major questions the surveys and cost analysis would need to address include: Page 8

12 1) If the Museum began using ipods or mp3 player devices for audio tours, should they be pre-loaded, museum-owned devices or are visitor-owned devices a viable option as well? 2) Should the devices have WiFi capabilities? 3) Which type/brand of commercial device is the best choice (ipod or an mp3-format player, and which version of the possible devices)? 4) How will the Museum store and maintain the devices? 5) What security would be needed to prevent device theft? 6) Should the Museum create its own content for these devices or continue to use outside vendors like Antenna Audio or both? Questions about the Whitney s offerings with regard to WiFi capacities remain open-ended and are still evolving. The possibility of moving away from having Museum-owned and -maintained device equipment has obvious economic advantages, and overall trends suggest that visitors are becoming increasingly familiar with owning and using more complex technology and that devices with WiFi capacity will become more common. In that context, as a long-term strategy, it makes sense for the Whitney to consider adding WiFi capacity to its building facilities. That said, current Museum visitor preferences, capacities, knowledge, and ownership trends have not caught up to what is technologically possible. For example, Museum goers (younger ones especially) seem to be growing more open to using personal devices for exhibition tours, but for now, they still reflect a minority of overall visitors. (Of the 38% of Biennial survey respondents who picked some kind of ipod/mp3 player as their platform of choice, half said they would prefer using a personal device to a pre-loaded, Museum-owned one.) Moreover, more than half (55%) of Biennial respondents owned devices with no WiFi capability, and another 11% did not know whether their devices offered that functionality. Given those current limitations, it would be premature for the Whitney to abandon offering its own device equipment in the shorter term. Page 9

13 ROUND 1 ANALYSES: SUMMER OF LOVE EXHIBIT SURVEY & MUSEUM PROFESSIONALS SURVEY AND INTERVIEWS Survey Analysis: Visitors to the Summer of Love Exhibit The survey administered during the Summer of Love: Art of the Psychedelic Era exhibition, on view from May 24 through September 16, 2007, was primarily quantitative in nature and assessed current usage trends and preferences pertaining to audio guide devices. Visitors were offered an accompanying audio tour that could be experienced using a traditional audio guide device from Antenna Audio. Neither cellphone nor ipod/mp3 devices were available, but the survey included exploratory questions about visitor familiarity and experiences with these devices in other settings. (For the complete Summer of Love survey questions, see Appendix A.) This paper survey was administered by graduate school interns of the Whitney s education department to visitors who volunteered their time. The interns were positioned in the main lobby of the Museum and randomly selected visitors were approached as they left the exhibit galleries. The data collection period spanned two weeks and involved strategic timing: surveys were administered both during weekends and weekdays. This allowed the team to capture a suitably varied mix of visitor samples. The data was also collected at varying hours in the day for the same reason. A total of 362 individuals participated in the Summer of Love survey. The following is a summary of findings from the survey data. Complete survey results may be found in Appendix B. Overview of Summer of Love Attendees Survey Pool Demographics The 362 survey respondents represented a relatively even distribution across different age brackets, with the top two age groups (18 24 and 45 54) being a minimum of 20+ years apart in age. (See Table 1.) Table 1 Summer of Love Attendees, By Age Frequency Percent Under % % % % % % % Page 10

14 In keeping with typical museum graphics, the visitors tended to be: Caucasian (86%) more female than male (60% versus 40%) well educated, with 39% having college degrees and 38% having advanced degrees fairly affluent financially although over one-quarter of the survey pool did not disclose their income, of those who did, 38% made over $100,000 annually and 18% made between $51,000 and $100,000 per year Most respondents (83%) attended Summer of Love with other people, either family, friends, or out-of-town guests. More than half (52%) were first-time Whitney visitors, and nearly one-quarter (24%) were visiting for the first time in years. Only 6% of respondents said they visit the museum more than four times annually. Of the 355 survey respondents who disclosed their residency locations, over 50% resided in the tri-state area, with the majority coming from New York (New York City in particular). The other states represented a diverse range of regions across the country, with the highest percentages coming from California (11%), Florida (5%), Texas (5%), and Massachusetts (4%). Another 8% were visitors from other countries. Visitor Familiarity and Comfort Levels with Technology In terms of their daily lives, the majority of the survey pool revealed a relatively high familiarity with technology and regular usage of technology devices, particularly in light of the broad spread of age groups in the survey pool: Nearly all surveyed visitors (97%) indicated that they own a cellphone. Likewise, 93% said they were comfortable with using one. (See Figure 1.) Figure 1 Page 11

15 Perhaps the more surprising statistic is that 73% of surveyed visitors own an ipod or other mp3 device and said they were comfortable with using the device (see Figure 2); more than half regularly (at least twice a month) download audio tracks onto their computers or mp3 players; and nearly 40% carry their ipods/mp3 players with them on a daily basis. Figure 2 Interestingly, while the younger age groups tended to yield a higher percentage of ipod/mp3 owners for all three age groups under the age of 35, the percentage of owners exceeded 80% comparable figures remained high for the and age groups, of whom 61% and 59%, respectively, own an mp3 player. (See Table 2.) Table 2 Summer of Love Attendee mp3 Player Ownership Own mp3 Player Under 18 92% % % % % % % Eighty-one percent of visitors currently had not or had no plans to purchase an iphone. Thirty-eight percent reported being subscribers or members of the social networking sites MySpace or Facebook. Of these 138 respondents, over half (59%) were under the age of 25, another 24% were between 25 and 34, and comparatively few were over 35. Page 12

16 General Audio Guide Preferences The ipod. Only 13% of visitors reported ever using an ipod audio tour during a museum visit. Of the 42 individuals who answered this question, 93% indicated that they enjoyed it, while the other 7% were not sure if they did. Of those who had never used ipods, 57% indicated that they would be interested in trying them, 18% were not interested in trying them, and 26% were not sure. Cellphones. Only 2% of visitors reported ever using a cellphone as an audio guide device during a museum visit. Of these visitors 50% indicated that they enjoyed it, 25% indicated that they did not enjoy it, and 25% were not sure if they enjoyed it. Of those who have never used cellphones as audio guides and answered this question, 46% were not interested in trying them, 31% were not sure if they wanted to try them, and 23% reported wanting to try the cellphone audio tour. The majority (58%) of visitors indicated that they would be disinclined to use cellphone tours because they do not want to use their calling plan minutes. General Device Preferences. Unsurprisingly, when asked if they would like to have several possible audio tour devices to choose from, most surveyed visitors (61%) said yes, though a sizable number (30%) were neutral. When asked to choose from four different delivery systems traditional audio guide devices, content downloaded at home onto an ipod brought to the museum, a museum-provided ipod pre-loaded with the tour, or a cellphone just over half (51%) indicated that they preferred the traditional museum audio guide device. Nearly one-third (32%) indicated a preference for a museum-provided ipod. Only 3% preferred the cellphone tour. (See Figure 3.) Figure 3 Page 13

17 Within particular age groups, however, some interesting trends emerge. (See Table 3.) It is no surprise that the standard device was the most popular with all but the youngest group; over 58% of the under-18 respondents preferred the pre-loaded museum-owned ipod instead. What is more thought-provoking is that the second most popular choice in every age group between 18 and 64 was the pre-loaded museum-owned ipod. Table 3 Summer of Love Device Preferences Within Age Groups Under Standard 33.3% 49.4% 39% 54% 61% 49% 87.5% Visitor-owned ipod w/content downloaded at home 8.3% 18.2% 24% 19% 7% 9% 12.5% Pre-loaded, museum-owned ipod 58.3% 31.1% 34% 27% 27% 35% -- Cellphone % 3% -- 5% 7% -- Likewise, within the preferred device types, the concentrations of age groups suggest some interesting trends. (See Table 4.) Unsurprisingly, of those who preferred the standard device, nearly half (47%) represented the older end of the spectrum (between the ages of 45 and 64). Similarly, of those who said they would prefer using their own ipods to download content at home, over half (54%) represented the young end of the age spectrum (between 18 and 34). Interestingly, however, those who preferred the preloaded, museum-owned ipod represented a broader, more even distribution across age groups: 39% of these respondents were and 40% were Table 4 Summer of Love Device Preferences, By Age Group Standard Visitor-owned ipod w/content downloaded from home Pre-loaded, museumowned ipod Cellphone Under 18 4% 4% 12% % 28% 21% 8% % 28% 18% 17% % 14% 9% % 12% 19% 33% % 12% 21% 42% 65+ 4% 2% Payment Preferences. When asked about paying for audio guides, 47% preferred not to pay an extra fee for usage, while 28% said they would not mind paying extra to use them. (See Figure 4 on page 15.) Page 14

18 Figure 4 Notably, a strong majority (82%) said they would use the guides more often if they were free, and visitors were evenly split in their awareness that the Whitney s audio tour was, in fact, free. (See Figure 5.) Figure 5 Page 15

19 General Visitor Behaviors Website Visitation Of the survey respondents who attended the Summer of Love exhibition, 39% had visited the Whitney s website at some point in time. Within this 39%, the most common reasons cited for visiting the website were to look up museum hours or to find information on special exhibitions or particular works of interest. Only 4% of those who said they visited the website did so to listen to podcasts or other audio content. Preparation for Whitney visit In preparation for their Whitney visit, most people (44%) turned to sources other than the Museum s website. Within these respondents, print media, family, and friends were the most common sources. The rest reported receiving their information from sources, such as the Whitney bulletin, broadcast media, work contacts, and internet sources other than the Whitney website. (See Table 5.) Table 5 Pre-visit Preparation Source Whitney Visit Preparation, By Source # of Exhibition Respondents % of Exhibition Respondents Print Media 59 40% Friend(s) 40 27% Family 20 14% Whitney Bulletin 8 5% Travel Guide 7 5% Radio 5 3% School/Work 3 2% TV 3 2% Internet 2 1% Other 1 1% When asked how they prepared for their visit to the Whitney, 42% of respondents said they did nothing. About one-third (32%) reported browsing the Whitney website, with 7% researching specific works they were interested in viewing during their upcoming visit. Consistent with the experience and anecdotal evidence reported by museum interpretation professionals, 2% downloaded the podcast for Summer of Love, 1% listened to it, and 4% reported having ever downloading and listening to an audio tour in advance of a museum visit. It is worth noting that the Summer of Love exhibit audio tour was atypical of the vast majority of Whitney audio guides in that it was comprised exclusively of late 1960s rock music from the Summer of Love period in the U.S. Page 16

20 Summer of Love Exhibit Audio Guide Device Usage Eighty-five percent of the 362 surveyed visitors to Summer of Love chose to experience the exhibition with an audio tour. Those who opted not to use an audio guide (15%) gave a range of reasons, the most common being that they preferred to experience the artworks on their own. Other less frequently cited reasons (with each reason accounting for 7% or less of those respondents who opted not to use an audio guide) included the following: feeling knowledgeable enough about the art already; feeling that audio tours were too time-consuming; feeling that the audio tour devices were uncomfortable; lack of interest; lack of time; and lack of awareness of the tour s existence. Usage Trends and Usability of the Audio Tour The responses to questions about audio tour usage and user-friendliness were largely positive. Of the 307 visitors who used the guide, the vast majority (92%) agreed that it was easy to use. (See Figure 6.) Figure 6 About two-thirds of those who took the tour (67%) used it throughout their experience of Summer of Love. With regard to evaluating more specific aspects of the audio tour devices, a solid majority of users felt that the devices were comfortable (79%), technically user-friendly and simple (82%), and up-to-date (62%). Only 7% found the headphones uncomfortable, 13% thought the devices were outdated, and 11% had some technical difficulties with the device. Page 17

21 The Overall Impact of the Audio Tour Content and Experience Nearly 90% of Summer of Love visitors felt that the informational content of the tour was interesting and 89% also stated that it enhanced their experience of the exhibition. (See Figures 7 and 8.) The majority of visitors (63%) also felt that the amount of information about each work was just right. Figure 7 Figure 8 Page 18

22 It is interesting to note that most visitors reported that they prefer hearing music content rather than voices (narration), but it is very likely that this statistic is highly skewed due to the nature of this particular exhibit and its all-music format, consisting exclusively of music from the Summer of Love period of American cultural history. While most visitors (47%) felt neutral regarding their enjoyment of the audio tour in comparison to audio tours they had previously taken, either at the Whitney or elsewhere, 44% felt that this tour was much more enjoyable than others. One respondent even commented specifically, Your audio tour is much better than MoMA s! (For additional comments, see page 15 in Appendix B.) Survey Analysis: Museum Professionals The second survey was created to understand the scope and depth of devices and delivery systems of audio tour interpretive content in use by other museums and to determine the Whitney s position along the continuum of art museum audio tour technology currently in use. The museum professionals were surveyed using a quantitative and qualitative instrument designed by EmcArts. (For the complete survey, see Appendix E.) This survey was sent to interpretation, education, and/or technology directors at major museums, and was designed and administered online. The survey assessed trends of availability and utilization of audio guide devices, such as traditional audio guide devices, ipods, cellphones, and multimedia players which offer both audio and video. This study primarily focused on medium to large museums that currently use one or more of these devices. A stratified (by geography, museum type, budget, and size) sample of museums was extracted from this population. Institutions recommended by the Whitney Museum were also contacted. A total of 54 survey invitations were sent out and 39 surveys were returned. Three of the submissions were excluded from the analysis due to incompletion, producing a return rate of 67%. (For the complete list of survey respondents, see Appendix D.) Current Museum Audio Tour Offerings Device Offerings and Usage Sixty-one percent of institutions offering interpretation technologies report that, over the past five years, device usage has increased. For 17%, usage has remained the same, 3% indicated that usage has decreased, and 19% were not sure whether there has been a change. Most commonly, museums offer two technologies or devices to visitors, while a quarter of institutions offer only one device. Seventeen percent indicated that they offer three devices, 8% offer none, and 6% offer four. Page 19

23 As for devices or delivery systems offered onsite by museums, two are deployed in equal amounts (39%): the traditional device (headset, handheld, wand) and cellphone access to audio tours. The next most common devices are ipods (or other mp3 players) offered at the museum with the audio tour content already loaded (33%). Very few institutions (6%) offer ipod/mp3 content that can be loaded at the institution. This is not surprising, as there is an inherent technical problem due to the limitations of the ipod s design. A visitor bringing their ipod to the museum can only sync with the museum s system and download the audio tour if they agree that it will replace the entire contents of their ipod. In nearly all cases this will not be acceptable to the visitor. For the 27 institutions that reported offering more than one device, the traditional device (according to museum professionals) was rated most popular by visitors (22%), followed by cellphone tours (14%), and an ipod or other personal mp3 player provided by the institution (8%). Ownership and Usage Fees Of the 27 professionals who answered this question, 30% of the institutions surveyed indicated that they owned their audio devices, while 19% reported leasing them. However, about half the institutions did a combination of both: they most commonly own and provide the ipods and mp3 players, but also lease traditional audio guide devices from outside vendors for temporary exhibitions. About half of respondents reported that their audio tours are included in the general admission price. Fifteen percent reported that they charge a separate fee for their audio tours. One-third stated that the audio tour fees depend on certain circumstances, such as exhibition-specific devices (temporary versus permanent), membership status (free for members), or exhibition sponsorship. Of the nine institutions which reported not charging any general admission fees, one charged an extra fee for traditional devices, four offered free cellphone tours, two offered free podcasts, and one reported offering visitors a variety of complimentary audio devices. Content Creation and Loading When museum professionals were asked who creates the content for the guides (who conducts the research, writes the script, etc.), responses were evenly split between a) inhouse staff only, and b) a combination of the device vendors and service providers other than the device vendors. Very few reported that content creation was handled entirely by the device vendor or by another party without the device vendor s involvement. The remaining responses included the involvement and input of parties such as university student interns in the in-house creation of content. It is important to note that museum staff is increasingly more directly involved in the content creation and audio production for ipod and cellphone audio tours, primarily because the software involved is so easy to learn and use. These technologies also employ common audio formats (standards such as mp3 and WAV files) for which many audio production software tools are available. This is unlike the closed proprietary systems controlled by the vendors of traditional audio guide devices, over which museum staff has little or no direct control. Page 20

24 At about half the museums, both the formatting of content and loading it on the devices is handled by in-house staff. This is followed by a mix of museum staff, device vendors, and outside vendors other than the device vendor (22%). Eleven percent of museum professionals reported that this function is performed by the device vendors exclusively. Other responses included having university student interns assist with this task. Regarding device maintenance, only 15% of museums reported that they outsourced this task to the device vendors themselves. More commonly (44%) a mix of museum staff or (41%) vendors/partners other than the device vendors are in charge of maintenance. About half of respondents reported that their institutions create additional tours with content customized for specific demographics. Of the institutions that create custom content, the most common groups are children and students, foreign language speakers, and families. The most common vendors of systems and devices designed specifically for use in the museum environment include (in order of prevalence): Acoustiguide, Antenna Audio, and Guide by Cell. Acoustiguide and Antenna Audio s devices are proprietary, whereas Guide by Cell s content delivery systems may be accessed by any provider s cellphone. One museum also mentioned deploying a cellphone tour that included the use of interactive voice response (IVR) technology provided by the vendor Plum Voice Portals. Website Audio Most institutions surveyed (85%) indicated that they offer podcasts or other downloadable audio content, available on either the institution s website (61%), from Apple s itunes online music service, or from other locations, such as podcast aggregating services, blogs, and other podcast directories (Odeo, Podcast Blaster, etc.). Most institutions websites offer two kinds of content the audio tours that visitors to the museum would hear, plus additional content different from that offered in their onsite audio tours. Thirty percent of the institutions only provide content that is found at the museum on their devices. The minority of museum websites (22%) only provide content not found on audio guides in the museum. Introduction of New Technology Of 34 institution representatives, more than three-fourths reported that their institution had upgraded existing audio devices or introduced new audio guide technology within the past five years, and felt the improvements were worth the investment. When asked when their institutions started offering these new or upgraded devices, most (81%) did so within the past two years. A number of different devices have been introduced, including cellphones, ipods, website podcasts, and newer versions of traditional audio guide devices. Seventy percent stated that they felt that visitors successfully accepted this change. The other 30% were not sure. Page 21

25 Obstacles to the Adoption of New Technologies Cellphones Reception problems, both indoor and for outdoor tours (sculpture garden, architectural spaces) Having to overcome the traditional no cellphones in the gallery culture among visitors and guard staff, both in terms of conversations and camera use Not all visitors have cellphones ipods Visitor training challenges Less intuitive interface Small screen resolution a challenge for some visitors Storage and distribution of multiple players presents device management challenges General Challenges: Promotion, marketing, and the cost associated with changing signage, print material, and cabinetry Training visitor services staff to introduce the new devices to the public Budgetary restraints Figuring out how to deliver mp3 audio content onsite when there are so many different types of players Benefits from Introducing New Technologies Benefits to Visitors Virtual visitors have access to website audio Visitors are spending more time at various exhibits and/or artifacts Increased visitor engagement Appeal of ipods and curiosity seems to draw visitors into the experience Visitors associate contemporary art with contemporary technologies and like the fact that ipods are offered Comments provide evidence of some pleasant and meaningful experiences for some visitors as they take in the art and music together Cellphone tour users seem to enjoy that they do not have to make any advance preparations or take any extra steps (stopping at an info desk, etc.) to make use of it Benefits to the Museum Ease of recording, editing, and uploading audio tours in-house by museum staff with minimal training results in flexibility to add or remove content at will The ability to produce content that is then owned by the museum, and reduced cost to produce and disseminate content Page 22

26 Autonomy, as there is no need to contract with external provider to handle the maintenance, logistics, and content ipod and cellphone projects provide a way to get something out there as a first step, a learning experience, fairly quickly, easily, and at relatively low cost Some new versions of traditional devices can store upwards of 15 hours of content. This means, for example, that one could load content for various tours in various languages on one unit. Future Plans Approximately half of respondents stated that they do not have any plans in place to upgrade existing or add new devices/technologies within the next 12 months. For the 14 institutions that are planning an upgrade or addition, they will be working with cellphone (36%), ipods (14%), and other devices (50%), including multimedia players. Current Trends and Expectations Reported by Survey Respondents There is an increased popularity of audio guide devices in general, but especially cellphones and ipods. Cellphone and mp3 player technologies and capabilities will continue to converge, making it less important that institutions offer separate, though similar, cellphone and mp3 versions of audio tours (that is, more people will have internet access on their phones and will use them to download mp3 files or podcasts rather than dialing into a phone number). Moving towards more social, community-oriented audio technologies: those that allow visitors to contribute feedback and other content, those that make the experience more conversational, and those that allow for a non-linear experience. Museums will push to fully own all audio guide content. Museums will push to purchase and maintain their own devices rather than leasing them. There will be a shift from the role of audio tours as educational tools to seeing them more as entertainment. Patrons will increasingly be drawn to unique content and more engaging presentation styles. Audio guides will increasingly use visuals, video, and graphics. So that visitors can choose the interface they feel most comfortable with, audio and video content will be disbursed through multiple ports: internet, cellphone, preloaded device, etc. Audio guides will follow the general trend of Web technologies: that is, the user is "king." There will be a number of opportunities for customizable visits to accommodate various goals, such as educational, interactive experiences, socializing, etc. General increase of web-based entry points to museum access, especially through podcasts and Web 2.0 technologies (YouTube, Facebook, etc.) 2 According to wikipedia.org, Web 2.0 refers to a perceived second generation of web-based communities and hosted services such as social-networking sites, wikis and folksonomies which aim to facilitate collaboration and sharing between users. Page 23

27 Because user behaviors can often be tracked using technology, analysis of this tracking data may be used to shape and to improve the visitor experience. Museums will move away from the one-dimensional institutional voice, and towards a more inclusive, democratic model of storytelling with and for multiple perspectives. Advice from Museum Professionals for Adding or Changing Audio Guide Technology Offerings Regarding Implementation Pilot, pilot, pilot. Find out who your audience is (age, income bracket, technologically savvy, etc.) and what best suits their needs. Test and evaluate with potential audiences, experiment, and build sustainability into the process so it can be managed internally. Be sure that you have knowledgeable and experienced in-house staff available to work on the project, implement it, and maintain it. You need IT staff, web staff, curatorial staff, visitor services staff, and audio production staff. Don't jump on the band wagon of the latest trend just to join the fun. Make sure you access your institutional needs and pick devices/options that make the most sense for your particular location/audience/staff even if it means going with a more low-tech option. Start the process early! Consider cost-saving techniques, but be realistic about staff resources needed to create quality audio products. Coordination between all departments involved (from content development to sales on the front lines) is crucial. Sometimes the only ways to prove that a project is worthwhile is to prototype it get it out there and test visitor response. Regarding Devices Go with a system that is flexible and permits a wide range of content options. Cellphone technology is flexible, convenient for both the museum and visitors, adaptable, and cost effective. Since cellphones are popular and are an effective choice for onsite visitors, podcasts reach a large virtual audience through your website, and both use the same file format, consider offering both. Make audio-tours available on your institution s website. Some people who access your audio tours may never actually visit your institution. Regarding Tour Content Keep segments brief. Manage your content well and disseminate widely. Let content drive the agenda, not technology. Page 24

28 Regarding Vendors It is important to consider the merits of maximizing content across platforms and make creative distinctions about what is appropriate for streaming versus downloadable versus onsite audio content. Consider the big picture look at all of your offerings and determine how to make each unique to distinct audience niches. Have a dedicated point person who is aware of departmental needs and activities so that there is rhyme, reason, and efficiencies to what you are producing. If appropriate, assemble an audio committee that will look at what lies ahead, evaluate results, and maximize the use of content. Carefully weight the costs, including staff time, when deciding whether to produce content in-house or rely on an outside vendor. While you may experience pressure to keep audio production in-house, professional vendors can play an important role in keeping the content quality high and professional. Production takes more work, time, and planning than one might expect, so having the ability to turn to professional vendors can actually be cost effective. Content Experimentation All but 7% of museum professionals reported that they have experimented with different ways of presenting content for the devices. There has been a general trend to create content that presents visitors with a diverse array of content comprising multiple viewpoints and voices. For example, adding video, visitors' comments, interactive media, interviews, original and period music, scripted text, poetry, sound effects, celebrity insights, etc. One museum professional reported introducing a contemplative rather than information-based experience, offering a range of music with only loose relationships to the art on view (not "didactic" music). Many reported interviews with artists and people from the local arts community, in addition to museum staff as a very important content component. Increased efforts have also been made to include perspectives outside the visual arts realm, such as writers, musicians, poets, and youth organizations. Interviews are most successful when kept short. No stop should be more than six minutes long, and most agree that content under three minutes is better. Audio tours are often done in a very conversational, non-scripted style, and are sometimes referred to as audio commentaries, rather than tours. Integrating music is effective and commonly used, but some museum professionals identified gaining copyright permissions as expensive and challenging. Some museums are incorporating visitors voices into their content, ranging from stories and creative writing pieces to songs. Some museums offer downloadable mp3s (podcasts) of longer, more in-depth interviews with visiting artists and curators. Page 25

29 Web 2.0 (Social Networking Technologies) Nearly 80% reported that they are currently using or exploring some of the so-called Web 2.0 or social networking technologies that especially target teens, including: MySpace, blogs, Facebook, YouTube, wikis, Flickr, podcasting, RSS subscription technology, forums, and tagging. Interactivity and Feedback Innovation Curve Over half of institutions surveyed offer interactive technologies; the rest do not (39%) or are not sure. Interactive technologies being offered include blogs, cellphone tour feedback facilities, computer stations, and in-gallery kiosks. Almost half (48%) of museum professionals express that they feel their institutions are on the cutting edge of audio guide technology. Only 7% report their institutions being resistant to adopting new technologies. Interview Analysis: Museum Professionals Common Ground Immediately following the close of the museum professionals survey, EmcArts conducted telephone interviews with respondents from eight of the survey participant institutions. For a list of interviewees, please see page 2 of Appendix D. Some trends became clear among the strategies and observations of respondents to the online survey. Further conversation helped amplify and clarify the picture that was emerging, by encouraging a more free-form discussion, albeit based on a clearly defined line of inquiry (see Appendix F). This also gave respondents a chance to address the importance of certain aspects of their current technology strategies and let them more fully articulate their visions of the future, not only for their institution but for the field of interpretation as well. Finally, these interviews provided an opportunity for museum professionals to give more detailed descriptions and anecdotal evidence of their own audio guide technology initiatives, a level of detail that was unavailable to them in the online survey. While their responses were generally in line with the findings of the online survey, there were nevertheless some surprises and new insights. In order to maintain a certain level of validity in the conclusions drawn from the data gathered during interviews of museum interpretation and education professionals, it was important to determine that interviewees have, to a significant degree, a unanimity of purpose, a similarity of mission. Otherwise, a disparity of approaches to technology Page 26

30 and disagreement over which approaches are effective could be dismissed as a logical outgrowth of disparate institutional and/or departmental goals. Institutional or Departmental Mission The first set of questions in the line of inquiry related to each interviewee s role within their respective institutions, and what he/she perceived as the institution s or department s goals. There were widespread similarities in missions, especially around the following: A mission to engage visitors and enhance their experience or understanding of the collection, an exhibit, or particular work of art A willingness to use various techniques and format, both analog (wall labels, signage, print materials) and digital (audio, video, multimedia, websites, podcasts) An acknowledgement that visitors bring diverse learning styles and that these need to be addressed with an equally diverse mix of tools and techniques A desire to diversify, in various ways, the audience being addressed Engaging visitors and enhancing their experience is measured and expressed in various ways. For some, it simply means getting the visitor to spend more time in the exhibit or in front of an individual work. For contemporary art, especially, it means giving the visitor a pathway to understanding works that are sometimes challenging or puzzling. General Trends in Interpretation While new technologies may not be necessarily driving the changes that have been taking place in museums approaches to interpretation, they have certainly helped enable change by providing new and, in many cases, easy-to-use platforms upon which institutions can build their new or expanded strategies. Most interviewees expressed a general move away from lectures, occasional large events, and turning the wall label into sound. Of the various terms most commonly used by interviewees when asked about changes they had experienced or indeed changes they had led the term diversity occurred most often, and in various contexts. All reported that audience demographics have diversified in terms of age range, ethnic groups, educational levels, and more. Interpretive content has likewise diversified, sometimes in response to these demographic changes, and sometimes in order to attract new and more diversified audience groups. Content is often now designed for specific demographics: children, teens, ethnic groups, community groups, foreign language speakers, and more. This diversity of content is, according to some, further diversifying the audience. There is also a trend to diversify and increase (or restore, in many cases) context specifically, to reflect or recreate the context within which the art was originally created. Context that may not be included in the pristine white box exhibition space is being reintroduced to the visitor experience. This routinely includes input from those outside sometimes far outside the expert curatorial environment. Often audio content includes the artist s own voice, voices from other artistic disciplines (poets, authors, or Page 27

31 architects), voices from outside the arts (scientists, researchers, or historians), and even visitor feedback. This amplified context could also include social and cultural events of the time, important facts about the artist s life, or even, as one museum professional put it, a conversation the artist had with someone in a pub. In short, anything that might help the work live and breathe and sing in the [visitor s] mind. Several interviewees also noted that a one size fits all approach to designing audio content does not work. Each tour needs to be tailored to the specific needs of a collection or exhibit. One tour may lend itself to artist interviews, another may focus on more traditional curatorial input, another may only have a musical soundtrack, and another may mix all of these. General Challenges with Audio Tours Despite museums best efforts to make audio tours engaging, informative, entertaining, enlightening, and even hip, take-up rates can often still remain quite low. The museum professionals interviewed saw the following as some of the key reasons for limited use of their tours: a preconceived notion that audio tours are not very interesting a lack of interest by younger visitors in taking their parents audio tour lack of prior good experience that might lead visitors to try again a desire to avoid being perceived as someone who needs a crutch to appreciate fine art a desire to avoid being reined in ; visitors desire to have total freedom to enjoy the experience on their own the level of intimidation some visitors feel about the technology the cost to take a tour (device rental fee, cellphone minutes) Common Responses and Strategies to Challenges with Audio Tours While there is a fairly broad variety of responses to the above challenges in terms of the actual technology being put in place and the relative success of these choices, certain observations and strategies were found to be in fairly common practice across the spectrum of institutions. One of the most commonly noted reasons for adopting or at least testing the use of cellphone tours and ipods as audio delivery devices was to attract that portion of the audience that was not interested because they saw it as their parents audio tour. By offering something hip and new, by employing technology with which a younger demographic is (on average) more familiar, museums experience higher usage among younger visitors. A generally unanticipated, but welcome, side-effect of using cellphone tours and ipods was that these new delivery devices were also surprisingly popular with the parental generation. They used the experience as an opportunity to try something that was perceived as hip and new that they hadn t had a chance to try in any other setting. Page 28

32 The Technology Another approach taken in an effort to stray from the traditional curator s voice audio tour was the use of unscripted interviews or conversations with the artist or others involved with the work being described. This was especially true with those employing cellphone tours, as the cellphone itself seemed to suggest the need for a less formal, less scripted, and more conversational style of content. It was noted by several interviewees that the length of each stop on an audio tour is of critical importance, and that shorter is better. Longer format interviews may be fine for a website podcast, but interviewees felt they are not suitable for someone walking through an exhibit. A largely positive review of a recent traditional audio tour at a major museum summed it up quite bluntly, stating that the tour was like having an expert curator walking through the exhibit by your side. But try to find a gallery with a bench many of the curators talk too slowly, and carry on for far too long. However, some museum professionals have noted that visitors sometimes ask for additional and deeper information. One museum professional reported a very successful audio tour offering as many as seven individual audio stops for a single large artwork in the exhibit. Cost is also a factor that cannot be taken lightly. One interviewee noted a tenfold increase in audio tour usage when a $5 tour was subsequently offered for free. Perhaps the most universally reported institutional challenge impeding the more widespread popularity of otherwise successful audio tours was the need to do sufficient and properly-targeted marketing and publicity. A repeated refrain was that marketing is key; no matter how deep and engaging the content and no matter how cutting-edge the technology, success is not possible if nobody knows it exists. There is general agreement that most visitors do not research audio tours before visiting a museum, so point-of-sale information and prominent signage are vital to the success of any tour. The interviews of museum professionals were designed to elicit information not already covered in the museum professional online survey, which covered specific technologies. Interviewees had strong, even passionate, opinions about what works for them and what does not. While most questions were not device-specific, responses nevertheless centered on ipods, cellphones, and traditional audio guide devices. The one technology about which specific questions were posed was podcasts. As they have a strong connection to ipod and cellphone tours in that they all use the mp3 file format standard, there was a need to hear interviewees comments on the role (or absence) of podcasts in their audio strategies. ipods The ipod Experience While the ipod is the cool new technology, in actuality, it provides the visitor with an experience that has more in common with a traditional audio tour device than with a cellphone. It is a high-quality, stereo, immersive experience. The high level of audio Page 29

33 quality provides the tour designer with a wider range of content options: high and low voices, very enjoyable music, successful use of background music, or other effects. Essentially, the ipod provides the option to create a soundtrack to accompany the visual experience. This is in marked contrast to the one-ear, monophonic, reduced sound quality experience of a cellphone tour. Like traditional devices, the ipod interface does not force you into a linear or serial experience (listening to each stop in sequence), but allows you to pick and choose the stops you want to listen to. However, the ipod software interface was designed for music audio primarily and is a less-than-perfect fit for the museum exhibit audio tour experience. There is more menu scrolling to negotiate from one stop to the next or when jumping around among stops. Overall, the user interface experience is less friendly than with the traditional device, or even a cellphone, which only requires the visitor to dial a phone number and punch in the number of the stop. This interface also requires some training for users unfamiliar with the device. One museum professional reported including an initial audio track that provided training for the uninitiated visitor. Some visitors (it seems mostly the older audience) are simply intimidated by the technology, sometimes enough to avoid it completely. However, some visitors are attracted to the ipod simply because it is an exciting, new technology they have not tried before, and they take the opportunity to try it in this safe setting, where they know they will get some personal attention, and where they know they have an interest in the content. While one interviewee reported the use of dual headphones, so that a pair of visitors could share the tour experience, for most, it is also a solitary experience. As most museum visitors reportedly visit with a friend, a family member, or an out-of-town guest, this can be seen as a handicap. Other negative factors reported were that users objected to using earbuds that other visitors had used, and difficulty reading the small text on the ipod screen. ipod Advantages Clearly, the cool factor automatically gives the ipod an advantage over traditional audio device tours, at least with a significant portion of the audience. It helps pull in a younger audience already familiar with the device and looking for an alternative to the traditional tour. Furthermore, as mentioned above, it surprisingly draws in members of the older audience with a curiosity to try the latest gadget. Perhaps the key advantage for the interpretation or education professional is the level of control and flexibility one can have over content creation. Additionally, the ability to create content and maintain the devices in-house requires a relatively low investment in hardware, software, and training costs. Simple but effective audio production tools are available free (Garage Band for Apple computers) or at low cost (Pyro, Nero, and others for Windows). However, it must be noted that users familiar with ipods have fairly high expectations of audio quality, so the audio production process must be taken seriously. Page 30

34 Anecdotal evidence also tends to show that users spend more time on the tour and at each stop using ipods than they would with cellphones or traditional devices. In addition, unlike a cellphone, an ipod is not a technology a visitor must own and bring with them to the museum, but can be rented or picked up onsite. ipod Challenges The most mentioned hardship is maintenance of the device: keeping them charged, storing them, and dealing with all the cables involved. Because ipods are designed to be an individual s primary audio device, the logistics of handling multiple devices were clearly not one of the manufacturer s primary concerns. Security is also an issue. Those museums currently using ipods report that they hold the visitor s credit card or driver s license as collateral against the devices being stolen. Proper marketing and signage is important. In order to bring in the visitor who may be intimidated by the new technology, one museum advertises its audio tour, not its ipod tour. They find that most visitors will not back out when they find out they will be using an ipod instead of a traditional device. One last challenge, although it is not a challenge in the same sense as the abovementioned difficulties presented in actual practice, is that presented by a limitation of the ipod s syncing interface, that is: the visitor cannot sync up his/her ipod with content at the museum without erasing the existing contents of the ipod. Cellphones The Cellphone Experience As already discussed above, cellphone tour experiences have a compromised sound quality, are monophonic, and are overall less immersive. The visitor dials a phone number, then the number of the stop on the tour, holds the cellphone to his or her ear and listen for the length of that stop. The visitor can then choose to listen to another stop or simply hang up. The cellphone tour is more attractive to those visitors who, for whatever reasons, do not want to commit to the immersive, encompassing ipod or traditional device experience style. They seem to approach it in a more á la carte manner, dipping in and out of the tour, dialing up those stops they are most interested in, skipping others, and perhaps interacting with their fellow museum-goers in between. Instead of being in a contextual bubble separating them from everything but the artwork and the audio, they have to opportunity to reach out for information when they want it and still maintain a connection with the people and things around them. The use of a cellphone in itself seems to promote a more conversational, anecdotal style of content creation. Those in charge of creating and/or assembling content report approaching the audio more as if they are having a conversation with a friend on their cellphone (although the conversation is one-way in this case). The content source can be Page 31

35 the voices of artists, curators and others talking, but the speaking style may not be as formal as that found in traditional audio tours. Another important, though not fully explored, functionality of cellphones is the facility for visitor feedback. Cellphone tour users can be presented with an option of leaving comments, a voic essentially, for one or more groups. These tend to be used like comment books, but they also have the potential for collecting user-generated content, which can then be fed back into the exhibit or audio tour, or re-used in future. Some interviewees report that they are much more successful when used with more accessible or friendly exhibits. Cellphone Advantages The most important role for cellphones may be in their potential as a bridge strategy a short-term method for exploiting the only ubiquitous visitor-owned device we currently have. Of all the technologies in place, cellphones probably present the least technological challenges, both for the museum and for the visitor. Current cellphone tour vendors make it very easy to upload existing podcasts or other mp3 content, or even record spoken content directly over the phone. It also presents the least number of hurdles to the visitor: they own the device, they do not have to stand in line, they know how it works, and it s free to use (except perhaps for their cellphone plan minutes). Some look to cellphone tours as a possible standard method for sharing content for traveling exhibits between museums. This is already taking place, although not widely enough to be considered a standard at this point. Cellphone Challenges While cellphone audio content can be produced in the same format as ipod tours, the sound production staff needs to take into account the monophonic nature and lower resolution sound quality inherent to cellphones. Close attention must be paid to the voices used (women s voices tend to be easier to understand), and background music, in most cases, needs to be very limited or completely eliminated. The monthly cost to a museum for providing cellphone tours, while certainly much lower than leasing traditional devices, is still higher than the essentially free selfproduced podcasts uploaded to ipods an institution owns. Most of the cost of using a cellphone falls upon the visitor, unless their cellphone plan has a lot of free minutes during museum visitor hours. It also requires the visitor to own and provide the device, although one museum plans to have a small fleet of loaner cellphones on hand. Another hurdle, albeit one that has been surmounted with a bit of discussion and explanation, is the prevailing culture in which visitors are admonished not to use their cellphones in any way in the galleries. Both visitors and the guard staff are now being asked to do an about-face from the policy that has been in place for years. Page 32

36 Cellphone reception can sometimes be an issue. One museum reported bad reception for a major carrier throughout their galleries, and another reported having to invest in signal boosting devices in some of their galleries. It is also important to note that marketing strategies for cellphone tours must take into account the specific differences from other audio tours. There is no desk where visitors stop and pick up the device, so point-of-sale signage is not an effective tool. Instead, it must be very visibly marketed in signage near or in the exhibition spaces and in print pieces when visitors first enter the museum and/or pay for tickets to the space. Podcasts and Webcasts While podcasts (or webcasts generally the same thing as podcasts, but accessed via an institution s website, as opposed to itunes or another podcast aggregator) are not necessarily the same as audio tours or a technology specific to audio tours, they are so closely linked that a short discussion of their role in a museum s interpretation and website strategies is in order. While these audio files are based on the same mp3 format that is most often created for use on ipods and cellphones, they have different characteristics depending on how and where they are being used. As noted earlier, the audio production process for ipod and cellphone audio tours is fairly low-cost in terms of software investment, and the technology is surprisingly easy to use. This means that one can create content that can be used for ipods, cellphones, and for use as podcasts, either to share with world via itunes, another online venue, or on an institution s website. One approach is to use exactly the same content at the institution content that is offered on all the devices the visitor can use at the museum as a podcast on the website. This gives the visitor the opportunity to download the audio tour to his/her ipod before visiting the museum, although there seems to be very little evidence that this is actually happening. Podcasts can take on different roles and serve different purposes. While the most effective audio tour stops seem to be fairly short (three minutes or less), people seem more willing to listen to longer segments when they are on their own computer at home, preparing for a visit, or researching a particular artist or artwork. Podcasts can also serve as alternative teaching resources. While an audio tour designed for grade school children would not be appropriate for high school visitors, a podcast may be used by a teacher in a high school art class. Podcasts may also contain the entire content of a lecture or artist interview, thus satisfying the needs of researchers, academics, or other audiences seeking a more detailed and in-depth understanding of an artist or an artwork. Again, this content can be edited and scaled-down for use in an audio tour, if appropriate. Podcasts can also be used to aggregate comments and feedback submitted by visitors via cellphone tours or other means, and put up on the website in podcast form if they cannot be incorporated into the audio tour itself. Page 33

37 ROUND 2 ANALYSES: BIENNIAL EXHIBIT SURVEY AND INTERVIEWS Survey Analysis: Visitors to the Biennial Exhibit The survey administered during the Whitney Biennial exhibition, on view from March 6 through June 1, 2008, was primarily quantitative in nature and assessed current usage trends and preferences pertaining to audio guide devices. Visitors were offered an accompanying tour that could be experienced through three available devices: the standard Antenna Audio museum audio guide device in current wide use at the Whitney visitors cellphones a new Antenna Audio XPVision multimedia device Audio content was identical for the standard audio guide device and the cellphone tours. The multimedia device tour, by virtue of its capacity to accommodate visual materials, offered different content from the two audio-only tours and was shorter in duration; it introduced a single Biennial installation on view in the Whitney s lower gallery. No ipod/mp3 player device was available, but the survey included exploratory questions about visitor familiarity and experiences with this type of device in other settings. Visitors who took the survey were given a different survey depending on the device they chose to use for the tour. Although many questions remained the same across the three surveys, each contained some questions specifically geared to evaluating the visitor s experience on the tour device he/she chose (For the complete Biennial survey questions for all three devices, see Appendix G.) This paper survey was administered by graduate school interns of the Whitney s education department to visitors who volunteered their time. The interns were positioned in the main lobby of the Museum and randomly selected visitors were approached as they left the exhibit galleries. Unlike the first exhibit survey, the data collection period for the Biennial spanned only five consecutive days in late April. Although these surveys were administered both during weekdays and on one weekend as well as at varying hours in the day to capture a varied mix of visitor samples, the timeframe was short enough that it raises some issues about the degree to which generalizations can be derived from the data. A total of 293 individuals participated in the Biennial survey. The following is a summary of findings from the survey data. Complete survey results may be found in Appendix H. Page 34

38 Overview of Biennial Attendees Survey Pool Demographics As with the Summer of Love survey pool, the 293 survey respondents represented a relatively even distribution across different age brackets, with and as the top two age groups. (See Table 6.) Table 6 Biennial Attendees, By Age Frequency Percent Under % % % % % % % Other visitor demographics yielded trends similar to those of the Summer of Love exhibit survey pool. Again, Biennial visitors tended to be: Caucasian (75%), but with slightly larger percentages of other ethnic groups than the Summer of Love survey pool (10% Asian-American, 8% Hispanic/Latino, and 5% African-American) more female than male (62% versus 38%) well educated, with 83% of surveyed visitors having college degrees or higher (48% with college degrees and 35% with advanced degrees) economically well off although 22% did not disclose their income, of those who did, 31% made over $100,000 annually and 26% made between $51,000 and $100,000 Most respondents (74%) attended the Biennial with either family, friends, or out-of-town guests. Another 5% attended with a tour group. Compared to the Summer of Love survey pool, where more than half were first-time Whitney visitors, 37% of Biennial survey respondents were first-time visitors. Nearly one-fifth (19%) were visiting for the first time in years, and 9% of respondents said they visit the museum for than four times annually. Overview of Biennial Attendee Devices Interestingly, given the three alternatives at the outset, overall, Biennial survey participants were fairly evenly split in the device they used for the tour, with only slightly more respondents (37%) opting for the standard audio device than for either a cellphone tour (30%) or the tour using the multimedia device (33%). It is worth noting, however, Whitney Museum staff reported anecdotally that visitors were highly resistant to taking a cellphone tour; reasons ranged from not wanting to use Page 35

39 cellphone plan minutes to not wanting to deplete the cellphone battery to owning a foreign cellphone that could not be used in the U.S. In addition, breaking out each age group s choices by device type, it is clear that there were some concentrations around particular device types by age (see Table 7): The standard device was most commonly chosen by older attendees those between the ages of and The highest concentration of cellphone users came from the and age groups. Multimedia device users tended to fall in the under 18 and age groups. Table 7 Biennial Attendee Device Choices, By Age Standard Cellphone Multimedia Under 18 10% 1% 25% % 16% 18% % 24% 28% % 26% 11% % 16% 12% % 15% 4% % 2% 2% Visitor Familiarity and Comfort Levels with Technology As with Summer of Love attendees, the Biennial survey pool indicated a fairly high level of technology usage and familiarity with a range of current commercial audio devices.* Virtually all respondents were comfortable with using standard computer interfaces, with more (48%) preferring a PC interface to a Mac (28%); 23% were equally comfortable with both platforms, and only 1% were comfortable with neither platform. However, when the interface preferences are examined by the audio tour devices chosen by the respondents, it suggests that there may be a correlation between Mac fans and those who are inclined toward a multimedia experience. (See Figure 9.) Figure 9: Biennial Attendee Computer Interface Preferences, By Device Choice * (Note: Round 2 surveys did not include questions on cellphone ownership or about social networking site subscriptions/memberships.) Page 36

40 The vast majority of respondents (76%) said they own some kind of device with mp3 audio capacities; only 24% said they do not own any device of this kind. (See Figure 10.) The ipod was, by a large margin, the most commonly owned device. Of those who owned an ipod or other mp3 player, more than half (52%) had it with them. Figure 10 The age-group trends regarding ownership of a device with mp3 player functionality (ipod, iphone, or other mp3 player) were similar to that of the Summer of Love group, but a few contrasting trends are worth noting. First, devices with mp3 player capacities are becoming ubiquitous, regardless of age group. (See Table 8.) Similar to the Summer of Love group, for all age groups under 45, the percentage of owners exceeded 75%, and even the percentages for the older and age groups where 68% and 54%, respectively, own such a device were relatively high. Perhaps even more interesting, the specific percentages for each age group demonstrate that ownership of these devices does not, strictly speaking, correlate to youth. The highest percentage of mp3 device ownership was not in the youngest group, but actually the group smack in the middle of the overall age span: 92% of the age group owned an mp3 player device. Table 8 Biennial Attendee mp3 Player Ownership Own Some Kind of mp3 Player Device Under 18 78% % % % % % % Page 37