This article is my evaluation on a time-based, interactive "real world" experience - Museum of Anthropology (MOA).
I will mainly discuss the following questions:
What qualities lead to a good user experience here?
What surprised me about the experience?
How might I create a set of heuristics/design principles to evaluate this type of an experience?
How could I learn what works (and doesn't work) about the experience?
Evaluate a time-based, interactive "real world":
Museum of Anthropology (MOA)
Part 1: The qualities that lead to a good user experience here
The place I visited is the Museum of Anthropology (MOA). It gives me a good user experience in that it
provides clear signage and easy wayfinding,
considers the diverse user groups,
embeds artworks in the museum architecture/decoration,
recreates some cultural scenes,
provide interactivity among the viewers, the display and the space, and
uses storytelling as one of the exhibit strategies.
Part 2: The things that surprised me about the experience
Successfully embedding artworks in the museum architecture/decoration is one thing that surprises me. MOA finds new ways of blurring the boundaries between the space and the works of art. For instance, in the main hallway, it uses a wooden art as a natural divider between the hallway and an exhibit room; there are two wooden poles standing next to an entrance which harmoniously blend into the door decorations.
A large number of exhibitions are indigenous artworks, while most visitors are not familiar with indigenous art and culture. In order to bring them closer to visitors and allow people to empathize with indigenous people’s life, MOA recreates some cultural scenes, makes full use of the environment and provides interactions. For instance, next to some indigenous weavings, there are some fabrics, a loom, and a half-weaved fabric on it. It has a sign saying that viewers can try the loom. It recreates the scene that how the weavings are created, and also allows people to touch and weave by themselves. Another example is the display of an indigenous kayak. It is displayed in the Great Hall which has French windows on three sides and next to an outdoor pond. Looking from afar, it looks like the kayak is on the pond in the natural environment, fitting so well in the green pond under the blue sky.
Another thing that surprises me is the storytelling strategy used in the exhibit. It is what engages the visitors and it is what makes us unique. Once entering the lobby, people will see several totem poles standing on both sides of the way. The timeworn surface and its faded color show the traces of time. People can’t help wondering what has happened to tribes. Walking in the hallway, the timeline on the wall shows the ups and downs that this group of indigenous people went through. Some indigenous people are talking about their stories in the touchable screen. Viewers can’t help pausing their steps and listen to their stories. The main hallway connects to several exhibit rooms that are specially used to display indigenous artworks. Viewers are immersed in the remarkable art, and influenced by the atmosphere.
Part 3: A set of heuristics/design principles I created to evaluate this type of an experience
To evaluate museums like MOA, I would set the following heuristics：
- Storytelling: Communicate through the exhibitions. It is what engages the visitors and makes the place special. More considerations will be given to the content, format, and display of the stories.
- Be interactive: Create opportunities that allow users to interact with the exhibitions and space. Interactions between viewers and the display and Interactions between the space and the display are important.
- Be multi-sensory: Activate users’ multiple senses. Engage users visually, tactually and emotionally. Technologies (such as touchable screens, AR and VR technologies) can also provide some help to make some exhibitions multi-sensory.
- Embed the artwork in the environment: Minimize the boundaries between the space and the works of art, and embed works of art seamless in the museum’s environment.
- Be educational: One of the museums’ purposes is to educate the general public. The format, content, layout of the display should be carefully designed to cater to its target users and to inspire their emotional and mental aspects. Provide some spaces that encourage exploring and learning.
Part 4: What works and doesn't work about the experience?
What works:
1. Clear signage and easy wayfinding:
It is effortless for me to navigate in this museum. The direction signs, floor plan sign, emergency procedure sign, and information desks are quite clear and updated.
2. Embed artworks in the museum architecture/decoration: I enjoyed the overall display of the artworks. The museum does a good job to naturally embed artworks in the museum architecture.
4. Interactivity among the viewers, the display and space: There are some artworks that people can touch and interact, such as wooden drums, and hand shadow displays.
What can to be improved:
Although almost all the facilities in MOA are wheelchair friendly, there is one exhibit room doesn’t have an automatic door for people with physical disabilities, which seems quite weird compared to other rooms. The doors are made of brown glass. One problem is that, the color of the door also misleads people whether the room is open or not. The other problem is that the door is a bit heavier than other doors. Even normal people need to push hard to open the door. If people who are in wheelchairs want to enter or exit this exhibit area, they need a person to hold the door for them.
Such design is mainly because the exhibitions in that room needs a special condition to preserve. To reduce the negative effect if it, the museum can put a notice there saying that they can call staff for help, or have staff in front of the door to guide/help people to enter.
© Wenyi Gong 2019
Comments