Audience Research for the British Galleries Project Silver Gallery ...media.vam.ac.uk/media/documents/legacy_documents/file_upload/5… · Audience Research for the British Galleries

Audience Research for the British Galleries Project

Silver Gallery Discovery Area Part 1: Introduction, Summary of Findings and Recommendations

Audience Research for the British Galleries Project

Silver Gallery Discovery Area

Part 1 (of 3): Introduction, Summary of Findings and

Recommendations

Contract Reference: VA/CON/50/97

6 March 1998

Prepared for:

The British Galleries Project Team of the V&A Museum

Prepared by:

Creative Research

11/12 The Green

London W5 5DA

: 0181 567 6974

Fax: 0181 567 6979

Table of Contents Page

PART 1: Introduction, Summary of Findings and Recommendations

1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................................... 4

2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 6

2.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 6

2.2 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................ 7

2.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 17

Audience Research for the British Galleries Project Silver Gallery Discovery Area

Part 1: Introduction, Summary of Findings and Recommendations

-1-

Creative Research, 11/12 The Green, London W5 5DA

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

This report describes the findings of a research project to evaluate visitor

response to the Discovery Area of the refurbished Silver Gallery at the V&A.

The Area incorporates some of the types of interpretation being considered

for inclusion in the redeveloped British Galleries and the research therefore

sets out to provide valuable information for the development team working on

this important project.

The research was conducted in two stages; qualitative research via focus

groups, followed by a larger scale quantitative survey.

The report is in three parts; in this first part we provide an introduction to the

research, its aims and objectives and methodology. This is then followed by a

summary of the findings across both research stages, incorporating our

recommendations.

The second part of the report contains the detail of the main findings from the

larger scale quantitative survey with its appendices.

The third part contains the main findings of the qualitative research, again with

its relevant appendices.

1.2 Aims and Objectives

The overall aim of the research study (5.1 of the brief) is to provide in-depth

information about how visitors feel about the presentation approach contained

within the Discovery Area, with a view to developing some general principles

which will help the Project Team develop activity areas in the refurbished

British Galleries.

The objectives of the project have been divided into Primary Requirements

and Other Things for Possible Investigation. Extracting from the brief, these

are as follows:



-2-


•

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

•

5.3 Primary Requirements

5.3.1 What People Like and Dislike about The Discovery Area

Information is sought on:

whether visitors like the Discovery Area

whether they go in and why

whether they avoid it and why

what they like and dislike about it.

5.3.2 How Well the Various Interpretive Devices Work

whether the devices work as intended

whether visitors understand how to use them

whether visitors enjoy using them

whether they direct visitors to examine objects more closely (in

the Discovery Area or later in the main Silver Gallery)

whether they hold visitors’ attention and the nature of that

attention

what visitors think they learn; what are visitors’ aims in visiting

the Discovery Area and are these achieved?

5.3.4 Who is Using the Discovery Area

Information is sought on the age, sex, socio-economic background and

educational level of visitors. This is to be compared to the original target

audiences for the Silver Gallery (specialists, the general public and children)

and possibly to the eight target audiences for the British Galleries.

5.3.5 How People Feel about The Discovery Area as a Physical Space



-3-


•

− at whom is the Discovery Area seen as being aimed?

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

•

•

Information sought here includes:

response to its physical size

response to its ambient temperature; perceptions of warmth/cold

response to the current noise levels and the possibility of further

interactives with sound

response to the light level

response to the design

response to the separation of the Discovery Area from the Main

Gallery.

5.3.6 Visitors’ Attitudes to Learning

the role played by the Discovery Area in helping visitors to learn

further exploration of attitudes to learning in the museum context

5.4 Other Things for Possible Investigation

5.4.1 Learning Style and Interpretation Preference

The linking of visitors’ learning styles to their attitudes to the Discovery Area

with a view to considering whether learning style is significant for planning

interpretation.

5.4.2 Other Types of Interpretation that People would like to see in the

Future

Exploration of the type of interpretation that visitors consider appropriate for

the Museum. Does exposure to the Discovery Area lead to a less

conservative view than that indicated by the earlier research conducted in the

British Galleries?



-4-


•

•

•

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

1.3 Methodology

The research was carried out in two stages. A first qualitative stage involved

focus groups with representatives of three of the target groups for the British

Galleries (Family Visitors, Independent Learners and Specialists) and

provided a thorough exploration of many of the issues.

A second quantitative stage, based on structured interviews with visitors to

the Silver Gallery, provided a more robust measurement of feelings on key

issues and gave a picture of who was visiting the Discovery Area.

Greater detail about the method adopted in each research stage is provided in

the appendices, as follows;

Quantitative Stage: Appendix I:

locations for interviewing

details of the number of visitors contacted to achieve the sample

how we defined members of the various target audiences for the

purposes of the survey

how we categorised respondents in terms of learning style

preferences

how respondents who were visiting as a member of a group

were treated in the analysis

the definition of social grades as applied to the sample

an explanation of sampling tolerances as a guide to determining

the statistical significance of any differences in the results

reported

the questionnaire used in the interviews along with the

instructions to interviewers about who to interview and how to

select them.



-5-


−

−

−

−

Qualitative Stage: Appendix II:

definition of the target audiences used for recruiting the focus

groups and other criteria applied

timing of the groups and attendance achieved

the topic guide used in directing the discussion

the recruitment questionnaire.



-6-


2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Introduction

•

•

•

•

•

In this section we have firstly pulled together the key findings of the two

stages of research in responding to the different aspects of the brief. This is

then followed by our recommendations which attempt to develop some

general principles to help the Project Team in developing ‘activity areas’ in the

refurbished British Galleries.

The conclusions and recommendations are based on two different pieces of

research - a quantitative survey among visitors to the Silver Gallery, including

those who went into the Discovery Area; and focus groups among three of the

key target audiences. When drawing conclusions from these two strands, it is

important to bear in mind the effect of the different methodologies.

The quantitative survey is based on interviews with visitors immediately after a

visit to the gallery. In this sense, it is very realistic; questions about behaviour

and attitudes can be answered on the basis of what visitors actually did and

felt during a ‘proper’ visit. If, at times, their responses seemed superficial, this

reflects the fact that most visitors spend relatively little time at any one exhibit

and, unless something in particular grabs their attention, they may not

become engaged intellectually with a display. We are recording the views of

visitors ‘at the coal face’, as it were.

These interviews are, of course, limited in scope and we do not have the

opportunity of probing into visitors’ replies or following up what they tell us.

A particular difficulty with this form of research is that visitors are very

reluctant to criticise anything. This is an example of what is know as the ‘halo

effect’. National institutions, such as the V&A, are generally held in very high

regard, and this, coupled with a desire to ‘please’ the interviewer, means that

most people put a positive slant on their replies. Thus, the findings from the

quantitative survey are likely to paint a more positive picture than is actually

the case.



-7-


•

•

•

•

•

The qualitative study is based on the views of a smaller number of visitors

who have been asked to put the Discovery Area under the spotlight. Being

invited to come to the Museum outside normal opening hours, spending time

purposefully studying the Discovery Area and then talking about it for well

over an hour, is hardly a natural or realistic set of behaviours.

Indeed, the whole process provides respondents with a licence to be critical -

something the moderator encourages. The end result is that everything ends

up being rather larger than life; those things which respondents like tend to

take on an even more positive perspective, whereas things which they dislike,

even fairly trivial things, take on much greater significance. Indeed, because

of the dynamic nature of a group discussion, respondents may not have even

thought about an issue at all until someone else happens to mention it but,

once it is raised, it can take on greater significance for the group.

So, whereas the quantitative results may paint a very rosy picture, the

qualitative findings are more likely to give (possibly) undue emphasis to those

aspects of the Discovery Area that respondents did not like or which they felt

could be improved.

Taken together, the two sets of research findings provide a more balanced

view about the Discovery Area; if we were to sum it up in one sentence, the

overall conclusion would be that the Discovery Area was well received by just

about everyone although there is considerable room for improvement.

2.2 Conclusions

5.3.1 What People Like and Dislike about The Discovery Area

Reaction to the Discovery Area was on the whole positive in both stages of

the research. The findings of the discussion groups tended to be more critical

but even here, there was a consensus that there is a place and a role for

these types of exhibits within the V&A. Family respondents were overall very

enthusiastic about the Discovery Area but even Specialists and Independent

Learners found things they liked.



-8-


•

•

•

•

•

Over half of the visitors involved in the quantitative survey to the Silver Gallery

went into the Discovery Area. Of those who did not, they were not particularly

avoiding it but simply had not noticed it or said they would visit it later. A

quarter did not go in because they did not have time (again not really avoiding

it) and a small number made a positive decision not to go in because their

interest lay elsewhere. Only one respondent had avoided it because he/she

thought it more suitable for children.

An average score of 7.4 out of 10 was given to reflect how interesting visitors

found the Discovery Area. The general things that visitors liked were the

hands-on approach, its combining of education/information with

entertainment, and certain of the exhibits.

The exhibits emerging as particularly well liked differed slightly in the

qualitative and quantitative research; while Stamping and Hallmark Rubbing

came out well in both, the Discovery Wall and Computer Street Scene which

came out well in the quantitative survey attracted both strong advocates and

critics in the discussion groups.

The Flatware Display and Making a Coffee Pot which were well liked by the

focus group participants were not appreciated as much by the undirected

visitors of the quantitative survey. We suspect that this is because in being

asked to look very closely at the Discovery Area and consider its function, the

issue of finding out about the complete silver making process was uppermost

in group members’ minds. For the more casual visitor who is ‘dipping into’ the

Discovery Area however, there is less soul searching about the function of the

Area and these exhibits made less impact.

With respect to dislikes, the quantitative survey threw up very few negative

comments. Most related to a desire for greater space for the Discovery Area,

or to frustration with some aspect of the interpretive devices that meant they

could not be used effectively. This echoed much of what was said in the

earlier qualitative work.

5.3.2 How Well the Various Interpretive Devices Work



-9-


•

•

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

As indicated above, some of the interpretive devices were not working as

intended, either because they were simply not functioning or their design did

not enable them to be used effectively.

The research highlighted issues with the design of:

the Computer Interactive:

the difficulty of accessing information for those not

conversant with computers

surprise that only three periods were available

the programme was too long so that there was an

insufficient turnover of users

the Discovery Wall:

the positioning of some of the elements made its

use difficult for adults

the point of the exhibit was not clear to some of the

group participants (or, perhaps, they were looking

for something more than was intended)

Magnetic Board:

its positioning made access potentially difficult for

children



-10-


−

−

−

−

−

−

−

•

•

•

•

X-rays:

the lack of information about what to look for and

where to find it made these difficult to interpret

Peg Bench:

this was largely unnoticed because it

communicated nothing of the silversmith’s craft; it

therefore was seen as part of the background

rather than something in its own right

Hallmark Rubbing:

there was a problem with the paper moving

around, especially for children

the pencils were not always sharp and it was

thought that crayons might be better for younger

children.

Other devices worked very well; ‘Flatware Display’, ‘Making a Coffee Pot’ and

‘Touch Objects’ were praised in the discussion groups, and overall, ‘Stamping’

and ‘Hallmark Rubbing’ came out well.

Some of the text panels also attracted visitors’ attention and were found to be

of interest, although they were unlikely to be mentioned by Family Visitors in

the quantitative survey.

In summary, it seems that every device found some appeal with certain

audiences and most visitors to the Discovery Area found something that they

enjoyed using.

From the group discussions we can see that certain devices held visitors’

attention more than others for a variety of reasons; the complexity of the

device, level of interest, and puzzlement about what the device is showing.



-11-


•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

From this research it is not possible to tell with certainty whether the devices

directed visitors to examine objects more closely in the Discovery Area or the

Main Gallery since this had to be discussed as a hypothetical scenario in the

groups. For some, it was felt that the Discovery Area would help with a

greater appreciation of the objects in the Main Gallery but not specifically with

directing them to look more closely.

5.3.4 Who is Using the Discovery Area?

A very positive finding to emerge from the research was that the Discovery

Area held appeal for all types of visitor.

The quantitative survey revealed that all demographic variables, the three

target audiences for the Silver Gallery, all of the eight key target audiences for

the British Galleries and all of the four learning styles, were represented by

visitors to the Discovery Area.

Even those audiences which one might expect to find the Area of less

interest, such as the Specialists, were found among its visitors; and the

groups that were most critical in the qualitative research (some Specialists

and Independent Learners) were again, still attracted to the Area.

Members of the AB social group and family groups (especially those with

younger children) were more heavily represented.

Of the four learning styles, Imaginative Learners were least likely to visit the

Discovery Area.

It is clear from the quantitative survey that the Discovery Area is being used

as a complement, rather than an alternative to, the Main Gallery. Ninety-three

percent of visitors who went into the Discovery Area also visited the Main

Gallery. Moreover, visitors to the Discovery Area spent just as much time

visiting the Main Gallery as they did in the Discovery Area.

On average, visitors spent ten minutes in the Discovery Area and twelve

minutes in the Main Gallery. When the respective size of the two areas are



-12-


•

•

•

•

•

•

taken into account, the Discovery Area is holding visitors’ attention for longer

than the Main Gallery.

When evaluating visitors’ subsequent answers about what they got out of their

visit to the Discovery Area, it is worth bearing in mind that many visitors spent

only a few minutes in the Discovery Area.

Family Groups and Independent Learners spent, on average, the most time in

the Discovery Area. Specialists, on the other hand, spent more time in the

Main Gallery.

5.3.5 How People Feel about the Discovery Area as a Physical Space

From the qualitative research, two main schools of thought emerged

concerning whom the Discovery Area was seen as being aimed at. Those

who were more familiar with, and open to, an interactive style of museum

exhibit, appreciated that it was not just children who got something out of such

exhibits.

Others, (mainly Independent Learners and Specialists) saw the Discovery

Area as mainly for children, although they acknowledged that they could have

got more out of it themselves if a fuller picture of silver making had been

conveyed and the interpretive devices had been less ‘gimmicky’. However,

there was no evidence from the quantitative survey that people were avoiding

the Area because they considered it to be only for children.

Both stages of the research indicated that the size of the Discovery Area was

seen as being inadequate for the number of exhibits in it. Some felt that the

area should be enlarged while others felt that some of the devices could be

removed. The prime aim was to gain more space for circulating and gaining

access to the devices.

In the discussion groups it was the Family Visitors who liked the separation of

the Discovery Area from the Main Gallery, mainly because it gave a defined

space in which to ‘contain’ their children. Some in the other groups also liked

the separation for the same reason i.e. children were confined to an area.



-13-


•

•

•

−

−

•

•

•

The separation did however seem to create some problems for linkage

between the information provided in the Discovery Area and that in the Main

Gallery. By visiting the two areas, the more complete picture of silver making

sought by some visitors, is to some extent provided, but this was not picked

up by them.

It is of interest however that the quantitative research demonstrated that the

Discovery Area is used as a complement, not an alternative, to the Main

Gallery with similar amounts of time being spent in each, so that although

physically separate, the two areas tend to be seen as an integrated

experience.

The ambient temperature, light level and noise level were generally unnoticed,

although two points are worth noting:

the Discovery Area was bypassed by some who did not notice it

because it is set back and not ‘highlighted’ in some way

while not disruptive, there was a feeling that visitors would not

like to see more computer interactives with a similar volume of

sound.

On the issue of noise level, there are clearly certain types of sound which are

acceptable, and others which are less so. Several participants in the

discussion groups felt that background period music could have a role to play

in creating atmosphere, but there was general resistance to background

soundtracks which accompany computer programmes or film footage and

which can be found rather irritating.

The general design of the area was criticised by some visitors in the groups,

particularly those with a design background. The L-shape of the area

extending under the stairwell made it a difficult area to utilise well and the

positioning of some of the exhibits was felt to be misguided.

Family Visitors, on the other hand, felt that the quality of the materials and

craftsmanship was high and would be respected by children.



-14-


•

•

•

•

•

•

5.3.6 Visitors’ Attitudes to Learning

Learning provides an important motivation for visiting museums, mainly

because they are recognised as providing opportunities to learn effectively

through an interesting and enjoyable experience.

Learning is seen as taking several forms; from the conventional absorption of

information (the broad picture or isolated ‘gems’) through, the development of

an aesthetic appreciation and socially acceptable behaviour (in children), to

the enhancement of the intellect or spirit.

The visitors involved in the quantitative survey gave a score of 5.7 out of 10

based on the extent to which they felt they had learned something (this

compared to 4.1 for the British Galleries). Those who found the Discovery

Area of greater interest also gave a higher learning score; reinforcing what

was said in the groups that more effective learning goes hand in hand with

enjoyment.

A broad spectrum of points that had been learned were mentioned by visitors,

showing again, that the Area is catering for a range of needs and interests.

Family Groups, in particular, stood out as having learned something from the

Computer Interactive and Hallmarking exhibits.

The visitors involved in the groups had time to take a more analytical view of

what they had seen. They tended to view the Discovery Area more as an

orientation centre and therefore had higher expectations about learning about

the full process of turning silver from its raw state into fully crafted objects.

5.4.1 Learning Style and Interpretation Preference

This research has only touched upon the subject of learning styles and how

they might influence the types of interpretation preferred. While we have

drawn some conclusions based on the findings of the quantitative research,

we are conscious that a rather crude method of assessing learning style had

to be used because of the timing constraints of the interview. We therefore



-15-


•

•

•

•

feel that the area needs further research to determine any links between

learning style and interpretation preferences.

From responses to a series of questions about the type of interpretation

people would like to see at the V&A, we can see that most visitors of all types

wanted a range of information about the objects on display and would

welcome the use of a range of display techniques.

There were some differences in attitudes to interpretation based on the

different learning styles and therefore it may be useful to take the range of

styles into account when designing the Galleries.

Experiential Learners, perhaps unsurprisingly, agreed most strongly with

many of the statements, while Imaginative Learners were less in agreement.

Moreover, it was the Imaginative Learners who were significantly less

represented in the sample of visitors to the Discovery Area included in the

quantitative survey. Finally, while Experiential Learners gave the highest

learning scores, Imaginative Learners gave the lowest interest ratings.

If Experiential Learners are being particularly well catered for at present, more

thought may need to be given to how other groups (particularly the

Imaginative Learners) can be better engaged.



-16-


•

•

•

•

•

5.4.2 Other Types of Interpretation that People Would Like to See in the

Future

Levels of agreement with the series of statements about content and method

of presentation were high in the quantitative survey, regardless of whether

visitors had been into the Discovery Area.

It was noticeable that Specialists (with what in many cases must be

considerably higher levels of knowledge) agreed strongly with many of the

statements.

As indicated under 5.4.1, there was a clear difference in opinion according to

the preferred learning style. Experiential learners, in particular, agreed

strongly with many of the statements; in contrast, Imaginative Learners

tended to adopt a more conservative attitude.

While overall, the higher levels of agreement among both those visiting and

not visiting the Discovery Area, would suggest that visiting did not lead to a

less conservative view, there were two statements where there were

significant differences in the numbers agreeing or agreeing strongly. These

were, ‘it would be really good if you could touch some of the objects’ and

‘computer-based exhibits should be used’. With both these, a higher

proportion of those visiting the Discovery Area than not visiting it were in

agreement. This may have been because their experience of the touching

exhibit and computer interactive demonstrated the appeal of these

techniques.

The issue of whether exposure to the Discovery Area had led to a less

conservative view about interpretation styles was approached differently in the

qualitative research, with participants completing the questionnaire before and

after exposure to the Discovery Area. This showed that experiencing the

Discovery Area did seem to influence people in certain respects. In line with

the quantitative survey findings, more visitors agreed that ‘it would be really

good if you could touch some of the objects’, again perhaps because of



-17-


•

•

•

•

•

•

−

−

exposure to being able to do this ‘safely’, especially where children are

concerned.

More generally however, certain Specialists and Independent Learners who

had previously been more conservative in their views on interpretation, did

soften their views after visiting the Discovery Area.

2.3 Recommendations

Clearly there is a role for ‘activity areas’ in the V & A, both in making a visit

more rewarding for existing visitors, and in attracting new visitors, particularly

those in family groups. Given the high level of demand for greater

interpretation of objects generally, interpretive devices have a potentially

important role to play.

Visitors want information on various levels, from anecdotal snippets which

capture the imagination, to more factual data about the origins of objects and

how they are made.

There also seems to be a great opportunity for the Museum to create a style

of interactive exhibit which is different to that found in the other major

museums; one which reflects the needs and experiences of its visitors yet is

also is in keeping with the ethos and ambience of the V & A.

All types of people are candidates for visiting an ‘activity area’ at the V & A so

that a broad range of physical and intellectual needs should be catered for,

from children to Specialists.

Firstly, there are some general points about the relationship of ‘activity areas’

to the Main Gallery:

the interpretive devices should complement the objects on

display rather than ‘replace’ them

the relationship between the interpretive devices and the objects

on display should be made explicit so that visitors understand

the relevance of the device and the point being made. It should



-18-


−

−

−

−

−

−

•

thereby be clear to visitors that the interactive is there to provide

guidance, insights or whatever, which they would not otherwise

have gained. Without this, the devices are likely to be seen as

‘gimmicky’, something that is not associated with the V & A

if the purpose of the interpretive device is to guide visitors in

how to look at the objects, then it may be appropriate for the

device to be located near to some relevant sample objects

while it may be desirable to incorporate interactive exhibits into

the Main Gallery to provide a clear linkage with the objects,

thought also needs to be given to:

the disruptive effect that exhibits such as popular

computer interactives or audio-visuals can have

on traffic flow and on people’s enjoyment because

of background noise levels

the need for parents to be able to ‘keep an eye’ on

younger children

while it is clearly not essential that interpretive devices are kept

together in a defined and physically separate area, there may be

some merit in setting aside some such areas in the above

circumstances, i.e. where clusters of ‘noisy’ interactives are

called for or where there are devices aimed specifically at

younger children

if ‘activity areas’ are created separate from the Main Gallery,

then these need prominent ‘signposting’ so that visitors do not

pass them by.

Secondly, practical issues to do with access to exhibits need careful

consideration. These include:



-19-


−

−

−

•

−

−

space is needed for more than one visitor, and perhaps a family,

to view a device

where devices are particularly popular, multiple versions may be

needed or where a screen is involved, the additional ‘observer

screen’ should be supplied (as in the street computer

interactive)

computer interactives should contain programmes which are

limited in scope so that any one user does not occupy the

device for an extended period. Further interactives of the same

type but with slightly different programmes may be necessary if

more ground is to be covered.

Regarding the design of the interpretive exhibits, there seem to be a number

of useful pointers from the research. These include:

a range of display techniques is desirable, selection depending

on which technique conveys most effectively the point being

made. For example, video or film footage is seen as potentially

having its downsides (e.g. noise level, interruption to circulation),

but scores highly where there is a need to convey a process or

where one wishes to bring an object ‘to life’ without

compromising the object itself

the fact that ‘interactive’ does not necessarily mean ‘hi-tech’.

Indeed, the views expressed in the qualitative research would

suggest that if there is a bias, it should be towards the more ‘low

tech’ exhibit, such as those involving lifting flaps, touching

objects, carrying out very simple activities, dressing up or

playing with facsimiles of objects. These often combine the

virtues of rarely ‘going wrong’, being easily understood and

offering the opportunity to discuss what is in front of you (rather

than being carried along by a computer programme or film)



-20-


−

−

−

−

−

−

where more ‘hi-tech’ devices are in use (though this does not

apply exclusively to them), there is a need to ensure that their

functioning is monitored and maintained in a timely fashion

careful consideration needs to be given to which audiences are

likely to get the most out of certain exhibits and to the design of

them in accordance with this, both in terms of their ergonomics,

and tone and type of information provided

where exhibits are aimed more at children, perhaps some kind

of graphic device could be used to signal that this is the case,

without deterring children from using other devices or adults

from using the ‘childrens’ exhibits

good quality materials and a high level of craftsmanship should

be used in ‘building’ the interpretive devices so as to reflect the

special character of the Museum

the incorporation of some devices which have a ‘product’ i.e.

something that visitors can take away with them or materials to

be completed (such as treasure trail quizzes) which lead to a

sense of achievement, especially in children

opportunities for personal interaction with Museum staff through

activities, presentations/tours and opportunities to have

questions answered.



-21-


MAIN FINDINGS:

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH STAGE

Documents

Audience Research for the British Galleries Project Silver Gallery ...media.vam.ac.uk/media/documents/legacy_documents/file_upload/5… · Audience Research for the British Galleries