1    

Einstein’s  Garden  Society  Award:  Individual  Project  Reports  2017    

Tangle    

Dr  Karen  M  Smith  (March  2018)  

   Executive  summary    Tangle  was  an  interactive  installation  using  lengths  of  thread  woven  individually  by  each  participant  to  understand  the  factors  (social,  educational,  psychological,  etc.)  that  influence  health  throughout  life.  Tangle  explored  how  much  control  human  beings  have  on  their  health  and  how  they  can  understand  more  about  healthy  ageing.  The  project  was  produced  by  Einstein’s  Garden  in  partnership  with  UCL  and  in  collaboration  with  a  textile  artist.  The  project  was  piloted  in  Einstein’s  Garden  at  the  Green  Man  Festival  2017.  In  the  festival  programme  Tangle  was  described  as:    ‘Everything  that  goes  into  your  life  is  important  -­‐  what  you  eat,  where  you  grow  up,  who  your  friends  are,  your  education  and  all  the  tiny  details.  These  threads  of  our  lives  intertwine  and  lead  to  different  outcomes  for  health  and  ageing.  Weave  your  own  threads  into  the  growing  sculpture  and  untangle  the  data  of  people’s  lives  to  understand  more  about  living  a  long,  happy  and  healthy  life.  In  partnership  with  UCL.’    An  overview  of  the  project  can  be  found  here:  http://einsteinsgarden.net/tangle      Participants  progressed  through  a  series  of  activities  with  questions,  for  example,  a  memory  test,  a  balancing  exercise.  Each  activity  contained  an  information  board.  Based  on  their  responses,  participants  collected  ribbons  relating  to  their  life  course  or  life  story  and  wound  those  into  a  

2    

sculpture.  The  project  aimed  to  weave  each  participant’s  life  course  and  generate  learning  regarding  the  study  of  life  course  epidemiology.  The  evaluation  suggested  that  the  project  was  extremely  successful  in  creating  a  visual  and  highly  enjoyable  activity  which  inspired  audiences  to  learn  and  evaluate  their  own  lives  and  consider  their  health  and  happiness  and  the  factors  that  influence  them.      Tangle  attracted  a  broad  range  of  people.  The  audience  responded  thoughtfully  to  Tangle  with  demonstrated  enjoyment  and  engagement.  As  evidenced  in  the  substantial  number  of  vox  pop  interviews  and  in  the  observations,  the  activity  presented  a  visual  tactile  experience  which  generated  quiet  discussion  and  engagement  alongside  fun  activities  which  generated  deeper  understanding  of  one’s  health  over  the  course  of  a  lifetime.      The  interaction  with  the  audience  and  the  experience  of  visitors  being  so  visibly  engaged  and  enjoying  the  project  was  the  most  rewarding  aspect  for  the  collaborators.      The  most  challenging  aspect  for  collaborators  was  a  combination  of  keeping  up  with  the  demand  for  resources  (e.g.  fabric)  as  people  participated,  and  ensuring  consistency  across  the  eight  activities.  Following  the  event,  many  collaborators  expressed  surprise  at  how  engaged,  welcoming,  inspired  and  interested  the  audience  were,  and  reaffirmed  how  enjoyable  the  experience  was  working  with  an  audience.  Most  collaborators  had  been  inspired  to  consider  their  everyday  work  in  a  new  way  and  had  gained  or  increased  understanding  of  public  engagement  with  science.  The  creative  collaborator  had  learnt  more  about  science  and  the  way  in  which  people  are  willing  to  engage.  Some  gains  in  skills  and  confidence  in  public  engagement  were  also  evidenced.        Methods      Online  surveys  were  conducted  with  collaborators  before  and  after  the  event,  exploring  their  expectations  and  reflections  on  their  involvement.  Seven  collaborators  completed  the  pre-­‐event  survey,  and  eight  completed  the  post-­‐event  survey.    Observations  were  conducted  at  the  Green  Man  festival  focusing  on  each  of  the  individual  projects.  Four  observations  were  completed  focusing  on  Tangle,  totalling  66  minutes.      Short  vox  pop  interviews  were  conducted  with  visitors  at  the  festival  to  explore  their  experiences  and  perceptions  of  the  activities.  Eight  visitor  vox  pop  interviews  were  conducted  with  visitors  to  Tangle  involving:    

• two  adults,  one  male,  one  female    • one  adult  male,  one  female  child  • two  young  adult  females  • two  separate  groups  of  one  adult  male  • one  adult  female,  one  male  child    • one  young  adult  female  • adult  female  and  young  adult  female  

 

3    

Vox  pops  were  also  conducted  with  collaborators  at  the  festival,  investigating  how  they  were  finding  delivering  the  activities.  Four  collaborator  vox  pop  interviews  were  conducted,  with  three  scientists  and  one  creative  collaborator.      

   Findings    

 1. Sample  

 Of  those  collaborators  taking  part  in  the  pre-­‐event  survey,  six  were  scientists  /  researchers  and  one  was  an  artist/engagement  collaborator.  Of  those  taking  part  in  the  post-­‐event  survey,  six  were  scientists,  one  was  an  arts  /  engagement  collaborator,  and  one  was  ‘other’:  research  manager.      

2. Collaborators’  existing  experiences  of  public  engagement    For  four  collaborators,  this  was  their  first  time  being  involved  in  a  public  engagement  project  of  this  nature,  three  had  been  involved  in  similar  projects  before.  Of  those  involved  in  similar  events  before,  one  had  taken  part  in  science  fairs  including  ‘hands-­‐on  activity’  and  another  had  worked  on  theatrical  productions  to  promote  awareness  of  charity  work,  and  medical  illness.    All  collaborators  were  motivated  to  get  involved  for  the  opportunities  it  offered  for  increased  public  engagement  involvement  and  to  disseminate  and  communicate  research  with  the  public  rather  than  ‘just  within  academia’.  One  collaborator  said:  ‘It  seemed  like  a  good  opportunity  to  have  some  'expert'  help  to  create  an  engaging  public  engagement  event  and  also  to  reach  an  audience  who  might  not  have  ever  heard  of  life  course  research.’      

4    

Another  science  collaborator  also  wanted  to  meet  people  and  hear  their  thoughts  on  their  work.  The  arts  /  engagement  collaborator  said  that  both  their  dedication  to  public  engagement  and  their  previous  ‘brilliant  experiences’  working  in  Einstein’s  Garden  at  Green  Man  had  motivated  them  to  become  involved.      

3. Collaborators'  perceptions  before  the  festival    Before  the  festival,  one  scientist  and  one  artist  collaborator  were  concerned  about  time,  and  for  the  artist  collaborator  the  relatively  short  time  scale  for  designing  and  preparation.  One  scientist  had  no  concerns  and  the  other  four  concerns  were  as  follows:  

• ‘The  creative  side.  Sometimes  scientists  are  not  the  most  creative  people’.  • ‘How  much  help  we  would  actually  receive  from  the  experts  in  terms  of  creating  the  event’.  • ‘That  it  would  be  hard  to  be  on  the  same  page  as  non-­‐scientists-­‐  our  study  is  sensitive,  and  

we  don't  want  to  communicate  details  of  our  work  incorrectly  or  give  viewers  the  wrong  impression  about  it’.  

• ‘That  there  would  be  disagreement  over  major  aspects  of  the  project  that  prevented  work  progressing  quickly’.  

 In  terms  of  collaborators  concerns  for  delivering  the  project  at  the  festival,  three  people  were  concerned  about  the  weather,  particularly  rain,  which  they  perceived  may  cause  complications  with  logistics  or  other  practicalities.  Another  person  was  mildly  concerned  about  the  practical  installation.  One collaborator  voiced  a  concern  about  time  and  logistics:  ‘I  have  a  slight  concern  that  our  activity  may  be  too  time  consuming  and  how  logistically  people  will  be  able  to  work  their  way  through  it  and  how  much  time  people  will  spend  with  us’.  A  further  collaborator  was  concerned  about  the  activity  being  tiring.    In  terms  of  what  collaborators  were  looking  forward  to  about  delivering  the  project  at  the  festival,  all  collaborators  were  anticipating  interaction  with  the  public  and  with  each  other  and  were  also  looking  forward  to  public  reactions  and  discussions.  Two  were  also  keen  to  be  able  to  see  the  installation  within  the  festival  setting.      Collaborators  were  aiming  for  a  range  of  outcomes  as  a  result  of  their  involvement  in  the  project.    Most  science  collaborators  were  looking  for  developed  public  engagement  and  science  communication  skills,  in  addition  to  developed  mutual  understanding  and  insights  into  their  research  via  interaction  with  audiences.  A  fun  and  playful  experience  was  also  hoped  for.  One  collaborator  said  they  aimed  for:  ‘experience  of  putting  together  a  more  creative  public  engagement  experience  which  may  hopefully  help  us  to  think  a  bit  outside  of  the  box  for  all  our  future  activities  as  well  as  reusing  aspects  of  Tangle.’ The  creative  collaborators  hoped  to  learn  from  the  scientists,  and  to  have  developed:  ‘A  beautiful  sculpture,  some  great  experience  with  public  engagement  and  to  have  facilitated  some  good  learning  experiences.’ Two  additional  pre-­‐festival  comments  expressed  thanks  and  enjoyment  of  the  experience  of  working  with  Einstein’s  Garden  and  team,  for  example:  ‘X  and  X  were  engaging  and  supportive,  and  meetings  were  co-­‐ordinated  well.’    

4. Collaborators’  perceptions  following  the  festival    

5    

Collaborators  were  asked  about  their  perceptions  of  the  overall  experience  of  delivering  the  project  at  the  festival.  On  a  scale  of  1  -­‐  10  (1  -­‐  very  negative,  10  -­‐  very  positive).  All  collaborators  rated  their  experience  in  the  top  three  scores  of  8-­‐10,  with  one  rating  the  experience  as  very  positive  (scoring  10),  five  scoring  9,  and  two  scoring  8.      When  commenting  on  their  ratings,  the  collaborators  noted  the  positive  experience  and  enjoyment  that  they  had  felt,  and  the  positive  feedback  from  the  keenness  of  the  public  to  interact  and  discuss  Tangle  widely.  ‘Fun’  was  a  word  used  consistently,  and  all  collaborators  suggested  that  the  project  was  successful.  Engagement  with  the  public  and  the  festival  as  a  whole  had  engendered  feelings  of  pride  and  satisfaction.  Seeing  the  project  come  to  life  had  been  a  real  highlight  and  for  one  collaborator  the  success  of  the  activity  had  far  exceeded  their  expectations.  One  collaborator  discussed  the  activity  as:  ‘Very  positive,  career  enhancing,  great  fun,  learnt  a  lot  from  the  scientists  and  the  public.  Learnt  a  lot  about  quick  problem  solving  and  how  different  levels  of  engagement  can  work.  It  was  very  hard  work  and  tiring!’    The  collaborator  who  scored  10  commented:  ‘I  really  enjoyed  it  and  it  was  successful;  people  liked  it  and  it  went  smoothly’.  It  was  noted  by  one  collaborator  that ‘the  help  we  had  to  come  up  with  the  concept  was  invaluable  and  the  fact  that  the  project  was  so  creative  led  to  it  being  a  much  more  enjoyable  experience’.     Collaborators  were  asked  about  the  most  rewarding  aspect  of  the  experience.    All  the  science  collaborators  said  that  an  aspect  of  audience  involvement  and  interaction;  predominantly  talking  to  people  engaging  and  sharing  their  research  work  with  the  public,  was  the  most  rewarding.  One  science  collaborator  also  found  seeing  the  overall  sculpture  at  the  end  rewarding.  Collaborators  commented,  for  example:  

• ‘engaging  with  interested  people  at  the  festival  who  asked  for  recommendations  for  further  reading’.    

• ‘Several  long  discussions  with  members  of  the  public  who  came  over  to  see  what  we  were  doing  were  very  rewarding’.  

 For  arts  /  engagement  collaborators,  the  most  rewarding  aspect  was  again,  public  engagement  and  being  able  to  witness  the  work  created  working  effectively.    Collaborators  said:  

• ‘Seeing  a  large  scale  work  realised  and  overhearing  valuable  engagement,  watching  public  understand  the  research  and  enjoying  the  way  it  had  been  interpreted  was  the  most  rewarding’.  

• ‘For  me  the  most  rewarding  aspect  was  when  I  walked  past  one  night  at  9pm  and  there  were  still  people  looking  at  and  reading  all  the  notes  on  the  sculpture.  The  fact  that  people  were  still  engaging  with  the  project  even  when  we  were  not  there  makes  you  a  little  bit  proud!!’.  

 Highlights  from  collaborators  in  vox  pops  were  the  engaged  audience  reactions  and  their  responses  to  the  research  and  to  the  work.  For  example,  one  science  collaborator  said,  ‘it’s  just  been  so  much  fun  and  learning  about  what  the  public  feel  about  what  we’re  doing  and  hearing  their  personal  stories.  Some  people  have  been  really  touched  by  it,  I  saw  a  women  with  tears  in  her  eyes  when  I  was  telling  her  about  my  research  and  it  was  so  important  to  me  to  know  that  it  matters.’  Another  collaborator  said:  ‘Just  reading  the  stories  on  there  has  been  a  real  highlight  for  me,  the  amount  of  things  that  people  share  almost  unprompted,  has  been  a  highlight’.    

6    

Collaborators  were  also  asked  about  the  most  challenging  aspect  of  the  experience.  All  but  one  of  the  collaborators  comments  found  that  the  most  challenging  aspect  was  a  combination  of  keeping  up  with  the  demand  for  fabric  and  other  resources  as  people  participated  and  ensuring  consistency  across  the  eight  activities.  For  example,  comments  included:    

• ‘The  project  seemed  very  busy  all  the  time,  so  it  was  a  lot  of  effort  to  make  sure  things  didn't  run  out.’    

• ‘the  most  challenging  aspect  was  keeping  up  with  demand  and  making  sure  we  had  enough  people  and  materials!’  

 One  collaborator  commented  that  engaging  with  the  public  was  the  most  challenging.  Another  added  that  the  challenges  were:  ‘physical,  heavy  lifting  and  logistics  of  being  at  a  festival!’    Tangle  was  popular  and  talking  to  people  in  what  proved  to  be  a  consistently  busy  activity  meant  that  breaks  were  not  taken,  and  a  longer  day  was  worked  than  expected.  To  alleviate  the  demand  in  the  future  some  collaborators  suggested:    

• ‘The  demanding  day  was  non-­‐stop  -­‐  we  should  have  had  a  rota  to  give  each  member  of  the  team  breaks,  and  designated  roles.’  

• ‘Needed  a  manager.  Could  have  done  with  more  people  /  breaks  /  structure  /  organisation.  Allocated  roles  etc.  This  made  it  stressful  at  times.’  

• ‘The  other  challenging  aspect  was  to  have  a  consistent  message  about  each  of  the  8  areas.  It  is  fairly  easy  to  explain  the  concept  of  life  course  and  what  we  do  to  people,  so  I  think  this  aspect  was  very  successful.  Depending  on  the  scientist  the  public  may  have  been  told  slightly  more/less  detail  about  the  topics.  I  don't  think  that  was  necessarily  a  bad  thing  it  is  just  a  consequence  of  having  quite  a  few  different  areas  and  scientists  who  know  more  about  a  specific  area  than  another.’  

 When  discussing  challenges  in  the  vox  pops,  one  science  collaborator  observed:  ‘We’ve  swapped  our  cups  of  tea  and  our  desks  for  an  airbed  and  rain  and  chatting  the  whole  day  with  people  asking  us  questions.  It’s  really  hard  to  answer  questions,  but  it’s  got  us  to  really  get  to  the  nub  of  what  we  do.  By  explaining  things,  we  know  our  work  better.  It’s  been  tiring  but  illuminating.’    

5. Impacts  on  collaborators      Collaborators  were  asked  whether  their  experience  with  the  project  had  impacted  on  their  ideas  about  public  engagement  with  science.  Two  collaborators  said  it  had  confirmed  or  reinforced  the    importance  of  public  engagement  and  the  symbiotic  relationship  between  art  and  science.  One  collaborator  said:  ‘I  think  taking  part  in  Einstein's  Garden  has  just  reinforced  the  idea  that  art  and  science  can  be  combined  to  produce  something  that  is  very  interesting  and  engaging  to  the  public.’      Three  Collaborators  were  surprised  by  audience  reaction  for  example:  

• ‘Showed  how  much  the  public  wanted  to  learn  about  our  research.  I  wasn't  expecting  people  to  want  to  know  as  much  as  they  did.’  

• ‘A  novel  and  clever  project  surprised  me  with  the  length  of  time  it  prompted  people  to  hang  around  for.’  

• ‘I  have  always  enjoyed  public  engagement  science  events,  but  I  was  particularly  struck  by  how  genuinely  interested  people  are  in  learning  about  what  we  do  -­‐  we  should  engage  more  often!’  

7    

 One  collaborator  had  learnt  ‘To  be  more  creative/abstract...  and  keep  it  simple...’  Another  collaborator  said:  ‘I'm  more  confident  about  different  methods  to  engage  people’.    In  the  vox  pops  collaborators  evidenced  further  learning.  For  scientists,  learning  included  how  enjoyable  the  experience  was  working  with  an  audience  and  some  collaborators  again  expressed  surprise  at  how  engaged,  welcoming,  inspired  and  interested  the  audience  were,  for  example:    ‘I’m  really  surprised  actually  at  how  engaged  people  have  been  because  I’ve  done  science  engagement  things  in  the  past  where  people  have  taken  a  little  bit  of  time  but  not  really  taken  as  much  time  as  they  have  here.  People  sitting  down  for  half  an  hour  and  really  talking  through  each  one  of  these  stations  behind  us,  people  are  talking  about  balance,  they’re  asking  questions  about  memory,  about  mastery,  what  that  means  to  their  health  and  it’s  really  incredible  to  see  people  engaging  on  that  level.’   ‘I  didn’t  think  that  they  were  going  to  love  it  as  much  as  they  do,  and  everyone  wants  to  talk  about  their  health  and  their  life  and  ask  questions.  A  lot  of  people  are  really  interested  in  research  which  is  good  because  we  worry  that  some  wouldn’t  be  that  interested  in  the  science  part,  but  they  really  are  amazed  by  the  work  that  we’re  doing.’     A  science  collaborator  observed:  ‘I  really  like  people  exploring  and  seeing  how  people  do  things  differently…  I  test  control,  it’s  really  subjective,  it’s  psychological,  and  it’s  something  different  to  every  single  person.  I  think  that’s  really  important  for  me  to  remember.  So,  some  people  think  it’s  so  important  to  be  in  control  and  some  people  are  more  like  it  would  be  more  relaxing  not  to  feel  in  control,  and  it  gave  me  a  really  new  perspective  on  my  work,  so  I’m  going  to  take  that  home  and  be  inspired  by  it.’    For  the  creative  collaborator  discussing  the  project  in  the  vox  pop,  they  observed:  ‘I’ve  learnt  a  lot  about  the  science  itself  but  also  about  the  way  in  which  people  are  willing  to  engage’.    Collaborators  commented  on  whether  their  experience  had  led  them  to  consider  their  everyday  work  in  a  new  way.  Two  collaborators  said  no,  and  six  said  yes,  with  the  following  further  comments:  

• Working  out  a  clever  way  of  representing  data  to  members  of  the  public  can  provide  an  excellent  way  of  prompting  in  depth  discussions  with  engaged  individuals.  

• I  learnt  a  lot  from  watching  people  make  their  life  courses,  this  will  go  into  the  everyday  running  of  workshops.  

• When  thinking  about  public  engagement  activities  we  will  try  and  think  about  the  user  experience  more  and  what  types  of  things  people  actually  enjoy  doing.  I  am  not  sure  it  will  have  necessarily  changed  the  direction  of  our  research.  

• It  has  encouraged  me  to  think  how  my  research  could  be  translated...    In  vox  pops  collaborators  confirmed  that  they  had  learnt  how  their  research  could  be  presented  by  collaborating  with  creative  practitioners.  One  collaborator  said:    ‘My  mind  is  really  rational  and  scientific,  and  I  don’t  understand  how  artists  think  so  it’s  really  interesting  to  see  it  and  observe  it.  I  have  so  much  respect  for  the  way  that  they  approach  things  because  some  of  the  public  have  actually  said,  “how  did  you  come  up  with  this  idea,  it’s  such  a  

8    

good  way  to  present  the  data”  and  I  said,  “it  wasn’t  just  me,  it’s  a  collaboration  between  artists  and  scientists”.’    Another  science  collaborator  said  that  the  creative  collaborators  were:    ‘so  positive  about  everything.  Like  “let’s  try  and  let’s  adapt  these  ideas,  make  it  all  work  together”,  and  I  think  sometimes  in  a  scientific  community  people  are  very  quick  to  say,  “well  no  that  won’t  work  because”,  rather  than  try  and  work  it  that  way…  everyone’s  so  positive  about  it  and  have  really  adapted  to  everyone’s  ideas  and  made  sure  that  everything  is  working.  I  think  it’s  just  surprised  me,  it’s  surprised  me  how  engaged  people  have  been.’    When  asked  about  other  impacts,  collaborators  rated  their  experiences  on  a  scale  of  1  (not  at  all)  to  10  (totally  changed).  Impacts  were  positive  in  nature:    The  average  rating  for  learning  about  art  and/or  science  was  7.4  with  three  collaborators  scoring  8.  An  example  of  collaborator  comments:    

• ‘I  had  already  started  thinking  about  combining  art  and  science  in  a  recent  engagement  event,  but  this  project  showed  what  can  really  be  achieved  when  you  have  the  right  combination.  I  think  the  project  was  very  designed  to  offer  different  levels  of  engagement.’    

• ‘I  have  always  been  interested  in  learning  about  science  so  this  has  confirmed  that.’      The  average  rating  for  confidence  in  public  engagement  was  8.8.  2  collaborators  scored  10,  three  scored  9  and  three  scored  8.  Collaborators  explained  their  rating  as  follows:    

• ‘The  relaxed  and  informal  atmosphere  is  a  great  place  to  feel  more  comfortable  with  public  engagement  skills  and  increase  one’s  confidence.’  

• ‘I  have  had  a  fair  amount  of  experience  in  talking  to  members  of  the  public  around  science  related  matters,  but  this  was  one  of  the  most  positive.  It  has  definitely  encouraged  me  to  continue  down  this  avenue.’  

 The  average  rating  for  impacts  on  skills  in  public  engagement  was  7.9.  Collaborators  commented,  for  example:    

• ‘My  skills  have  shot  up.’  • ‘The  people  who  took  part  ranged  from  some  who  had  no  idea  about  a  cohort  to  people  

who  were  actually  part  of  a  cohort  or  working  in  the  health  survey  area.  The  audience  were  very  engaged  so  this  really  helps  boost  your  confidence  as  people  are  genuinely  interested  in  what  you  are  saying.  There  was  a  wide  age  range  at  Green  Man  so  it  was  good  to  be  able  to  talk  in  more  simple  terms  to  a  child  but  then  to  explain  some  of  the  more  detailed  findings  to  adults  who  showed  a  deeper  interest/understanding.  It  helps  to  practice  all  levels  of  engagement.’  

   Collaborators  were  asked  ‘Before  taking  part  in  this  project  how  involved  would  you  have  considered  yourself  in  public  engagement  with  science  (e.g.  do  you  participate  in  many  events  and  activities?)  (1-­‐10  scale,  1  –  not  engaged  at  all,  10  extremely  engaged)’  and  they  responded  with  an  average  rating  of  6.8.    When  asked  whether  their  experience  had  made  them  more  or  less  likely  to  be  involved  in  similar  public  engagement  events  in  future  (1-­‐  much  less  likely,  10  –  much  more  likely),  the  average  rating  was  8.6,  alongside  comments,  this  scoring  demonstrates  that  collaborators  were  marginally  

9    

positively  affected  in  terms  of  their  motivation  in  public  engagement.  However,  the  comments  suggest  that  those  who  gave  further  detail  to  this  question  were  already  committed  to  increasing  involvement  in  public  engagement.  The  project  was  noted  to  have  ‘highlighted  the  ability  to  be  more  ambitious  with  future  projects.’ Two  further  examples  of  comments  follow:  

• ‘I  am  actively  involved  in  our  public  engagement  activities.  Taking  part  has  made  me  want  to  continue  what  we  are  doing  and  interacting  with  the  public.’  

• ‘I  think  I  do  enough  public  engagement.’    Two  collaborators  commented  on  whether  the  ideas  that  came  about  in  the  workshop  were  seen  through  in  full  to  the  festival?  Both  felt  that  the  ideas  had  come  through  and  one  collaborator  commented:  ‘Yes,  the  final  project  was  a  great  meshing  of  all  ideas’.  When  asked  if  there  were  any  other  comments,  two  collaborators  made  the  following  comments:  

• ‘Working  with  such  a  positive  team  who  were  willing  to  ensure  everyone's  voice  was  heard  was  refreshing.  The  experience  of  the  team  and  artists  involved  shone  through  and  their  ability  to  engage  with  the  science  behind  the  project  was  inspirational.  I  hope  these  cross  disciplinary  projects  continue!’  

• ‘I  was  actually  surprised  how  many  adults  (without  children)  took  part  in  the  activity.  Before  attending  I  thought  it  would  be  mainly  children  but  this  wasn't  the  case.  The  [artist  collaborators]  were  great  in  running  everything  and  coming  up  with  all  the  stands/fabric  words  etc.’  

 6. Audience  interactions  and  behaviours    

 Participants  in  vox  pops  demonstrated  their  enjoyment  in  Tangle.  All  eight  vox  pops  discussed  enjoyment.  One  vox  pop  particularly  stressed  their  enjoyment  as  a  family:  ‘We  had  a  really  nice  time  as  a  family  just  going  through  the  self-­‐assessment  of  your  core  values  and  the  skills  and  what  you  really  appreciate  in  life.  And  then  we’ve  just  finished  by  tying  our  threads,  measuring  the  importance  of  the  skills,  into  the  fence.  And  we’ve  done  that  as  a  family  which  has  been  really  nice.’    All  of  the  audience  members  participating  in  the  eight  vox  pops  said  that  they  had  spoken  to  scientists  as  part  of  their  experience  in  the  project.      Visitors  described  talking  to  scientists  about  learning  and  memory,  balance,  play,  eating  behaviours  and,  for  example:  ‘what  you  shouldn’t  be  eating,  sweets,  sweets,  sweets’;  ‘about  the  psychological  science  behind  memory  and  how  I  can  balance  on  one  foot’ along  with  recalled  details  of  particular  areas  of  interest  from  their  discussion,  such  as:  ‘we  spoke  to  one  of  the  guys  about  it  who  was  explaining  the  first  original  experiment  with  the  people  who  did  it  for  their  whole  life,  it’s  really  interesting’.  One  vox  pop  visitor  said: ‘it  was  really  interesting  about  the  studies  they  were  telling  us  about  where  they’ve  looked  at  people’s  birth  onwards  to  try  and  predict  behaviour  and  whether  it  influences  how  you  look  after  yourself’.  One  vox  pop  group  described  the  scientists  as ‘really  welcoming’, and  another  said: ‘I  thought  the  chap  at  the  beginning  was  very  good,  giving  us  the  introduction  to  the  work,  I’m  a  doctor  so  I  had  heard  of  the  research,  but  we  didn’t  really  talk  in  depth  to  any  of  the  others’.  

10    

When  asked:  ‘Did  you  discover  anything  new?’  all  vox  pops  suggested  that  they  had  developed  new  learning  and  thinking,  and  had  been  challenged  or  intrigued  or  encouraged  to  reflect.    Other  visitors  had  discovered  new  learning,  for  example:  

• on  the  duration  and  longitudinal  quality  of  some  of  the  studies,  (for  example,  ongoing  testing  from  1946,  with  the  study  being  the  oldest  British  birth  cohort  study).    

• understanding  the  environment,  for  example,  the  rise  of  the  supermarket  and  the  effect  on  obesity.  

• that  obesity  is  a  reflection  of  life,  culture  and  the  surrounding  environment.    

In  another  group  a  visitor  commented  that  they  had  ‘learnt  that  balance  is  really  important  from  a  really  early  age  so  when  you  start  walking,  the  earlier  you  start  walking  the  better  your  balance  will  be  so  that’s  pretty  interesting  to  know’.  Another  visitor  commented  that  they  had  discovered:  ‘that  it’s  far  more  complicated  and  fascinating  than  you  really  think…it  makes  you  think  more.’    A  different  vox  pop  group  visitor  said:  ‘It  made  me  aware  certainly  just  of  things  like  what’s  important,  the  evaluation  at  the  end,  things  like  family’s  important  to  me  and  stuff,  just  makes  me  reinforce  things  really,  appreciate  things.’  Another  visitor  commented:  ‘I  think  the  main  focus  of  it  was  about  how  stuff  from  when  you’re  just  born  or  when  you’re  learning  to  walk  can  affect  you  up  to  when  you  die.  So  it  was  very  interesting  about  things  that  stay  with  you  and  things  that  don’t.’    Observations  provided  a  snapshot  of  audience  behaviours  whilst  participating  in  the  activity.  Four  observations  were  conducted,  of  approximately  43  visitors.  Observations  ranged  in  length  between  13  and  20  minutes  in  duration.      All  observations  record  a  mix  of  adults  and  children.  Specific  observational  comments  note  the  broad  range  of  participants  and  a  ‘quiet’  engagement  with  the  activity.  Observations  also  note  how  people  who  appeared  to  be  strangers  when  arriving,  engage  in  group  activity  at  tables  together,  for  example:  ‘18  year  old  woman  on  own…talking  to  other  participants,  e.g.  man  and  little  girl  and  another  similar  aged  woman.’ Another  observation  notes  further  people  having: ‘Discussion  with  each  other  about  their  relative  values;  joined  by  another  friend  or  a  random  stranger  talking  about  difference  between  formal  and  informal  learning.’  One  observation  ends  with:  ‘Overall  picture  as  I  leave  is  of  several  small  groups  around  the  tables,  often  individuals  who  don't  know  each  other/don't  arrive  together.  Quietly  standing  and  winding.’    Observations  demonstrate  welcome  and  engagement  of  people  by  collaborators,  drawing  visitors  into  the  activity,  for  example:  ‘Male  researcher  welcomes  groups  and  directs  them  to  emptier  parts  of  the  tables.  Researchers  doing  a  good  job  at  welcoming  visitors:  "do  you  want  to  join  in?"’    The  balancing  game  was  also  observed  to  attract  people  to  the  activity.  For  example:  ‘Male  and  Female  in  their  30s  join  and  do  balancing  game,  another  Male  and  Female  in  their  30s  are  attracted  by  seeing  this  and  come  and  join.  Standing  still,  nodding  as  female  researcher  explains  the  concept.  "Beautiful"  said  female  when  told  about  the  winding  sculpture.  All  huddle  around  the  memory  game  together  -­‐  smiling.  Nodding,  counting  on  fingers  as  observation  ends.’    Observations  show  strong  engagement  and  often  demonstrate  thoughtful  interaction  from  visitors,  particularly  when  threading  strings,  but  also  at  other  activities  such  as  the  balancing  game,  for  example:    

11    

• ‘Groups  quietly  threading  at  tables…Researchers  engaged…  quiet  conversation…peaceful  atmosphere.’    

• ‘Researcher  at  balancing  game  is  talking  to  large  group  and  all  are  quietly  listening,  smiling…nodding  along  as  she  talks  about  the  cohort  study.’  

 Observations  also  record  ‘lots  of  giggling,  laughing’  particularly  at  the  balancing  game.  Another  observation  notes:  ‘2  Females  in  their  20s  are  playing  the  balancing  game.  Laughing  and  hopping  around,  smiling  at  one  another.’        One  observation  records  visitors  discussing  ‘being  energised’  by  Tangle.  Another  observation  notes  a  long  discussion  between  a  woman  and  researcher:    ‘Woman  in  40s  approaches  and  researcher  asks  if  she  would  like  to  know  more.  "That's  really  interesting!"  on  hearing  about  the  concept  of  large  cohort  studies.  Woman  and  researcher  talk  for  10  mins.  Back  and  forth  conversation,  researcher  is  winding  and  [the]  two  women  are  standing  side-­‐by-­‐side.  Woman  doesn't  do  a  life  course,  but  conversation  continues  touching  both  on  the  study,  other  cohort  studies  and  the  impact  on  healthcare  and  their  own  lives/work.’    One  observation  also  notes:  ‘"Oh  it's  brilliant,  that's  been  fun!"  -­‐  mum  and  5  year  old  say  to  researcher  as  they  wind  their  life  courses  into  the  frame.  "ooh  stand  there  so  I  can  get  a  photo"’.    Two  observations  also  observe  visitors  suggesting  that  they  could  spend  substantial  amounts  of  time  at  the  activity,  for  example  comments  overhead  from  visitors  such  as:  ‘I  could  stay  and  do  this  all  day’.      

7. Impacts  on  the  audience    Collaborators  were  asked  how  they  felt  the  audience  had  responded  to  the  project,  and  if  there  were  things  which  they  felt  had  worked  particularly  well.  Collaborators  commented  generally  on  a  strong  positive  audience  response  with  people  spending  long  amounts  of  time  on  the  activity  and  asking  numerous  questions.  One  collaborator  said:  ‘we  counted  that  at  least  620  people  were  involved’. Collaborators  were  surprised  by  how  willing  people  were  to  share  and  how  much  people  liked  making  the  thread.  The  interactive  components  and  craft  aspects  (making  of  the  life  course  and  the  tapestry)  were  felt  to  work  very  well.  A  collaborator  said:  ‘Everyone  seemed  to  enjoy  the  creative  side  and  lots  of  people  mentioned  how  therapeutic  it  was  weaving  their  life  courses.  There  was  a  good  mix  between  the  hands  on  activity  tests  and  the  self-­‐service  questions.’    Collaborators  observed  that  the  games  were  already  questions.  One  collaborator  suggested  this  potentially  made  people  feel  important,  intrigued,  and  also  invited  people  to  ask  their  own  questions  and  enabled  conversations  to  initiate  easily.  A  collaborator  said:  ‘the  simple  but  engaging  task  allowed  people  to  hold  interesting  conversations’.      Engagement  was  observed  to  be  across  the  age  spectrum,  suitable  for  adults  and  children,  and  for  families  to  learn  together.  The  sculpture  invited  questions  but  did  not  need  participation  in  the  activity.  A  collaborator  was  surprised  by  those  that  did  participate:  ‘The  weaving  into  the  giant  sculpture  also  worked  out  better  than  I  thought.  You  could  see  people  actually  thinking  quite  hard  about  where  to  put  their  life  course.’  

12    

 The  length  of  participation  was  felt  to  work  well.  One  collaborator  said:  ‘people  were  able  to  stay  for  10-­‐20  minutes  which  allowed  time  to  engage  in  conversation.’      Two  Collaborators  commented  specifically  on  the  balance  station  and  memory  task  which  were  felt  to  work  particularly  well  and  gained  audience  interest.  An  arts  /  engagement  collaborator  felt  that  ‘it  was  great  to  have  so  many  scientists  available.’    Collaborators  were  also  asked  if  they  felt  there  were  things  that  the  audience  did  not  find  as  engaging.  One  collaborator  did  not  think  there  was  anything  that  was  less  engaging.  Comments  concerned  specific  elements  of  the  activity,  and  were  as  follows:  

• The  mastery  and  friendship  sections  could  be  improved.  • The  'give  this  ball  to  a  friend'  station  -­‐  people  didn't  understand  that  (and  if  they  were  

alone/parents  it  didn't  make  any  sense).    • The  thimble  in  the  memory  box  -­‐  children  didn't  know  what  this  item  was,  and  non-­‐native  

English  speakers  struggled  with  the  word…One  memory  box  was  a  bit  of  a  bottleneck  (would  be  nice  to  have  a  memory  task  more  than  one  person  could  do  at  once).  

• The  audience  would  perhaps  like  to  have  seen  more  of  the  outcomes  from  the  actual  survey.    

• The  sculpture  could  be  viewed  without  engaging  a  researcher  consequently  some  viewers  may  have  gone  away  having  not  learnt  about  the  science  of  the  project.  

 Specific  comments  on  questions:  

• The  questions  on  education  did  not  seem  to  provoke  as  much  discussion,  though  the  fact  they  required  less  hands  on  time  from  researchers  was  valued.  

• A  few  questions  were  considered  quite  hard  for  younger  children  to  understand,  the  example  given  was  the  question:  ‘how  in  control  of  your  life  do  you  feel?’.    A  collaborator  suggested  that  all  questions  could  be  child  proofed  in  advance.  

• One  collaborator  said:  ‘I  felt  like  there  was  a  bit  too  much  to  explain  about  the  project…the  8  questions/tests  and  making  the  life  course  was  ok  but  then  having  to  explain  about  the  fence  and  the  different  areas  about  quality  of  life.’  

 Some  visitors  in  vox  pop  groups  commented  that  they  had  changed  their  attitude  to  science  by  taking  part,  and  they  were  now  more  interested  in  science.  Others  were  already  interested.  Those  whose  interest  had  not  been  affected  made  comments  such  as:

• ‘I’m  quite  open  minded,  my  wife’s  actually  a  lecturer  in  science  anyway,  but  certainly  it’s  good  to  get  the  kids  involved  to  show  there’s  more  to  science  than  boring  classroom  lessons  and  something  a  bit  more  fun  and  interactive’.  

• ‘I  don’t  think  I  had  a  bad  attitude  towards  it  before,  I’d  always  accepted  that  it  was  important’.  

One  visitor  suggested  that  they  ‘maybe  a  bit  less  scared  at  having  a  go  at  something  at  a  festival,  a  sciencey  thing’.  Tangle  had  made  science  more  accessible  to  this  visitor.      Those  who  were  impacted  and  had  changed  their  views  on  science  made  comments  such  as:    ‘I  think  things  like  this  are  really  important  to  have,  a  festival’s  a  really  great  place  to  be  in  but  I  think  things  like  this  are  really  important  and  you  should  definitely  invest  in  funding  them’.  Another  visitor  commented  on  the  impact  of  the  activity  by  being  creatively  involved;  that  the  message  and  

13    

knowledge  sticks:  ‘it’s  like  doing  something  isn’t  it,  doing  the  you  know  like  tying  something  around  a  piece  of  rope,  that’s  something  that  you  will  take  away  and  remember,  do  you  know  what  I  mean  because  it’s  kind  of  active  and  it’s  visual  and  it’s  I  don’t  know  it  weaves  into  something,  it’s  not  being  told,  you’re  not  just  being  told  something’.  Another  commented  that  Tangle  enabled  ‘research  that  can  involve  everybody  and  you  can  do  together  and  have  a  lot  of  fun  as  a  family’.    Audience  members  were  asked  in  vox  pops  whether  they  expected  to  see  an  activity  like  this  at  a  music  festival.    Comments  from  interviewees  ranged  in  opinion  dependent  on  their  experience  of  festivals  in  general  and  which  festivals  they  had  previously  attended.  Some  visitors  were  repeat  returners  to  Einstein’s  Garden,  and  expected  arts  and  science  activity.  Of  the  eight  vox  visitor  pop  groups,  four  expected  the  activity,  and  four  did  not,  but  were  not  necessarily  surprised  by  it.  The  four  different  vox  pop  groups  who  said  they  were  not  expecting  the  activity,  for  example,  clarified  their  thoughts  with  similar  comments  such  as:    

• not  at  a  music  festival  but  at  green  man,  we  know  they  have  lots  of  science.  • green  man  always  has  a  science  area  and  no  other  place  does    • I  think  the  Einstein’s  Garden  as  a  whole  is  fantastic  anyway,  so  many  diverse  things    • not  at  a  normal  music  festival  • I  feel  this  is  more  like  an  artsy  music  festival  so  I  wasn’t  surprised  by  it  being  here  

   When  asked  to  describe  the  experience  in  three  words,  the  vox  pop  groups  used  the  following  words:      

 Fun  was  a  word  used  most  in  descriptions  and  in  the  vox  pops  in  general.  Interesting  and  thought  provoking  were  also  words  used  often.      All  eight  vox  pops  groups  said  they  would  recommend  Tangle  to  others.  They  clarified  why  they  would  recommend  it  with  comments  describing  the  activity  as  fun  and  creating  new  thinking  and  reflection.    Examples  of  comments  follow:  

14    

• I  think  it’s  a  really  good  way  of  talking  about  science  in  a  different  way.  • Definitely,  100%,  it  was  really  really  good  fun.    • We’re  going  to  get  brother  and  dad  to  come  and  do  it  because  we  think  we  might  beat  

them,  we’re  a  little  bit  competitive  in  our  family  aren’t  we?  • I  would  recommend  it  because  it  just  gives  a  perspective  on  one’s  life  and  even  a  four  year  

old  and  a  much  older  person  could  do  it  together.    All  vox  pops  were  emphatically  inspired  to  take  part  in  other  similar  activities.  Comments  included  a  number  of  ‘yeah  definitely’  and  further  comments  such  as:  

• it’s  very  interesting  • we  like  this  area  and  activities  like  this  help  us  to  think  

 In  Vox  pops,  most  visitors  did  not  suggest  improvements.  Visitors  described  the  activity,  for  example,  as  ‘very  pleasantly  challenging’ and  others  made  comments  such  as:  

• ‘I  think  it  was  really  well  laid  out…explained  really  clearly’  • ‘it  was  fantastic,  it  really  was,  everything’s  brilliant  here’  

 Two  vox  pop  interviewees  suggested  improvements,  one  visitor  suggested  further  signposting  regarding  some  of  the  studies  that  were  discussed  in  order  to  discover  more  about  the  context  and  to  enable  further  reading  after  the  festival.  Another  visitor  suggested  more  scientists  at  busy  times  to  support  the  flow  of  people.          

8. Improvements  and  suggestions    Collaborators  made  a  number  of  specific  improvements  and  suggestions  to  individual  activities  that  are  detailed  above  in  section  7.  More  general  suggestions  for  improvements  were:  

• A  manager  or  a  rota  to  reduce  stress  and  provide  structure  and  organisation  so  each  team  member  could  have  designated  roles  and  breaks.  

• To  have  a  consistent  message  about  each  of  the  eight  areas.      Most  vox  pop  visitors  did  not  suggest  improvements.  The  two  main  improvements  suggested  were:  

• Further  information  and  signposting    • Additional  people  resources  at  busy  times  to  support  the  flow  of  people.    

 

15