The goal of any attraction, exhibit, or any shared
experience is simple: to max out the rewards of visitor time and focus to
optimize the experience and the memory so important to return visits.
For Americans, at least, who count and measure time as
a form of currency, nothing is worse than the report that an attraction was a
waste of time. Which means money and
energy were squandered, which could have been better spent elsewhere. Part of the value of an experience is how
easily it can be found, and then, how easy or difficult it is for people to
engage with it.
How do you get and keep audience attention in an
attraction / exhibit? This is the basic
question of where and when in the process guests are prepared to receive
information. Not all content is equal (the
“what”), and context (the “where and when”) rules how or whether we pay
attention.
Nothing happens in a vacuum. A solitary experience is far different that a
shared one – just ask any golfer who hits a hole-in-one with no one else there
to see it. The social group is the validator of the experience. The group can
be an emotional multiplier – enthusiasm is contagious – or exert a dampening
effect. If you think you had a great experience but your companions don’t share
your enthusiasm, you will soon start to rethink your own experience.
Contagion
One notable example of this dampening effect occurred
shortly after the stage version of Disney’s Lion
King debuted on Broadway in 1997. At the time, there was a lot of hostility
in the New York theater community to the very idea of Disney even coming to
Broadway. We won’t mention the name of the theater critic, but his early review
praised the show highly – an opinion not shared by his colleagues. After a few
weeks of negative reviews by his peers, he saw the musical again and wrote a
second review. Basically he said that
somehow he had been duped by the Disney magic and the play wasn’t nearly as
good as he thought it was the first time. His memory of his first stellar experience
was sabotaged—retroactively--by colleague negativity.
We are social primates. So the experiences of the people around us
shape our own expectations and experience, and we affect theirs. In order to
entertain – and by entertain we mean in the original sense of the word – “to
attract and hold attention” – you have to understand what else is going on. Where is your audience mind being pulled, in
which directions, while you are trying to show footage, deliver key information,
or display science laws or live animals?
Attention Span
Years ago the Washington Zoo was studied to see how
long people would look at the live exhibits in their enclosures. The answer was an average of eight seconds. And much of that tiny time slice went to
reading the usual fence-mounted signage.
Museums didn’t do much better – under an hour is all that visitors will
spend in a North American museum of any size.
In contrast, though, the average theme park stay was eight hours or more,
with the highest repeat visits. This is
why the theme park is the gold standard for experience design. What’s going on here? How is it that attention is far better in a
low-level or no-reading zone?
Signage
First off, the Disney Imagineers who designed the
original park worked with images, not words.
They understood that the best designs are those that work with the way
people already think and react to the world around them. That is why there is was very little directional
signage in the original Disneyland (aside from stylized “art” signs), and the
reason that the park has always been high on the list for international
visitors—you don’t have to speak English to understand what’s going on and what
you should do. It also adds to their
exceptional export value. They are
essentially artworks that function as total immersive environments. Immersive experiences don’t work like books
(which demand close visual focus and control) – they invite the entire body and
all the senses. And reading divides
attention away from the group, into the introversion of eyes and brain
processing.
At the other end of the scale, take botanical gardens
and arboretums. These garden
environments insist on Latin classification tags and even dense botany-textbook
extracts, a kind of technical communication that for any visitor not already an
expert, is especially fatiguing to read in public venues.
Who is your real audience?
These places tend to be treated as research venues
with signage by and for specialists. They project the way the people who work
there want to be perceived by their colleagues. But for the casual visitor who just wants to
enjoy the majesty of a white oak or the exotic intrigue of orchids, it’s not
helpful, and lends a touch of elite disdain to the experience. The question is suddenly, “Do I know enough /
am I educated enough to even be here?”
No such question occurs in a theme park, which deals with our shared
history and archetypes, those icons and events we most treasure and identify
with.
You may have to make a momentous decision about who
your audience really is – who you want to attract, and why. Expert audiences have quality attention to
pay to your holdings or environment, and this is the attention that most
curators, researchers, scholars, directors, and many designers actually
identify with. Art museums were
originally galleries of painting and sculpture for sale, not improving
institutions trying to educate the non-art-collecting public. The
public-education impulse dates back to Carnegie and his crusade to lift
American taste into the middle class, and continues in grants and evaluation
programs for the widest possible audience
But the managerial class for public venues, especially
art and history based, is most interested in expert-to-expert communication;
that’s where their personal and career reward lies. Hence the signage in Latin, footnoted exhibit
labelling, expert treatises and lectures that need translation for any public
understanding.
The way the mind attends to, takes in, and understands
any content is by broad themes, not scholarly documentation—that’s the genius
of the themed environment.
No comments:
Post a Comment