From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum Del museo social al museo social digital - Dialnet
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
From the Social
Museum to the
Digital Social
Museum
Del museo social
al museo social
digital
José M. Más, Phd Más, J.M. y Monfort, A. (2021)
Marketing Management Department From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum
ESIC Business & Marketing School Revista Internacional de Investigación en Comunicación
josemanuel.mas@esic.edu
aDResearch ESIC. Nº 24 Vol 24
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2931-1235
Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · Págs. 8 a 25
Abel Monfort, Phd
https://doi.org/10.7263/adresic-024-01
Business Management Department
ESIC Business & Marketing School
abel.monfort@esic.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3713-7102Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
ABSTRACT Main topic / subject: The goal of the article is to organize the conceptual evolution between
the social museum and the digital social museum, a fundamental conceptual change that will
imply a different form of management and that considers the latest technologies applied to
the museum experience.
Logical development of the subject: For the development of this conceptual proposal, the
paper starts from a series of fundamental texts that describe the current situation of experience
management in museums; it carries out a critical review of the concepts of the traditional
museum and the social museum and with data and examples the paper proposes the use of
the concept of the digital social museum.
JEL Classification:
M31 Author’s point of view and contributions: The article contributes to the definition of the
digital social museum. It expands the concept of the social museum and gives a fundamental
Key words:
value to the impact of new technologies and social networks as an integral part of the museum
Social museum, experience and management.
digital social museum,
Implications and conclusions: Museum institutions should work in a much more inclusive and
technology, participatory manner, thus giving way to an evolution that begins in the early twentieth century
innovation, and is called the social museum. New technologies offer great potential for the achievement of
museum, these goals of participation and dialogue, leading to a new concept of the digital social museum.
institutional Through this paper we reflect on how new technologies contribute to understand museum
communication management under the principles of the digital social museum.
RESUMEN Tema principal: El objetivo del artículo es organizar la evolución conceptual entre el museo
social y el museo social digital como un cambio fundamental que implica diferentes formas de
gestión y considera las últimas tecnologías aplicadas a la experiencia museística.
Desarrollo lógico del tema: Para el desarrollo de la propuesta conceptual, el artículo empieza
con una serie de textos seminales que describen la situación de la gestion experiencial en
museos. Desarrolla una revision crítica de los conceptos vinculados al museo tradicional y el
museo social y, con datos y ejemplos, se propone el uso del concepto museo social digital.
Clasificación JEL:
Punto de vista y aportaciones del autor: El artículo contribuye a la definición de museo so-
M31
cial digital. Expande el concepto de museo social y aporta un valor fundamental al impacto de
Palabras clave: las nuevas tecnologías y las redes sociales como una parte integral de la experiencia y gestion
Museo social, museística.
museo social digital,
Repercusiones y conclusiones: Los museos son instituciones que deberían trabajar de una
tecnología, manera más inclusiva y participativa para dar paso a una evolución que comienza a principios
innovación, del siglo veinte y es acuñada como museo social. Las nuevas tecnologías ofrecen un gran po-
museo, tencial para lograr estos objetivos vinculados a la participación y el diálogo, dando lugar a lo
comunicación que se propone como museo social digital. Este artículo refleja cómo las nuevas tecnologías
institucional contribuyen a entender la gestion museística bajo los principios del museo social digital.10 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
1. Introduction gagement with the visitor, whether at the level of
Cultural institutions offer a service that includes the exhibition space or with the collection itself
education, accessibility and communication (Drotner, 2014). These trends call for a change
(Belenioti & Vassiliadis, 2017). To achieve this, in the management model, from the social mu-
museums have been undergoing a process of seum to the digital social museum.
change in management models that has been According to Rivière (1993, p. 53) there are
progressive, moving from a traditional vision, to two strong factors driving the changes from the
a social museum model and, as this critical review traditional model of the museum during the
suggests, to a digital social model. 20th century: on the one hand, the creation of a
Museums are institutions that offer their vis- series of international organizations that sup-
itors (customers) memorable experiences (Antón port the development of museums, establishing
et al., 2018). As users seek novelty and variety in a supporting infrastructure and developing a
their leisure activities, so museums are forced to group of professionals around historical herit-
create engaging experiences (Minkiewicz et al., age and museums; on the other hand, the deep
2014) as do other institutions in the cultural cultural changes (social, political and econom-
sector. However, cultural institutions face a con- ic) taking place worldwide. The 1st Internation-
stant challenge based on budgetary constraints al Workshop on Ecomuseums and New Muse-
and rising visitor expectations, which has forced ology, held in Quebec City on October 13,
their directors to pay great attention to user 1984, set the basis for the concept of the social
needs (Komarac et al., 2017) and to understand museum. Against the dogma of conservation, it
that museums have to communicate and contin- proclaims the priority of participation. Thus the
uously provide an enjoyable experience (Sundar so-called Declaration of Quebec advocated cul-
et al., 2015). tural democracy, social dynamism, openness
During the 20th century there was a change and interactivity in the face of the authoritarian
in the concept of the museum as compared to institution, closed and not very prone to change.
the vision of the museum in the previous centu- In this way, it sought an enriching dialogue and
ry. Following Viñarás (Viñarás-Abad, 2005, p. recognized the social body as an active protago-
48), this new concept of the museum not only nist, moving away from the categorization of
gathers and presents its collections, but also de- the public as a passive subject (Díaz-Balerdi,
mands an advance in the exploitation of the mu- 2002, p. 504).
seum institution, and also conceptual, didactic The new role of the museum was to focus on
and technological updating. But there is also a the public that visited them, on their expecta-
decisive and influential factor: tourism. The tions, preferences and needs (Vergo, 1989). This
countries of Mediterranean Europe created new new vision of the museum was taken by the mu-
typologies of museums according to the rise of seum institutions as an opportunity to redefine
this public, while the northern countries were their mission in society. The new concept of the
guided by more didactic and pedagogical rules. social role of the museum, where the experience
All these changes mean that cultural institutions of the visitor takes prominence, also increases the
and museums are called upon to adopt new me- importance of the analysis of its visitors, in favor
dia technologies to stimulate and maintain en- of a more integrative museum (Cordón, 2013).From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 11 In fact, the literature on museum management museums even after the visit, seeking informa- includes the need for formative evaluation dur- tion and revisiting the museum through the con- ing the development of the project, understand- tents of social networks and pages where opin- ing visitor motivations and expectations through ions are expressed (Antón et al., 2018). In the segmentation studies, and even analyzing visitor process of dialogue and work with visitors, a re- feedback to understand their experience and lationship of co-creation of experiences between subsequent programming (Chaney et al., 2018; museum and users is produced (Antón et al., vom Lehn & Heath, 2016). 2018) and it should be managed. In addition, Recent studies have shown that museums museums are faced with the challenge of how to have emerged as laboratories of future culture, integrate new technologies such as Robots, Arti- including all sorts of high-tech experiments with ficial Intelligence, Service Automation to pro- the aim of providing unparalleled entertain- voke memorable experiences (Recuero-Virto & ment and educational experiences that com- Blasco-López, 2019). pete with platforms such as Netflix (Recue- Therefore, this critical review poses a brief re- ro-Virto & Blasco-López, 2019). New technolo- view of the evolution of museum management gies (ICTs) have revolutionized the way users to define what we propose as a digital social mu- visit and enjoy and share their experiences (Yoo seum. Research on the concept of the digital so- & Gretzel, 2016). Other studies have shown cial museum has also been the subject of previ- that achieving engagement with potential vis- ous studies. In fact, the concept has been defined itors requires a content-based strategy as well as as a way of management that takes advantage of dialogue between the museum and its audience the opportunities offered by digital technologies, (Camarero et al., 2018). In other words, the achieves a truly close, open and social approach museum has to maintain a dialogical approach to the visitors, enriching their experience by per- both inside and outside the building. In this sonalizing the interaction, favouring accessibility context, the use of social networks can favor and expanding the target audience of the exhibi- two-way communication and the marketing de- tion (Mas, 2018, 2020). However, there has not partment should regularly check the feedback been an article that justifies the natural progress from users on social networks with the aim of between the traditional, social and, at present, detecting new topics and possible problems the digital social museum. On the other hand, (Waller & Waller, 2019). the concept of dialogue with stakeholders has Digital media and devices have the opportu- been addressed from multiple perspectives (e.g. nity to change socio-cultural practices that are Monfort et al., 2019; Villagra et al., 2015) and linked to collective memories and oral tradi- deserves our attention to link it to communica- tions. That is, to our cultural heritage (Giaccardi, tion and marketing management by museum 2012). Consequently, the possibilities of social institutions. media are capable of changing this perception The article is structured as follows. The fol- and even go one step beyond what are known as lowing section presents the current situation, in social museums. These tools facilitate more ac- which the transition from the traditional muse- tive experiences, which encourage visitors to um to the social museum is highlighted. Then, a continue participating in the relationship with section is dedicated to the new technologies that
12 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
have been incorporated in the museums in their professionalization of the user experience, the
relationships with visitors. Finally, a develop- development of international organizations that
ment of the concept of the social museum to the support the management of museums and the
digital social museum is proposed and it con- cultural changes (social, political and economic)
cludes with a definition of this critical proposal. that have taken place worldwide promoted a
change in the way of understanding and living
2. From the traditional museum to the museum experience (Rivière, 1993). In this
the social museum context, several studies have proposed the
Since the late 1980s, museums have included change between the traditional museum and the
marketing departments in their management social museum. Llerena (2015) conducts an in-
structure with the aim of influencing their pro- teresting comparison between the traditional
gramming and exhibition development strategy museum and the new social museum, which is
(Gilmore & Rentschler, 2002). Along with this summarized in the following table:
Table 1. Comparison between the traditional museum and the social museum
Traditional Museum Social Museum
Everyone. A space where visitors contribute to the
institution with ideas and suggestions, and where
Museums are places for: Experts. They are exclusive dialogue and socialization are encouraged. They are
given the opportunity to create and connect with
people who share the same interests.
The exhibition The expertise of curators and A collaborative process with visitors through studies
is based on: scientists on an exclusive basis of the public.
The display of the objects.
The focus of the The commitment and experience of the public, which
The welcome is barely taken
exhibition is on: is fundamental.
into account
The focus of the activity
Exhibition and research Visitors.
is on this:
Communicative. The objects
The perception of Cultural. There is a constant interaction between
transmit information that the
communication is: object and subject.
visitor must acquire.
Single and closed. The museum
re-elaborates and presents it Multiple, open and presented in a way that allows for
Knowledge is:
without the possibility of inter- many interpretations.
pretation.
Knowledge The individual, who interacts in an active and
From outside the individual.
is acquired from: participative way.
Recipient of a knowledge previ-
The public Developer of learning, experiences, knowledge and
ously elaborated by
is conceived as: experiences.
the museum.
A simple conveyor and repro- A facilitator and mediator who participates in
The teacher
ducer of the knowledge that the construction of the knowledge presented
is seen as:
the museum possesses. by the museum.From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 13
Table 1. Comparison between the traditional museum and the social museum (cont.)
Traditional Museum Social Museum
Positivist and behaviorist.
Constructivist. Learning is active, it implies a
Learning is accumulated and
restructuring of the mental schemes of those who
The learning absorbed through the sum of
learn. The learning is participative and dialogical.
approach is: information transmitted by an
The public is an active part of a space of social
external agent. The public is
encounter and exchange of knowledge.
just a passive consumer.
It identifies and develops potential audiences,
communicates with communities and learns
The evaluation There is no such space for how audiences experience the museum and their
is done through: reflection. perception of it. It focuses on participants’ behavior
and the impact of actions, i.e., what they do and
what happens as a result of that experience.
Provide one-way information
Communication/ Two-way: understanding these spaces as places
for the mere dissemination and
conversation is: of interaction.
self-promotion of your work.
Communication and
Restricted to the inside of the
museum interpretation It can be found everywhere.
museum space.
services:
Source: Llerena (2015)
As shown in the table above, this new concept 3. The social museum and new
of the social museum enhances the “new museol- technologies
ogy” as a new way of conceiving museums as 3.1. Background and motivations
spaces at the service of citizens, whose aim has to Following Castilla (2012), new technologies help
be dialogue, promoting communication and in- museums both to disseminate their activity and to
venting new exhibition techniques (Montañes, interact with the user: “new technologies applied
2001, p. 2). Thus, the social museum completely to museology allow to improve and expand the
changes the idea of the traditional museum by possibilities of public dissemination of knowl-
focusing on establishing a dialogue of peers with edge and artistic and historical resources, while
its public, understanding that it needs to work they can significantly improve the relationship
not only for its visitors, but also with its visitors between the museum and the user”. Thus, the de-
(Gómez-Vilchez, 2012). velopment of the Internet and, specifically, that
This concept of the social museum as an insti- experienced in the last ten years, has allowed mu-
tution that dialogues with society, that strives to seums to establish a very beneficial relationship
generate complete, enriching experiences through with Information and Communication Technolo-
the active participation of the visitor is the start- gies (ICT), which in turn has served them to con-
ing point for this article. In the following pages sider new ways to develop their programs as new
we will analyze the relationship between the so- modes of exhibition, sales and communication
cial museum and technology to understand how with the public (Fontán, 2013, p. 153).
digital technological advances can help the mu- While the renewed museology emerged as a
seum to deepen its social character. new way of understanding museums, of break-14 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
ing with that tradition of the nineteenth-century of the visit, b) 62.5 % are interested in improving
temple that was so far apart from society, and of their online communication and positioning
bringing it closer to everyone who felt interested strategy, c) 56.3 % use digital technologies to
in visiting it (Cordón & González, 2016, p. make it easier for people with different types of
149), ICTs offer new opportunities to establish disabilities to access the entity, d) 40.6 % seek to
different environments in which to relate to the improve the processes of conservation of works
visitor: “ICTs become a true bridge between the of art, collection management as well as its dis-
public and the art collections [...] they are a semination and digitization, and e) 34.4 % seek
common cultural element between those collec- to personalize the attention to the public in the
tions and the generations of the present, they are physical space and to promote its interactivity.
the vehicle for storing, exhibiting and transmit- Along with these conclusions, other studies
ting contemporary art and, finally, they are a have shown that digital media and devices are
means used for communication and education” called upon to change the way we understand
(Fontán, 2013, p. 5). our cultural heritage (Giaccardi, 2012). They are
Castilla (2012) considers that museums also likely to provide experiences that encourage
should not only benefit from new technologies visitors to continue participating in the relation-
to improve the way they show their exhibitions ship with museums even after the visit (Antón et
to the new user, but if they do not take advan- al., 2018), favoring co-creation (Antón et al.,
tage of them, they run the risk of becoming ob- 2018) and integrating the latest technologies
solete and not connecting with new audiences. (e.g. Robots or Artificial Intelligence) to provoke
This connection must be made in a modern, impactful experiences (Recuero-Virto & Blas-
accessible way that invites interaction and par- co-López, 2019). New technologies (ICTs) have
ticipation, attracting both the current audience also transformed the way users visit, enjoy and
and especially the new younger audiences, thus share their experiences (Yoo & Gretzel, 2016).
ensuring the future of museums in a connected To achieve these results, studies have shown
world. In fact, research has concluded that mu- that engaging with potential visitors requires a
seums are an exceptional space to be used as content-based strategy as well as dialogue be-
laboratories of future culture, since they allow tween the museum and its audience (Camarero
experiments with high technology that offer ex- et al., 2018). The use of social networks can fa-
periences at the level of large entertainment plat- vor this two-way communication and the mar-
forms (Recuero-Virto & Blasco-López, 2019). keting and communication department should
Saldaña and Celaya (2012) carried out a sur- regularly check user feedback on these platforms
vey in which 136 museums from all over Europe in order to detect new issues and possible prob-
participated. The study, entitled “Museums in the lems (Waller & Waller, 2019).
Digital Age”, was published in Museum Next the
same year and sought to deepen the main moti- 3.2. Advantages of using technology in the
vations and objectives of museums when incor- museum
porating technology. Some of the conclusions In addition to these data, there are many authors
reached were: a) 65.6 % of museums seek to at- who agree in highlighting the advantages and
tract new audiences and to enrich the experience benefits that new technologies offer to museums.From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 15
The International Council of Museums (ICOM) technologies should work not as ends in them-
(1999), for example, in its VII Latin American selves, but as additional tools when it comes to
Conference on Cultural Heritage “Museums and improving the visitor’s experience and support-
Cultural Diversity. Old cultures, new worlds”, ing and reinforcing the museum and education-
reflected on the main benefits that ICTs bring to al approach of each center in a customized way.
museums and pointed out, among other things, It is therefore necessary to design their integra-
the possibility of: i) communicating with differ- tion with criteria and common sense and after a
ent segments of the public in a differentiated deep reflection adapted to what should be
way, ii) presenting updated information on ac- shown, with what purpose and how, along with
tivities, databases of their library, online catalogs, a selection of appropriate content and quality.
announcing new books on the central theme of Otherwise, the use of technology would involve
the museum or temporary exhibitions, iii) gen- risks (Castilla, 2012).
erating didactic materials that can be used both Thus, the literature insists on the need for
by schools and users, before and after the visits, formative evaluation during project development,
differentiating levels, iv) presenting in advance understanding visitor motivations and expecta-
what is going to be exhibited in the museum tions through segmentation studies, and even ana-
through the publication of images and news to lyzing visitor feedback to understand their experi-
inform about what is going to happen, v) pre- ence and subsequent programming (Chaney et al.,
senting evaluation tools, intended for visitors to 2018; vom Lehn & Heath, 2016); all this without
the site or visitors to the museum, vi) presenting forgetting a series of barriers for these institutions:
updated reading material related to the muse- the lack of budget, and the lack of qualified per-
um’s theme, differentiating between material for sonnel (Saldaña & Celaya, 2012).
experts and material for non-experts, vii) gener-
ating conversation in forums or chats, viii) pro- 3.3. Current possibilities offered by the
viding materials that can be accessed by profes- latest technologies to the social museum
sionals or researchers interested in the central In this context, we now offer a list of different
theme of the museum, even if they are located in technologies that can help museums in their in-
different parts of the world, ix) demonstrating novation process, trying to explain the experi-
that the museum is alive and active. ences by type of technology; we also show illus-
Castillo (2011) shows that the integration of trative examples that help to understand this
technology in the museum allows the visitor to potential. This organization does not pretend to
move to the time and space in which a work be taxonomic but merely illustrative. In other
was created in order to understand it and value words, the objective is not to describe each and
it as such. Otherwise, the only thing that is every technological option in the museum field
achieved is “to strengthen their cognitive barri- but to show those that can help museums to
ers and exclude them from cultural knowledge”. fulfill their functions in a clearer way. To select
Saldaña and Celaya (2012) provide an addition- the five technologies we have followed the pro-
al advantage: the possibility of improving access posal developed by Castilla (2012) in their
to the museum for audiences with some kind of work ‘Entornos museísticos, nuevas tecnologías
visual or auditory deficiency. Thus, all these expositivas’:16 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
3.3.1. Mobile devices and smartphones that each visitor brings during the visit. This
The potential offered by mobile devices to mu- trend greatly reduces the investment in hardware
seums has been studied since the early 2000s that the museum must make, as it is carried out
(Proctor & Tellis, 2003). Today, it remains a by each visitor who brings a technologically ad-
major pillar in technological innovation ap- vanced device, his or her smartphone: “Mobile
plied to museums, which increases the possi- systems favor the ubiquity and accessibility of
bilities of enjoyment of the heritage exhibited collections, the production of high quality inter-
in the museum: “One of the clearest options active content, interaction with and between vis-
that mobile technology has offered since the itors and the optimization of the institution’s own
beginning has been the possibility of expand- resources” (Solano, 2012).
ing the museum spaces, and in that idea, linked In addition, the proposal to use each visitor’s
to the broad concept of heritage, to use the en- mobile phone favors acceptance and user experi-
tire context where the museum building and ence, since the personal mobile is a friendly de-
collections are integrated, as a more complete vice that everyone knows and is familiar with. In
cultural whole, included under the idea of the following example, we can see an interesting
spaces for presenting heritage” (Ibañez-Etxe- proposal of an x-ray simulator that, once down-
barria, 2011, p. 71). loaded as an application, allows a simulation of
Indeed, one of the great potentials for muse- the interior of the artworks to be seen through
ums is to take advantage of the mobile devices the camera:
Figure 1. Example of using a smartphone interactivity through an X-ray simulator
Source: museumexhibits.comFrom the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 17
Figure 2. Example of interaction through a QR code
Source: National Museum of Fine Arts of Argentina (MNBA)
Another interesting option that exploits the by the National Archaeological Museum in Ma-
potential of mobile phones is to offer the visitor drid. This museum generated five stories that al-
the possibility of further information about the low the user to travel in time to recreate how their
artwork or even create their own gallery on their ancestors lived. The five scenarios that were rec-
mobile phone, by including a QR code (Figure 2). reated were Prehistory, Prohistory, Roman His-
The visitor can scan this code, access en- pania, the Middle Ages and the Modern Age.
riched information about the artwork and Thus, the organization seeks to reinvent the con-
download it to generate their own online gallery cept of museum visits and exploit this technology
to share with their acquaintances. to bring the visitor closer to the history of Spain.
Augmented Reality (AR) refers to the ability
3.3.2. Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality to project virtual objects onto real images, gener-
We define Virtual Reality (VR) as the generation ating a mixed experience, enriched with virtual
of a virtual environment, closed and 100 % dig- and fictional images, overlapping in a real phys-
ital, which the user can experience as if he/she ical environment. As with Virtual Reality, Aug-
were in a real and natural setting. We found a re- mented Reality has also proven to have a pedago-
markable example of the use of virtual reality in gical application for museums and interpretation
museums in the experience carried out in 2017 centers, where it is one of the most advanced18 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
Figure 3. Example of the use of Virtual Reality in the National Archaeological Museum
Source: Antena 3 Televisión (Spain)
resources because it promotes interaction be- hanced through the superimposition of virtual
tween visitors and the cultural object in an attrac- images that the user can appreciate through the
tive and educational way (Ruiz-Torres, 2011). camera of his/her own mobile phone. The virtual
In his work “Augmented Reality, education images could have the aim of explaining the
and museums”, Ruiz-Torres has already detailed, work, contextualizing it in a fictitious environ-
in 2011, more than ten examples of the use of ment, presenting relevant information, etc. It is
this technology by institutions such as the Virtu- relevant to comment on the experience devel-
al Museum of Computer Science, University of oped by the company Smartify, which has gener-
Castilla La Mancha, the Interpretation Center of ated a mobile application that can be download-
the Order of Calatrava of the Castle of Alcaudete ed to any device and that recognizes the artwork
de Jaén, the Museum of the Autonomy of Anda- displayed and shows relevant information about
lusia in Seville, the Center for the Interpretation it. This real-time image processing system can be
of Technology Zamudio, the Museum of the Ju- used to view paintings, sculptures or other ob-
rassic in Asturias, etc. (Ruiz-Torres, 2011). Ac- jects. The most remarkable thing is that this initi-
cording to Castilla (2012), the use of Virtual Re- ative is not linked to any specific museum, but
ality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) can be rather that a private company has developed this
used in museums to perform reconstructions application. It can be used in any museum in the
and to create multimedia smart guides. world. Whether the works can be recognized will
In the first case, the use of these technologies depend on the speed with which museums man-
allows the observation of a painting to be en- age to digitize the works they exhibit:From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 19
In addition to carrying out reconstructions, in The Cleveland Museum of Art, which invites
museums can also use virtual and augmented re- viewers of all ages to actively participate through
ality to update traditional audio guides, favour- exploration (Saldaña & Celaya, 2012) (Figure 4).
ing new and personalized experiences such as
having the virtual presence of the artist describ- 3.3.4. Audiovisual scenographic elements
ing his work process or having representations of Another of the possibilities offered by new tech-
period characters explaining the use or manufac- nologies is to create scenographic spaces to gen-
ture of the elements on display (Castilla, 2012). erate a highly immersive digital environment.
Immersive techniques seek to make the visitor
3.3.3. Touch tools feel part of the recreation or viewing. This sen-
Museums now allow touch. Traditionally, art- sation can be achieved, for example, through a
works had to remain behind a display case or a panoramic visual sensation or through spatial
string marking a distance from which to ob- and surround sound. It can be improved with
serve. The proliferation of touch screens allows realistic environmental effects or those that ap-
visitors to interact with the exhibits in a simple, peal to the rest of the senses (synchronized am-
intuitive and innovative way, making it possible bient lighting, wind, mechanical vibrations of
to navigate maps and images with the hands, the floor or seats, replication of scents).
see multimedia content, zoom in, rotate, etc. Unlike virtual or augmented reality, these
The Espacio Visual Europa (EVE) (2017) spaces work with the panoramic sensation of
states that touch screens allow the development immersion, making it ideal for recreating histor-
of parallel discourses according to the type of ical, archaeological or natural reconstructions
public and their information needs, helping to with maximum spectacular effects. Once the
understand the exhibition message and making sensation of reality is achieved, the system can
the tour in the museum much more versatile, so be provided with forms of interaction with the
that the public can be addressed according to environment as natural and intuitive as possible
their interest and/or level of curiosity. One of the to avoid breaking the feeling of immersion (Cas-
best examples of the use of touch screens is found tilla, 2012).
Figure 4. Example of the use of a large touch screen
Source: The Cleveland Museum of Art20 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
This technique has great potential to bring 3.3.5. 3D screens, fog screens and spherical
complex problems closer to a general public, as is projection
the case, for example, with the issue of biological The 3D technology that offers the greatest poten-
diversity (Marandino, 2011). We found another tial for museums is specular holography. This
remarkable example of the use of these immer- technique consists of obtaining 3D objects or an-
sive digital techniques in the Foresta Luminia imations “in the air” by controlling specular imag-
project, in the Parc Decouverte Natura, in Quebec. es generated by screens or 2D projection surfaces,
At nightfall, visitors explore the trails and areas of commonly called holograms (Castilla, 2012).
the park at their own pace, experiencing a set Holographic techniques can be mixed with other
with lighting effects and videomapping accompa- systems that enhance the interactivity of the holo-
nied by an original soundtrack created for this gram, allowing users to interact with these
project. Along the two kilometers of the path, three-dimensional digital images in real time.
which has been called “the garden of wishes”, vis- The Illinois Museum and Holocaust Educa-
itors, children and adults interact with the space tion Center makes significant use of this tech-
by taking a “magic stone”, making a wish and nology by allowing its users to interact with the
then throwing it into the water of the “enchanted holographic image of various survivors. The ex-
lake”, activating audiovisual effects of great im- hibition uses speech recognition and automatic
pact. The tour also allows visitors to meet fasci- learning technology to make it easier for visitors
nating virtual beings that accompany them on to ask questions of World War II survivors and
their extraordinary adventure. also to hear their answers. To this end, the mu-
seum recorded thirteen of these survivors who,
Figure 5. Example of the use of immersive techniques
with audiovisual scenographic elements for nearly a week, answered thousands of ques-
tions in high-definition video. Most of them live
in the United States, although others reside in
Canada, Israel and the United Kingdom. The
idea is to preserve their testimonies after they
die.
Figure 6. Example of the use of interactive holograms
Source: forestalumina.com SSource: ilholocaustmuseum.orgFrom the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 21
4. Conclusion and implications truly close, open and social approach to the vis-
It is clear how new technologies offer an oppor- itors, enriching the visitor’s experience by per-
tunity in the construction of a truly social muse- sonalizing the interaction, favoring accessibility
um, more inclusive and participatory, giving way and expanding the target audience of the exhibi-
to what we can call a digital social museum. The tion (Mas, 2018, 2020), we can argue that the
examples cited, as well as the theoretical frame- concept of the social museum has been overcome
work, show how there are numerous initiatives, by a more current vision that we call the digital
somewhat dispersed and atomized, to take advan- social museum.
tage of the potential offered by these new tech- The digital social museum favors the image of
nologies to bring the works on display closer and the museum as a connecting platform of audi-
to generate a dialogue with the visitor that will ences, contents and experiences through digital
improve his or her experience. technologies. In the following table, we complete
Considering the previous contributions, which Llerena’s proposal (2015) with a new column re-
define the digital social museum as a way of lated to the uniqueness of the digital social muse-
management that takes advantage of the oppor- um if we compare it with its more “analogical”
tunities offered by digital technologies, achieves a version.
Table 2. Comparison between the social museum and the digital social museum
Social Museum Digital Social Museum
Everyone. A space where
Digital technologies enhance the interaction
visitors contribute to the insti-
of the visitor with the museum, between the
tution with ideas and sugges-
visitors, and the interaction in an autonomous
tions, and where dialogue and
Museums are places for: way with their own mobile devices. These
socialization are encouraged.
devices allow to customize the experience and
They are given the opportunity
thus improve the visit, adapting it to each one.
to create and connect with
Digital devices therefore encourage connectiv-
people who share the same
ity, creativity and visitor participation.
interests.
Digital technology allows for a mapping of
the visitor’s experience, providing, even in real
The exhibition is A collaborative process with
time, data on preferences, interactions and
based on: visitors through studies of the
questions, which can improve the exhibition in
public.
real time. The participation of the visitor in the
generation of the exhibition becomes a reality.
The interaction of the visitor with the exhibited
The commitment and experi- artwork, in an adapted and personalized way.
The focus of the exhibition
ence of the public, which is It evolves the concept of the visitor as a global
is on:
fundamental. concept, to the interaction that each individual
makes in each visit.
The focus of the activity Each visitor as a unique individual (customiza-
Visitors.
is on: tion and adaptation).
Community: Interaction of individuals around
Cultural: there is a constant a cultural theme. The museum provides the
The perception of
interaction between object and content on which the interrelationship of
communication is:
subject. individuals is based. The community manager
as curator.22 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25
Table 2. Comparison between the social museum and the digital social museum (cont.)
Social Museum Digital Social Museum
Multiple, open and presented
Knowledge is adapted to the experience
Knowledge is: in a way that allows for many
that each individual wants to have.
interpretations.
The individual, who interacts in The community in general and the individual
Knowledge is acquired from:
an active and participative way. in particula.r
Developer of learning,
Consumer of customized experiences,
The public is conceived as: experiences, knowledge
protagonist of his own visit.
and experiences.
A facilitator and mediator who
participates in the construction Community enabler that brings the
The teacher is seen as:
of the knowledge presented by experience closer to the newcomer.
the museum.
Constructivist. Learning is
active, it implies a restructur-
ing of the mental schemes of Customized through the unique experience
those who learn. The learning that each visitor has, based on multiple
The learning approach is:
is participative and dialogical. stimuli, generated by both the museum
The public is an active part of a and the rest of the community.
space of social encounter and
exchange of knowledge.
It identifies and develops poten-
tial audiences, communicates
with communities and learns
how audiences experience the
museum and their perception
The evaluation is done through: Customized and in real time.
of it. It focuses on participants’
behavior and the impact of
actions, i.e., what they do and
what happens as a result of
that experience.
Two-way: understanding these
Communication/conversation is: Multidirectional: Museum and Community.
spaces as places of interaction.
Communication and museum No spatial-temporal location. Can be accessed
It can be found everywhere.
interpretation services: from anywhere at any time.
Source: Own elaboration based on the proposal of Llerena (2015)
Therefore, future research will have to re- sionals to implement new technologies and so-
think the contributions given to the manage- cial networks in the management of communi-
ment of social museums and face an approach cation and positioning of museums – all this
fully integrated into a digital framework, which under the framework of the evolution between
requires marketing and communication profes- the merely social and the digital social.From the Social Museum to the Digital Social Museum · págs. 8 a 25 23
Bibliography Fontán, O. (2013). Aprender en internet: comprensión y valo-
ración del patrimonio del siglo XX. Trea.
Antón, C., Camarero, C., & Garrido, M.-J. (2018). Explor- Giaccardi, E. (2012). Heritage and Social Media. In E. Giac-
ing the experience value of museum visitors as a co-creation cardi (Ed.), Heritage and Social Media: Understanding Herit-
process. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(12), 1406–1425. age in a Participatory Culture. Routledge. https://doi.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1373753 org/10.4324/9780203112984
Belenioti, Z.-C., & Vassiliadis, C. A. (2017). Branding in the Gilmore, A., & Rentschler, R. (2002). Changes in museum
New Museum Era (pp. 115–121). https://doi.org/10.1007/ management. Journal of Management Development, 21(10),
978-3-319-33865-1_14 745–760. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710210448020
Camarero, C., Garrido, M.-J., & San Jose, R. (2018). What Gómez-Vilchez, S. (2012). Museos españoles y redes social-
Works in Facebook Content Versus Relational Communica- es. Telos: Cuadernos de Comunicación e Innovación, 90, 79–86.
tion: A Study of their Effectiveness in the Context of Muse- Ibañez-Etxebarria, A. (2011). Museos, Redes Sociales y Tec-
ums. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, nología 2.0. Euskal Herriko Unibertsitateko Argitalpen Zer-
34(12), 1119–1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.20 bitzua.
17.1418475
International Council of Museums (ICOM). (1999). Muse-
Castilla, P. (2012). Entornos museísticos: nuevas tecnologías
os y Diversidad Cultural. VII Seminario Latinoamericano So-
expositivas. Telos: Cuadernos de Comunicación e Innovación,
bre Patrimonio Cultural.
90, 87–96.
Komarac, T., Ozretic-Dosen, D., & Skare, V. (2017). Under-
Castillo, M. G. (2011). Tendencias en la Gestión del Cono-
standing competition and service offer in museum market-
cimiento Cultural: Museos Virtuales. Universidad de Sala-
ing. Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración,
manca.
30(2), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-07-2015-
Chaney, D., Pulh, M., & Mencarelli, R. (2018). When the 0159
arts inspire businesses: Museums as a heritage redefinition
Llerena, S. (2015). La Comunicación de los museos españoles
tool of brands. Journal of Business Research, 85, 452–458.
en Twitter: análisis de la situación y establecimiento de buenas
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.023
prácticas. Carlos III University.
Cordón, D. (2013). Museos y Gabinetes de Comunicación: sin-
Marandino, M. (2011). La biodiversidad en exposiciones
ergias eficaces para el futuro. https://www.uchceu.es/activi-
inmersivas de museos de ciencias: implicaciones para edu-
dades_culturales/2013/congresos/documentos/David_Cor-
cación en museos. Enseñanza de Las Ciencias, 29(2), 221–
don_Benito.pdf
236.
Cordón, D., & González, D. (2016). Museos y comuni-
cación: los nuevos medios como herramienta de diálogo y Mas, J. M. (2018). Spanish museums on Facebook: Analysis
sociabilidad de la institución. El uso de Twitter por el museo of their communication as social museums. Revista de Comu-
del Prado, museo Thyssen-Bornemisza y museo Reina nicacion, 17(2), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.26441/RC17.2-
Sofía. Fonseca, Journal of Communication, 12(12), 149. 2018-A8
https://doi.org/10.14201/fjc201612149165 Mas, J. M. (2020). Museos españoles en Facebook: análisis de
Díaz-Balerdi, I. (2002). ¿Qué fue de la Nueva Museología? El su comunicación en el marco del museo social digital. ESIC.
caso de Québec. Artigrama, 17, 493–516. Minkiewicz, J., Evans, J., & Bridson, K. (2014). How do
Drotner, K. (2014). Museum Communication and Social consumers co-create their experiences? An exploration in
Media. In Museum Communication and Social Media: The the heritage sector. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(1–
Connected Museum. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/ 2), 30–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2013.800899
9780203500965 Monfort, A., Villagra, N., & López-Vázquez, B. (2019). Ex-
Espacio Visual Europa (EVE). (2017). Museos y pantallas ploring stakeholders’ dialogue and corporate social respon-
táctiles. EVE Museos e Innovación. https://evemuseografia. sibility (CSR) on twitter. Profesional de La Informacion, 28(5).
com/2015/11/24/museos-pantallas-tactiles/ https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2019.sep.1324 aDResearch ESIC Nº 24 Vol 24 · Primer semestre, enero-junio 2021 · págs. 8 a 25 Montañes, C. (2001). El museo: un espacio didáctico y social. logical Affordances in a Virtual Museum. International Jour- Mira Editores. nal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(6), 385–401. https:// Proctor, N., & Tellis, C. (2003). The State Of The Art In doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1033912 Museum Handhelds In 2003. Museums and the Web 2003. Vergo, P. (1989). The new museology. Reaktion Books. https://www.museumsandtheweb.com/mw2003/papers/ Villagra, N., López, B., & Monfort, A. (2015). The manage- proctor/proctor.html ment of intangibles and corporate branding: Has anything Recuero-Virto, N., & Blasco-López, M. F. (2019). Robots, changed in the relationship between business and society? Artificial Intelligence, and Service Automation to the Core: Revista Latina de Comunicacion Social, 70, 793–812. https:// Remastering Experiences at Museums. In Robots, Artificial doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2015-1072 Intelligence, and Service Automation in Travel, Tourism and Viñarás-Abad, M. (2005). Una aproximación a la gestión de Hospitality (pp. 239–253). Emerald Publishing Limited. la comunicación en los museos: cambios y tendencias en el https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78756-687-320191018 cambio de siglo. Vivat Academia, 38–64. Rivière, G. (1993). La Museología: Curso de museología textos vom Lehn, D., & Heath, C. (2016). Action at the exhibit face: y testimonios. Akal. video and the analysis of social interaction in museums and Ruiz-Torres, D. (2011). Realidad Aumentada, educación y galleries. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(15–16), 1441– museos. Revista ICONO14. Revista Científica de Comuni- 1457. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2016.11 88846 cación y Tecnologías Emergentes, 9(2), 212. https://doi. Waller, D. S., & Waller, H. J. (2019). An analysis of negative org/10.7195/ri14.v9i2.24 reviews in top art museums’ Facebook sites. Museum Man- Saldaña, I., & Celaya, J. (2012). Los Museos en la era digital. agement and Curatorship, 34(3), 323–338. https://doi.org/10 Dosdoce. http://www.igartubeitibaserria.eus/es/files/los-mu- .1080/09647775.2018.1550622 seos-en-la-era-digital Yoo, K.-H., & Gretzel, U. (2016). The Role of Information Solano, J. (2012). Hacia la universalización de la cultura: and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in Marketing Los museos en la palma de la mano. Telos: Cuadernos de Tourism Experiences. In The Handbook of Managing and Comunicación e Innovación, 90, 97–99. Marketing Tourism Experiences (pp. 409–428). Emerald Sundar, S. S., Go, E., Kim, H.-S., & Zhang, B. (2015). Com- Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1- municating Art, Virtually! Psychological Effects of Techno- 78635-290-320161017
You can also read
