Editorial

Abstract

A theme running through several of the articles in this issue is the possibilities and challenges presented by the changing nature ofmuseums, especiallywith respect to promoting accessibility and broadening their audiences. Using a variety of theoretical and analytic approaches, the authors describe successful undertakings, make suggestions for improvements, and provide tools for promoting and assessing change. The issue begins with Matthew Berland’s keynote address from the 2016 Visitor Studies Association conference in Boston, MA. Berland describes an approach to data that he calls constructivist analytics. He provides a variety of examples taken fromhis own and others’ work to illustrate different ways of thinking about and presenting data for a variety of purposes and audiences. In one example he shows how new techniques allow researchers to combine the specificity of small-scale qualitative research, typically focused on individuals, with the power of quantitative analysis of large groups to better understand and improve the museum experience for more people. Berland’s focus is on how people—including visitors, staff, administrators, and policymakers—learn with and from data. Kate Booth, Justin O’Connor, Adrian Franklin, and Nikos Papastergiadis present a case study of the Museum of Old and New Art (MONA), a new museum located in a workingclass neighborhood in Tasmania, Australia. The authors situate their work in recent claims about the transformative effects of locating museums in unusual locations, such as industrial centers—sometimes referred to as the Bilboa effect, following claims about the positive impact of the Guggenheim Museum on its neighborhood in Bilboa, Spain. Drawing on notions of cultural capital, and combining quantitative and qualitative approaches, the authors examine efforts MONA has made to include local residents and how residents with varying levels of cultural capital have responded. They point to successful outreach, factors that keep residents away from the museum, and missed opportunities for greater inclusion. Karen Hughes and Gianna Moscardo note that young adults rarely attend science museums and propose that policies that effectively incorporate digital technology, including the use of cell phones and social media, may increase attendance bymembers of this group. Some museumprofessionals believe that cell phone use in exhibitsmay distract visitors from attending to the collections and ideas presented by themuseum; other professionals argue that allowing, even encouraging, visitors to use their cell phones to document and share their experiences and to access additional information about exhibits may enhance visitors’ attention to the museum’s content and purposes. Using the notion of mindfulness, the authors compared three groups of university students during a visit to a natural history museum: a group that had been instructed to use their phones to take photographs of the exhibition, a group that had been asked not to use their cell phones, and a control group given no special instructions. Students given instructions about how to use their cell phones stayed longer in the exhibition and had the highest scores for mindfulness and perceived learning; these students seemed to pay attention to the exhibit to figure out how to document and share its core ideas with others. In contrast, when students in the control group took photos they did so more to document superficial aspects of their visit. The authors suggest that museums can provide guidance for