Understanding and Engagement in Places of Science Experience: Science Museums, Science Centers, Zoos, and Aquariums

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 49, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 70-85

  Schwan, Stephan ^a   Grajal, Alejandro ^b   Lewalter, Doris ^c  

^a KNOWLEDGE MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER   (Germany)

^b BROOKFIELD ZOO   (United States)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84903575038     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2014.917588     Document Type: Article

References (122)

1. Adelman, L. M., Falk, J. H., & James, S. (2000). Impact of National Aquarium in Baltimore on visitors' conservation attitudes behavior and knowledge. Curator, 43, 33-62. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2000.tb01158.x
2. Afonso, A. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2007). Educational value of different types of exhibits in an interactive science and technology center. Science Education, 91, 967-987. doi: 10.1002/sce.20220
3. Alexander, J. M., Johnson, K. E., & Kelley, K. (2012). Longitudinal analysis of the relations between opportunities to learn about science and the development of interests related to science. Science Education, 96, 763-786.
4. Allen, S. (2002). Looking for learning in visitor talk: A methodological exploration. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 259-303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Allen, S. (2004). Designing for learning: Studying science museum exhibits that do more than entertain. Science Education, 88, 17-33. doi:10.1002/sce.20016
6. Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. (2004). Designing with multiple interactives: Five common pitfalls. Curator, 47, 199-212. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00117.x
7. Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. (2009). Creating a program to deepen family inquiry at interactive science exhibits. Curator, 52, 289-306. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2009.tb00352.x
8. Anderson, U. S., Kelling, A. S., Pressley-Keough, R., Bloomsmith, M. A., & Maple, T. L. (2003). Enhancing the zoo visitor's experience by public animal training and oral interpretation at an otter exhibit. Environment and Behavior, 35, 826-841. doi:10.1177/0013916503254746
9. Arya, D. J., & Maul, A. (2012). The role of the scientific discovery narrative in middle school science education: An experimental study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 1022-1032. doi:10.1037/a0028108
10. Ash, D. (2004). How families use questions at dioramas: Ideas for exhibit design. Curator, 47, 84-100. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00367.x
11. Association of Zoos and Aquariums. (2012). Annual Report on Conservation and Science. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Maryland. Retrieved from https://www.aza.org/uploadedFiles/Conservation/Commitments_and_Impacts/2012ARCS.pdf
12. Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2010). Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen closer. Psychological Science, 21, 147-152. doi:10.1177/0956797609356283
13. Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2005). Promoting environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviour through free-choice learning experiences: What is the state of the game? Environmental Education Research, 11, 281-295. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.11.003
14. Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Falk, J. (2011). Visitors' learning for environmental sustainability: Testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife tourism experiences using structural equation modeling. Tourism Management, 32, 1243-1252.
15. Bauer, D., Hampp, C., Schwan, S., & Kampschulte, L. (2012, April). Knowledge transfer of conflictual natural scientific issues in museums and exhibitions: The role of authentic objects. Paper presented at the 12th International Public Communication of Science and Technology Conference, Florence, Italy.
16. Bauhoff, V., Huff, M., & Schwan, S. (2012). Distance matters: Spatial contiguity effects as trade-off between gaze-switches and memory load. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 863-871. doi:10.1002/acp.2887
17. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
18. Berenguer, J. (2007). The effect of empathy in pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39, 269-283. doi:10.1177/0013916506292937
19. Bitgood, S. (2009). When is "museum fatigue" not fatigue? Curator, 52, 193-202. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2009.tb00344.x
20. Bitgood, S. (2010). An analysis of visitor circulation: Movement patterns and the general value principle. Curator, 49, 463-475. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2006.tb00237.x
21. Bitgood, S., Patterson, D., & Benefield, A. (1988). Exhibit design and visitor behavior. Environment and Behavior, 20, 474-491. doi:10.1177/0013916588204006
22. Boisvert, D. L., & Slez, B. J. (1994). The relationship between visitor characteristics and learning-associated behaviors in a science museum discovery space. Science Education, 78, 137-148. doi:10.1002/sce.3730780203
23. Boisvert, D. L., & Slez, B. J. (1995). The relationship between exhibit characteristics and learning-associated behaviors in a science museum discovery space. Science Education, 79, 503-518. doi:10.1002/sce.3730790503
24. Borun, M., Chambers, M., & Cleghorn, A. (1996). Families are learning in science museums. Curator, 39, 262-270.
25. Borun, M., Chambers, M. B., Dritsas, J., & Johnson, J. I. (1997). Enhancing family learning through exhibits. Curator, 40, 279-295. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.1997.tb01313.x
26. Boyce, P. R. (2004). Lighting research for interiors: The beginning of the end or the end of the beginning. Lighting Research and Technology, 36, 283-294. doi:10.1191/11477153504li118oa
27. Briseño-Garzón, A, Anderson, D., & Anderson, A. (2007). Adult learning experiences from an aquarium visit: the role of social interactions in family groups. Curator, 50, 299-318. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2007.tb00274.x
28. Brookfield Zoo. (2012). Unpublished report, Brookfield Zoo, Brookfield, IL.
29. Churchman, D. (1985, August). The educational impact of zoos and museums. A review of the literature. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
30. Clayton, S., Fraser, J., & Saunders, C. D. (2009). Zoo experiences: Conversations, connections, and concern for animals. Zoo Biology, 28, 377-397. doi:10.1002/zoo.20186
31. Crowley, K., & Jacobs, M. (2002). Building islands of expertise in everyday family activity. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 333-356). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Crowley, K., & Knutson, K. (2007, November). The need for a practical theory of museum learning. Paper presented at the workshop "Learning in Museums-The Role of Media" at the Knowledge Media Research Center, Tübingen, Germany.
33. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.
34. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Hermanson, K. (1995). Intrinsic motivation in museums: Why does one want to learn? In J. H. Falk & L. D. Dierking (Eds.), Public institutions for personal learning: Establishing a research agenda (pp. 67-77). Washington, DC: American Association of Museums, Technical Information Service.
35. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Robinson, R. E. (1990). The art of seeing: An interpretation of the aesthetic encounter. Malibu, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum and the Getty Center for Education in the Arts.
36. Daum, A. W. (2009). Varieties of popular science and the transformations of public knowledge: Some historical reflections. Isis, 100, 319-332. doi:10.1086/599550
37. Davey, G. (2005). What is museum fatigue? Visitor Studies Today, 8, 17-21.
38. David, O., & Bar-Tal, D. (2009). A socio-psychological conception of collective identity: The case of national identity as an example. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 354-379. doi:10.1177/1088868309344412
39. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: Rochester University Press.
40. De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2009). Towards a framework for attention cueing in instructional animations: Guidelines for research and design. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 113-140. doi:10.1007/s10648-009-9098-7
41. Durant, J. R., Evans, G. A., & Thomas, G. P. (1989). The public understanding of science. Nature, 340, 11-14. doi:10.1038/340011a0
42. Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2005). From living to virtual: Learning from museum objects. Curator, 48, 317-338. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2005.tb00175.x
43. Eghbal-Azar, K. (2012, July). Appropriation and experience at the museum. Affordances in exhibitions and movement patterns of visitors. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Visitor Studies Association Conference, Raleigh, NC.
44. Engelkamp, J., & Zimmer, H. D. (1994). Human memory: A multimodal approach. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
45. Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 171-190. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1
46. Falk, J. H. (2009). Identity and the museum visitor experience. Walnut Creek, CA: Left.
47. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor Experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
48. Falk, J. H., & Diercking, L. D. (2012). The museum experience revisited. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast.
49. Falk, J. H., Moussouri, T., & Coulson, D. (1998). The effect of visitor's agendas on museum learning. Curator, 41, 107-120. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.1998.tb00822.x
50. Falk, J. H., Scott, C., Dierking, L., Rennie, L., & Jones, M. C. (2004). Interactives and visitor learning. Curator, 47, 171-192. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00116.x
51. Falk, J. H., Storksdieck, M., & Dierking, L. (2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding: evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16, 455-469. doi:10.1002/tea.10070
52. Field, H., & Powell, P. (2001). Public understanding of science versus public understanding of research. Public Understanding of Science, 10, 421-426. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/10/4/305
53. Geyer, C., Neubauer, K., & Lewalter, D. (2013). Public understanding of science via research areas in science museums: the evaluation of the EU project NanoToTouch. In L. Locke & S. Locke (Eds.), Knowledge in publics: Beyond deficit, engagement and transfer (pp. 50-74). London, England: Cambridge Scholars.
54. Gibson, H. L., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students' attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86, 693-705. doi:10.1002/sce.10039
55. Glaser, M., Garsoffky, B., & Schwan, S. (2012). What do we learn from docutainment? Processing hybrid television documentaries. Learning and Instruction, 22, 37-46.
56. Grüninger, R., Specht, I., Lewalter, D., & Schnotz, W. (2013). Fragile knowledge and conflicting evidence: What effects do contiguity and personal characteristics of museum visitors have on their processing depth? European Journal of Psychology of Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10212-013-0195-0
57. Gusset, M., & Gerald, D. (2011). The global reach of zoos and aquariums in visitor numbers and conservation expenditures. Zoo Biology, 30, 1098-2361. doi:10.1002/zoo.20369
58. Gutwill, J. P., & Allen, S. (2010). Facilitating family group inquiry at science museum exhibits. Science Education, 94, 710-742. doi:10.1002/sce.20387
59. Hampp, C., & Schwan, S. (2014). The role of authentic objects in museums of the history of science and technology: Findings from a visitor study. International Journal of Science Education Part B: Communication and Public Engagement. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/21548455.2013.875238
60. Harvey, M. L., Loomis, R. J., Bell, O. A., & Marion, M. (1998). The influence of museum exhibit design on immersion and psychological flow. Environment and Behavior, 30, 601-627. doi: 10.1177/001391659803000502
61. Heimlich, J. E., & Horr, E. T. (2010). Adult learning in free-choice, environmental settings: What makes it different? New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 127, 57-66. doi:10.1002/ace.381
62. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
63. Hohenstein, J., & Tran, L. U. (2007). The use of questions in exhibit labels to generate explanatory conversation among science museum visitors. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1557-1580. doi:10.1080/09500690701494068
64. Hong, H. Y., & Lin-Siegler, X. (2011). How learning about scientists' struggles influences students' interest and learning in physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 469-484. doi:10.1037/a0026224
65. Humphrey, T., & Gutwill, J. P. (2005). Fostering active prolonged engagement: The art of creating APE exhibits. San Francisco, CA: Exploratorium.
66. Hurd, P. D. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational Leadership, 16, 13-16.
67. Kals, E., Schumacher, D., & Montada, L. (1999). Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment and Behavior, 31, 178-202. doi:10.1177/00139169921972056
68. Kirchberg, V., & Tröndle, M. (2012). Experiencing exhibitions: A review of studies on visitor experiences in museums. Curator, 55, 435-452. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2012.00167.x
69. Kisiel, J., Rowe, S., Vartabedian, M. A., & Kopczak, C. (2012). Evidence for family engagement in scientific reasoning at interactive animal exhibits. Science Education, 96, 1047-1070. doi:10.1002/sce.21036
70. Kottasz, R. (2006). Understanding the influences of atmospheric cues on the emotional responses and behaviours of museum visitors. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 16, 95-121. doi:10.1300/J054v16n01_06
71. Krapp, A. (2002). An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to self-determination theory. In E. Deci & R. Ryan (Eds.), The handbook of self-determination research (pp. 405-427). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
72. Lehnhardt, K., Hauck, D., Wilson, S., Sellin, R., Kuhar, C., & Miller, L. (2004). Assessment of the Bushmeat Message. Journal of International Zoo Education Association, 40, 22-25.
73. Leinhardt, G., & Crowley, K. (2002). Objects of learning, objects of talk: Changing minds in museums. In S. Paris (Ed.), Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums (pp. 301-324). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
74. Lenzner, A. Schnotz, W., & Müller, A. (2013) The role of decorative pictures in learning. Instructional Science, 41, 811-831. doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9256-z
75. Lewalter, D., Neubauer, K., & Geyer, C. (in press). Comparing the effectiveness of two communication formats on visitors' understanding of nanotechnology. Visitor Studies.
76. Lindgren-Streicher, A., & Reich, C. A. (2007). Visitor usage of digital and physical artifacts in two museum programs. Visitor Studies, 10, 152-167. doi:10.1080/10645570701603666
77. Luebke, J. F., & Matiasek, J. (2013). An exploratory study of zoo visitors' exhibit experiences and reactions. Zoo Biology, 32, 407-416. doi:10.1002/zoo.21071
78. Magner, U. I. E., Schwonke, R., Aleven, V., Popescu, O., & Renkl, A. (2014). Triggering situational interest by decorative illustrations both fosters and hinders learning in computer-based learning environments. Learning and Instruction, 29, 141-152. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.07.002
79. Maibach, E. W., Leiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., & Mertz, C. K. (2011). Identifying like-minded audiences for global warming public engagement campaigns: An audience segmentation analysis and tool development. PLoS ONE 6 e17571. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017571
80. Malcolm, J., Hodkinsion, P., & Colley, H. (2003). The interrelationships between informal and formal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15, 313-318. doi:10.1108/13665620310504783
81. Mason, M. F., & Bar, M. (2012).The effect of mental progression on mood. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 217-221. doi:10.1037/a0025035
82. Meyer, M. (2010). From cold science to "hot research." In F. Cameron & L. Kelly (Eds.), Hot topics, public culture, museums (pp. 129-149). London, England: Cambridge Scholars.
83. Miller, J. D. (1998). The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 203-223. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001
84. Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 273-294. doi:10.1177/0963662504044908
85. Minogue, J., & Jones, M. G. (2006). Haptics in education: Exploring an untapped sensory modality. Review of Educational Research, 76, 317-348. doi:10.3102/00346543076003317
86. Morris, G., Hargreaves, J., & McIntyre, A. (2004). Learning journeys: Using technology to connect the four stages of meaning making. Retrieved from http://www.renaissancewestmidlands.org.uk/local/media/downloads/Learning%20Journies%20Final.pdf
87. Mortensen, M. F. (2010). Designing immersion exhibits as border-crossing environments. Museum Management and Curatorship, 25, 323-336. doi:10.1080/09647775.2010.498990
88. Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitors: Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 376-397.
89. Myers, O. E., Saunders, C. D., & Birjulin, A. A. (2004). Emotional dimensions of watching zoo animals: An experience sampling study building on insights from psychology. Curator, 47, 299-321. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00127.x
90. OECD. (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow's world. Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/9789264040014-en
91. Packer, J. (2006). Learning for fun: The unique contribution of educational leisure experiences. Curator, 49, 329-344. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2006.tb00227.x
92. Packer, J., & Ballantyne, R. (2004). Is educational leisure a contradiction in terms? Exploring the synergy of education and entertainment. Annals of Leisure Research, 7, 50-65. doi:10.1080/11745398.2004.10600939
93. Packer, J., & Ballantyne, R. (2010). The role of zoos and aquariums in education for a sustainable future. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 127, 25-34. doi:10.1002/ace.378
94. Paris, S. (2002). Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
95. Peart, B., & Kool, R. (1988). Analysis of a natural history exhibit: Are dioramas the answer? The International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, 7, 117-128. doi:10.1080/09647778809515113
96. Pekarik, A. J., Doering, Z. D., & Karns, D. A. (1999). Exploring satisfying experiences in museums. Curator, 42, 152-170. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.1999.tb01137.x
97. Peponis, J., Dalton, R. C., Wineman, J., & Dalton, N. (2004). Measuring the effects of layout upon visitors' spatial behaviors in open plan exhibition settings. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31, 453-473. doi:10.1068/b3041
98. Pirolli, P., & Card, S. K. (1999). Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106, 643-675. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.643
99. Povey, D. D., & Rios, J. (2002). Using interpretive animals to deliver affective messages in zoos. Journal of Interpretation Research, 7, 19-28.
100. Proffitt, D. R. (2006). Embodied perception and the economy of action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 110-122. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00008.x
101. Reiss, M. J., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2011). Dioramas as depictions of reality and opportunities for learning. Curator, 54, 447-459. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2011.00109.x
102. Rey, G. D. (2014). Seductive details and attention distraction-An eye tracker experiment. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 133-144. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.017
103. Rounds, J. (2004). Strategies for the curiosity-driven museum visitor. Curator, 47, 389-412. doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00135.x
104. Rowe, R., & Kisiel, J. (2012). Family engagement at aquarium touch tanks-Exploring interactions and the potential for learning. In E. Davidsson & A. Jakobsson (Eds.), Understanding interactions at science centers and museums: Approaching sociocultural perspectives (pp. 63-77). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
105. Sandifer, C. (2003). Technological novelty and open-endedness: Two characteristics of interactive exhibits that contribute to the holding of visitor attention in a science museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 121-137. doi:10.1002/tea.10068
106. Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391-406. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00174
107. Serrell, B. (1998). Paying attention: Visitors and museum exhibitions. Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.
108. Smith, L., Broad, S., & Weiler, B. (2008). A closer examination of the impact of zoo visits on visitor behaviour. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16, 544-562. doi:10.1080/09669580802159628
109. Stamps, A. E. (2007). Mystery of environmental mystery. Effects of light, occlusion, and depth of view. Environment and Behavior, 39, 165-197. doi:10.1177/0013916506288053
110. Steg, L., & de Groot, J. (2012). Environmental values. In S. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 81-92). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199733026.013.0005
111. Stocklmayer, S. M., Rennie, L. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education. Studies in Science Education, 46, 1-44. doi:10.1080/03057260903562284
112. Thomas, E. F., McGarty, C., & Mavor, K. I. (2009). Transforming "apathy into movement": The role of prosocial emotions in motivating action for social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 310-333. doi:10.1177/1088868309343290
113. Toepper, J., Glaser, M., & Schwan, S. (2014). Extending social cues based principles of multimedia learning beyond its immediate effects. Learning and Instruction, 29, 10-20. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.07.002
114. Triona, L. M., & Klahr, D. (2003). Point and click or grab and heft: Comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school studentś ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 149-173. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_02
115. Van Schijndel, T. J. P., Franse, R. K., & Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2010). The exploratory behavior scale: Assessing young visitors' hands-on behavior in science museums. Science Education, 94, 794-809. doi:10.1002/sce.20394
116. Visscher, N. C., Snider, R., & Van der Stoep, G. (2009). Comparative analysis of knowledge gain between interpretive and fact-only presentations at an animal training session: An exploratory study. Zoo Biology, 28, 488-495. doi:10.1002/zoo.20174
117. Weiler, B., & Smith, L. (2009). Does more interpretation lead to greater outcomes? An assessment of the impacts of multiple layers of interpretation in a zoo context. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17, 91-105. doi:10.1080/09669580802359319
118. Wineman, J. D., & Peponis, J. (2010). Constructing spatial meaning. Spatial affordances in museum design. Environment and Behavior, 42, 86-109. doi:10.1177/0013916509335534
119. Witt, J. K. (2011). Action's effect on perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 201-206. doi:10.1177/0963721411408770
120. Yalowitz, S. S., & Bronnenkant, K. (2009). Timing and tracking: Unlocking visitor behavior. Visitor Studies, 12, 47-64. doi:10.1080/10645570902769134
121. Yaneva, A., Rabesandratana, T. M., & Greiner, B. (2009). Staging scientific controversies: a gallery test on science museums' interactivity. Public Understanding of Science, 18, 79-90. doi:10.1177/0963662507077512
122. Yoon, S. A., Elinich, K., Wang, J., van Schooneveld, & Anderson, E. (2013). Scaffolding informal learning in science museums: How much is too much? Science Education, 97, 848-877.