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

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 161-181

  Hampp, Constanze ^a   Schwan, Stephan ^b  

^a DEUTSCHES MUSEUM   (Germany)

^b KNOWLEDGE MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Authentic objects; Informal science learning; Replica; Science museum; Visitor studies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84947549187     PISSN: 21548455     EISSN: 21548463     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2013.875238     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. 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
2. 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
3. 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
4. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A., (2009). Learning science in informal environments. People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
5. Benjamin, W., (1963). Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
6. Berlyne, D. E., (1966). Curiosity and exploration. Science, 153, 25–33. doi: 10.1126/science.153.3731.25
7. Boizvert, 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
8. Bourdieu, P., (1983). Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital. In R., Kreckel (Ed.), Soziale Ungleichheiten (pp. 183–198). Göttingen: Schwartz.
9. Bourdieu, P., Darbel, A., & Schnapper, D., (1997). The love of art: European art museums and their public. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
10. Cutting, J. E., (2003). Gustave Caillebotte, French impressionism, and mere exposure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 319–343. doi: 10.3758/BF03196493
11. 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
12. Evans, E. M., Mull, M. S., & Poling, D. A., (2002). The authentic object? A child's-eye view. In S., Paris (Ed.), Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums (pp. 55–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Falk, J. H., Scott, C., Dierking, L., Rennie, L., & Jones, M. C., (2004). Interactives and visitor learning. Curator, 47, 171–198. doi: 10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00116.x
14. Frazier, B. N., Gelman, S. A., Wilson, A., & Hood, B. M., (2009). Picasso paintings, moon rocks, and hand-written Beatles lyrics: Adults’ evaluations of authentic objects. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 9, 1–14. doi: 10.1163/156853709X414601
15. Gurian, E., (1999). What is the object of this exercise? A meandering exploration of the many meanings of objects in museums. Daedalus, 128, 163–183.
16. Hein, H., (2007). The authority of objects: From regime change to paradigm shift. Curator, 50, 77–85. doi: 10.1111/j.2151-6952.2007.tb00251.x
17. Hong, H. Y., & Lin-Siegler, X., (2012). How learning about scientists’ struggles influences students’ interest and learning in physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 469–484. doi: 10.1037/a0026224
18. Hood, B., & Bloom, P., (2008). Children prefer unique individuals over perfect duplicates. Cognition, 106, 455–462. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.01.012
19. International Council of Museums. (2007, August). ICOM Statutes. Approved during the 21st general conference in Vienna, Austria.
20. 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
21. Korff, G., Eberspächer, M., König, G. M., Tschofen, B., & Baumunk, B. M., (2002). Museumsdinge: Deponieren-exponieren. Cologne: Böhlau.
22. 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. 301–325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. 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
24. Mayring, P., (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (11th ed.). Weinheim: Beltz.
25. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M., (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Newman, G., & Bloom, P., (2012). Art and authenticity: The importance of originals in judgments of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 558–569. doi: 10.1037/a0026035
27. Newman, G., Diesendruck, G., & Bloom, P., (2011). Celebrity contagion and the value of objects. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 215–228.
28. Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C., (2011). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96, 21–47. doi: 10.1002/sce.20463
29. Paris, S. G., (Ed.). (2002). Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Pekarik, A. J., Doering, Z. D., & Karns, D., (1999). Exploring satisfying experiences in museums. Curator, 42, 152–173. doi: 10.1111/j.2151-6952.1999.tb01137.x
31. Sandifer, C., (2003). Technological novelty and open-endedness: Two characteristics of interactive exhibits that contribute to hold the visitor attention in science museum. Journal of Research in Science and Technology, 40, 121–137. doi: 10.1002/tea.10068
32. Sanford, C., (2010). Evaluating family interactions to inform exhibit design: Comparing three different learning behaviors in a museum setting. Visitor Studies, 13, 67–89.
33. Stich, C., Knäuper, B., Eisermann, J., & Leder, H., (2007). Esthetic properties of everyday objects. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 104, 1139–1168.
34. Triona, L., & Klahr, D., (2003). Point and click or grab and theft: Comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students’ ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 149–173. doi: 10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_02
35. Zimmerman, H. T., Reeve, S., & Bell, P., (2009). Family sense-making practices in science center conversations. Science Education, 94, 478–505.