Paper at the conference: New Roles and Missions of Museums

Taipei: INTERCOM (International Committee on Management), November 2-4

Available at http://www.intercom.museum/documents/3-5chen.pdf

A new communication model in the natural history museum

CHEN Hui Chuan, HO Chuan Kun & HO Ming Chyuan

Abstract
It is a discourse to argue that how a new communication model, the instigating model, is
practiced in the natural history museum of the 21st century. The variety of communication
theories are suggested in practice in natural history museum since 1968. From ‘the museum as
a communication system and implications for museum education’ to ‘museum exhibitions as
communication media to convey ideas’, the communication models have shifted obviously.
Hooper-Greenhill used the metaphor of the modernist museum, the educational model (curator-
centered); and the metaphor of post-museum, the interpretative model (visitor-centered), to
describe those differences. Three models are compared in this study. Since the first two models
concern only on the learning value in the museum, no matter what the perspective was used to
develop the exhibition. This study argues that the understanding of learning process and
meaning-making are the core values of the new communication model. This new instigating
model develops the exhibition in a natural history museum from a memetic view, the
perspectives of learning involve an infection process of meme. The meme's host could be
anyone relevant to exhibition. The instigator of signal could be anything: object, artifact or text,
graphic design, specimen etc. It is the responsibility of the museum designer to create the
variety of experience aspects to instigate the active selection of culture evolution and to remove
the gap between hosts of memes. A special exhibit on Bat Legend is used as a trial ballon to
highlight the applicability of our new communication model in the natural history museum.

Key Words: communication model, natural history, museum exhibition, meme

1
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
A new communication model in the natural history museum
Introduction
From the aspect of museum sustenance,
Neil Kolter and Philip Kolter claimed some
viewpoints of marketing at the end of the 20th
century that all new museums have to face up
today: 1. museum mission and identity; 2.
building an audience; 3. attracting financial
resources. A growing number of museums
today are reinventing themselves to adapt to
changing anticipation by the revolution of
organization, exhibition design, programs, and
services. In the beginning of the 21st century,
museums in Taiwan are going to face up to a
more immediately challenge, the shift of the
government organization to public
cooperation. Visitors in museums shift the role
to customers than as students. How to
compete with other culture industries
becomes a problem today.
If a revolutionary idea of exhibition design
can be addressed, it might be the first step for
the museum to cope with the more full-scale
interaction relevant to the social and
economic revolution externally and internally.
From ‘the museum as a communication
system and implications for museum
education’ to ‘museum exhibitions as
communication media to convey ideas’ , the
communication models have been shifted
obviously. New communication model should
be invented to create a more practical
relationship among all relevant stakeholders
of exhibition. To solve the problems coming
from those challenges in the natural history
museum of 21st century, a new
communication model of exhibition design is
addressed in this discourse. A case study is
demonstrated for a new perspective of
exhibition design in museum practice.
1. New role of museum in the age of
experience economy
Moira G. Simpson pointed out that the past
30 years have seen significant changes in the
field of museology, perhaps none as
significant as the development of the
2
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
ecomuseum and community-based museum
and demonstrated the examples of the “new”
museum paradigm. A new role of museum
has emerged within a postindustrial, post-
modern society, after a collapse of a
distinction between culture and commerce.
Deirdre Stam (1993) has demonstrated the
new museology in the point of “informed
muse” and stated “new museologists offer
less tangible metaphors to suggest purpose:
the museum can be a forum or a dialogue
between curators and the public; or even a
public access system where visitors can
assemble their own experiences.” The visitor's
experience becomes, paradoxically, the more
tangible entity, to wit, the product of the
museum. This view implies that the primary
product of the museum is then not the
preservation and display of the artifact but
rather the information to be derived by the
public from the museum.
To function as the answer for the
question of “what is the utility of The New
Museology for museum practice,” Deirdre
Stam concluded that museums must
develop these techniques as follows:
• new methods for attempting understanding
of society and audience;
• new ways of testing visitors' needs and
responses;
• new organizational structures and
management approaches to deal with new
and dynamic functional relationships;
• new ways to evaluate ‘productivity’ ;
• new communication patterns;
• new approaches to information
management and utilization.
In the beginning of the 21st century,
information is not the only primary economic
offering anymore. An alternative and distinct
economic offering, “experience,” provides the
key to future economic growth. The age of
experience economy is emerging.
When experiences are as a fourth
economic offering, after the other offerings of
materials, goods, services, experiences are
as distinct from services as services are from
goods. Experiences are events that engage
individuals in a personal way. As an
experience may engage customers, Pine and
Gilmore considered two dimensions of the
most important, as depicted in two axes (Fig.
1); one is absorption vs. immersion, and the
other is passive vs. active participation.
The coupling of these dimensions defines
the four “realms” of an experience-
entertainment, education, escape, and Fig. 1 The experience realms depicted by Pine and
aestheticism. In The Experience Economy, Gilmore
CIRCLEtDegree of Design and Orchestration of Visitor Expenence
they pointed out that the wide range of
satisfying experiences is the minimal
requirement for visitors, a surprise
manipulated by the experience and
transformation would be the end achievement.
The satisfying visitor experiences in nine
Smithsonian museums have been explored by
Pekarik, et al. and were classified into four
categories: object experiences, cognitive
experiences, introspective experiences, and
social experiences. It may be the
VERTICAL AXIStLevel & Depth of Expenence Dimensions
of the
characteristic experience in traditional
Museum-going Experience
museums. Fig. 2 A designed museum-going experience outlined by
Neil Kotler and Philip Kotler also identify Neil Kotler and Philip Kotler
the museum product with multiple
experiences of museum-going, which include responses. The experiences as the
recreation, sociability, learning, an aesthetic revolutionary product in museums cause the
experience, a celebrative experience, and an developing model of exhibition design to shift.
enchanting experience. They eventually
outlined three dimensions of a designed 2. New perspectives of exhibition design
museum-going experience and represented To be expected or viewed as a loyal
three strategies to serve the marketing role of producer, designers have to play a straight
the museums (Fig. 2). First strategy is neutral bridge between the curator/transmitter
“improving the museum-going experience” ; and the visitor/receiver in the old perspectives
second is “community service” ; and third is of the exhibition. In the traditional model of
“market repositioning toward entertainment.” exhibition development, curators assembled
Those dimensions roughly are corresponding the objects or specimens, established the
to the distinction among “audience goals,” conceptual framework, and wrote the text and
“product goals,” and labels of exhibition. The designer then
“organizational/competitive goals.” packaged the curatorial material in 3D form,
The effort of the museum exhibition is usually embodying the curator's vision.
evaluated inevitably by all kinds of visitors'

3
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
A new communication model in the natural history museum
Afterwards, educators prepared interpretative
materials that could help visitors make sense
of the exhibition experience. However, usually
a curator's true affections were aimed at other
scholars, leaving a majority of visitors in the
dark. In the challenging times of the 1960s
and 1970s, the curator as the voice of
authority was one of the first to be challenged.
As Kathleen McLean stated that the dynamics
of dialogue in the new age of exhibition design
will be urged inevitably by the societies of
which they are a part. The developing model
of exhibition design inevitably will be shifted
by the new perspectives of the museum
paradigm.
Eilean Hooper-Greenhill used “new
research paradigm: marginalizing the
museum” as the subtitle of a paragraph. And
stated, “a new approach to museum audience
research is becoming established which is
pushed forward partly by those who wish to
democratize the museum, and partly by the
general cultural shift towards postmodernism
and postcolonialism.” Part of this cultural shift
is seen in the reworking of concepts of
education and learning. She suggested that
museum communicate on site through a
range of methods which includes exhibitions
of many different types, functions, sizes and
approaches to interpretation. Different
audiences need different provisions, and
thought should be given as to how different
types of exhibition or display can be used to
attract different sections of the public. Popular
blockbuster and the small-scale exhibitions of
a local adult education group can serve this
concept without any contradiction. In the
viewpoint of Hooper- Greenhill, the exhibition
is a piece of the holistic approach to museum
communication and is the educational media
to serve the ‘ real ’ people, the subgroup of
audiences.
The paradigm of meaning making in
museums was concerned in the 1990s; in the
meanwhile, the paradigm of constructivism
was emerging to challenge the other
4
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
paradigms that guide disciplined inquiry.
Silverman stated, “the concept of meaning
making is generating excitement within the
museum community. Providing an approach
to understanding visitor experiences, the
paradigm illuminates the visitor's active role in
creating meaning of a museum experience
through the context he/she brings, influenced
by the factors of self-identity, companions,
and leisure motivations.” Jay Rounds
addressed that meaning-making paradigm,
which differs from the cultural-transmission
paradigm in some critical ways, asserts a
radically-different view of the output of the
exhibit experience-from facts successfully
transferred to meaning constructed in the
mind of visitors.
George E. Hein further clarified that “all of
discussions of constructivism include meaning
making; but meaning making does not
necessarily imply constructivism.” Hein also
described the constructivist museum in the
considerations below, e.g. connections to the
familiar, learning modalities, collaborations,
social interaction, and intellectual challenge,
etc.
In the perspectives of “exhibitions as
communicative media,” museum exhibitions
are products of research, organized and
designed to convey ideas. Flora Kaplan
pointed that an exhibition that communicates
must educate and excite the mind and the
senses; when communication is optimal it
creates an ‘affect’ among spectators and
audiences. Exhibitions generally utilize the
same basic elements to tell the stories: they
employ objects either made and used by
human beings or drawn from the natural
world; they require texts, most often in the
form of label, wall panels, headlines and
banners; and they incorporate other graphic
elements, such as photographs, maps, charts
and drawings. In addition, they use lighting,
museum “furniture” -cases, platforms, walls-
and architectural elements that must protect
the objects shown, enhance viewing
and enclose exhibition space. Qualities of
color and texture attach to all these elements.
Sound, seating and the media of film, video,
slide projection, computers and simulation
may also be added. Live elements often range
from planting to performance-dancers, actors
and scholars, as well as lectures and docents.
This communicative media actually is
represented as an assemblage that consists
of those “so-called” basic elements.
Although the perspectives obviously shift
among those emerging paradigms, the
characteristic of exhibition design never has a
distinguishing definition. All concerns of the
communication model are exclusively relevant
to the curator/transmitter and the visitor/
receiver, or the relationship between them in
the position of power. It seems that the
exhibition has no interpretation involving the
designer. It is a paradoxical viewpoint to
ignore designers and their influences in the
communication model, if we expect a creative
design would be a surprise to achieve and to
win the satisfaction of the visitors' experience.
I. Theories and methodologies 1.
Communication theories and learning
approaches
‘The educational role of the museum’ is not
only a book title of Hooper-Greenhill but also
the proper duty of all museums. She used
three words: education, interpretation and
communication, to catch on to what this
means. Museums should be the informal or
lifelong learning place is the unalterable
viewpoint, especially in natural history and
science museums.
Traditionally, the taxonomy of educational
objectives by Benjamin Bloom used in the
objective model with the setting of
predetermined goals and the methods of
formative and summative evaluation.
However, the visitor is completely different
from the student. The simple communication
model was introduced to the museum world
in North America by Cameron in the late
1960s. Cameron's emphasis on objects as the
medium of museum communication was
challenged. Knez and Wright proposed that
putting across ideas (intellectual cognition)
was the primary function of museum
communication, at least in science museums,
and their suggestions led to the modifications
in the basic communications model.
The process of communication has evolved
from the development of a simple model to
something more complex. The initial simple
description of the process of communication
was based on the idea of one person sending
a message to another, perhaps over the
telephone. Distinctions were made at the
beginning of the process between the source
and the transmitter, and at the end of the
process between the receiver and the
destination. Following up the communication
model of Shannon and Weaver, the
knowledge should be effectively received by
visitors. All of the design problems should
focus on the decrease of noise or the increase
of channel (Fig. 3). The model can be applied
to a museum educational exhibition (Fig. 4). In
this instance the “noise” which interferes with
the message might include anything from
crowds to visitor fatigue or others.
The influence of the model of
communication on approaches to exhibition
production is discussed by Roger Miles who
points out how this linear understanding of the
communication process is mirrored in the
linear process of making exhibition (Fig. 5).
However, Miles proposes a very different
approach to exhibition which is much more
flexible and makes use of extensive research
at all stages of the process, including market
research before the process begins, trying-
out of exhibits during production and
summative evaluation after the exhibition
opens.
Hooper-Greenhill identified two broad
approaches to conceptualizing
 5
A new communication model in the natural history museum
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
 Fig. 3 The Shannon and Weaver communication model

source transmitter channel receiver ------ ► destination

Noise

Fig. 4 The Shannon and Weaver model applied to exhibition

Fig. 5 The simple communications model adapted as a way of understanding the exhibition process. The
move from curator to designer to educator takes place in time.

communication: the transmission model and

the cultural model. The transmission model, a
geographical metaphor is used. It is clear that
a realist and positivist epistemology and a
behaviorist learning theory underpin this
model (Fig 3). The cultural approach to
understanding communication: based on the
constructivist paradigm, communication is
understood as a cultural process of
negotiating meaning, which produces “reality”
through symbolic systems such as texts,
object, artworks, maps, models and
Fig. 6 The model d
museums. It is the ritual or cultural view. The Eilean Hooper- Green
view proposes that “reality” has no finite cultural approach to
identity, but is brought into experience, is communication: ba
constrructivist paradigm
produced, through communication. Reality is
defined within negotiated frameworks or
“interpretative communication” (Fig. 6). an alternative approach of goal-free
Stephen Bitgood made a lot of contribution evaluation for a communication model. The
to the effective exhibit and judged the success evaluations are more open-ended and explore
of an exhibit in two ways-visitor measures possible consequences rather than the
and/or critical appraisal by experts. Visitor predetermined expectations of goal- oriented
measures include behavior, knowledge, and evaluation.
affection. Stopping (attracting power) and Hein summarized the education theories in
viewing time (holding power) are used as two four theories of teaching are located in
indices of behavioral measurement usually. different quadrants (Fig. 7): pedagogy for
Bicknell also worked didactic/expository education, stimulus-
response education, discovery learning and
constructivism.

6
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
A new communication model in the natural history museum

Knowledge exists outside the learner

communication is all about.” In Aunger's
viewpoint, he described communication
through four approaches: mechanical,
Didactic,
Expository El Discovery inferential, evolutionary and coevolutionary.
Incremental
r
k Learner Mechanical approach is devoted to
learning, 4 ^
Learning Theory
added bit by constructs communication among agents without
bit T
Stimulus-
E3 Constructivism
w knowledge
intelligence, such as machines. It is based on
Response 0 the mathematical model of communication, as
ca ■
epitomized in the work of Chaude Shannon
All knowledge is constructed by the learner personally or socially
and William Weaver during the 1940s, and is
not directly relevant to memetics. The
Fig. 7 Four domains of Hein's education theories
mechanical approach thus sees
Kelman compared the objective model and communication largely as a process of finding
the responsive model to be used in evaluation the optimal coding system to compensate for
of exhibition. The skill of the ethnographic “noise” problem.
research used in order to produce a complete Inferential approach sees communication
picture of the learning process. Kelman used as the mutual negotiation of meaning. Single
the Hein matrix to gather a mass of detailed events of information exchange, exemplified
information as so- called naturalistic or by dialogue between a sender-receiver pair,
responsive model. This model eliminated the are standard focus of both the Mechanical and
tunnel vision effect in the objective model. the inferential theories.
Responsive evaluation is advocated by Stake, Evolutionary approach is devoted to
focuses attention on program activities rather describing the evolution of signaling
than program intent. behaviors. The theory holds that
communication is a specialized behavior
2. Communication approaches in memetic
involving the broadcast of information. It is a
view
question of dialogue versus dissemination.
Communication approaches in memetic
Single events of information exchange,
view is an alternative view to be worthy of
exemplified by dialogue between a sender-
attention. As in Dawkins's original formulation,
receiver pair, are the standard focus of both
memes are passed on by imitation. The
the mechanical and the inferential theories.
Oxford English Dictionary defines a meme as
Dissemination suggests that the sender
“An element of a culture that may be
tosses signals out into environment, hoping to
considered to be passed on by non-genetic
find one or more receivers. It is a metaphor of
means, especially imitation.” Memes have
message-passing story used to explain both
been variously suggested to exist as “an idea
biological and culture evolution.
in someone's head,” “a repeatable piece of
If the receiver's response to this
behavior like a spoken word,” or “embodied in
information is also in the sender's interest, the
the form of artifacts, like wheels.” Memes are
ability to emit that cue will also improve.
the replicators and tend to increase in number
Communication can even become an arms
whenever they have the chance.
race between the sender (to deceive) and the
Replicators transmit information, as Robert
receiver (to decipher). The transformation,
Aunger says, “the idea that social
distortions, and losses of information typical of
communication involves the replication of
social transmission are to be explained not
information forces us to reconceptualize what
just as side effects of “jumping the gap”
between brains but as the normal

7
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
consequence of “dueling” communication
itself.
Coevolutionary approach emphasized that
a consequence of successful communication
can be the replication of the information
conveyed. Communication is explicitly linked
to large-scale of social phenomena such as
cultural change through a physical
consequence of communication by dyads: the
replication of information. It is involved not
merely as a sender and a receiver, but also as
a channel and a message.
The major claim of coevolutionary
approach is that communication
simultaneously involves the sender and
receiver in two different relationships: first, as
conspecifics with potentially divergent genetic
and social interests, but also as potential
hosts to a more or less robust, parasitic
replicator with its own revolutionary interests.
The coevolutionary theory thus suggests an
additional relationship between sender and
receiver than that of cooperators or
competitors: they also share an infection.
Signals are patterned streams of particles
flowing through a channel. In Aunger's view,
signals are not interactors; nor are they
phenotypes, instead they are what he will call
“instigator.” The arrival of a signal in a brain
brings an influx of energy and information,
sparking the crucial change in local area.
Artifact, whose primary function is to serve as
a signal template, can be called a
communicative artifact.
3. Methods of case study - Tracking study
& interview
The exhibition: Lucky Animals vs. Night
Monsters - the Bat Legend as a traveling
exhibition was planned and fabricated during
January 2004-February 2005; exhibited during
February-December 2005, in the National
Museum of Natural Science, Taichung,
Taiwan. This theme was schemed out for the
richness of biodiversity and cultural diversity.
The only problem is the
scarcity of bat specimens and objects of bat
motif in the museum collection. It is a
successful cooperation of different parties that
included the museum staff, the freelance
architect, the photographer of art objects, the
craftsmen of exhibits, the volunteers of the
specialist, the Bat Association of Taiwan, etc.
Each party made the contribution and the
interpretation for their work equally and freely.
A case study of developing model of
exhibition design in the perspectives of new
communication theory, in memetics view, was
explored. The entire design process of
museum exhibition includes theme orientation,
team planning, content developing, 3D &
graphic design, exhibits design and evaluation
etc. Using the system of random sampling:
each subject was selected when the first
visitor crossed the entrance threshold at a
predetermined time, with a total of 100
subjects selected.
The methods of tracking and recording
visitor behaviors/conversation were
conducted. A more open-end questionnaire
after a request was recorded as a preliminary
study, and the interview of four docents for
this exhibition was recorded, too.
II. Case study: Bat Legend exhibition 1.
Results and discussions of the exhibition
The venue of Bat Legend consists of six
sections A-F (Fig.8). The various options of
the visiting route are allowed in the venue, the
entrance and the exit shared the same door.
Most visitors (51%) follow the route of turning
right. (Table 1) Only 84% of subjects
completed the entire route and accepted the
interview.
A new communication model in the natural history museum

8
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
 Table 1 The visitor tracking result of bat exhibition Venue route options
Percentage (Total subjects =100)
Route 1: Entrance-A-B-C-D-E-F-C-Exit 51%
Route 2: Entrance-B-A-C-D-E-F-C-Exit 25%
Route 3:Various or incomplete routes excluded route1&2 24%

VERTICAL AXIS: Level & Depth of Experience

Fig. 9 The experience aspects of the Bat Legend exhibition
relevant to the model of museum-going experience
outlined by Neil Kotler and Philip Kotler

Fig. 8 The layout of the Bat Legend exhibition, each section

(A-F marked by different colors) was installed to present the
aspects of experience

Language

MYTH
III SIGN
Culebre

a. Chinese culture of bat myth b. Western cultural of bat myth

Fig.10 Poetic aspect: the second-order semiological system of Roland Barthes in “Myth today,” used for bat myth in
Chinese culture (a) and Western cultural (b)

Each section consists of panels and
specimen/objects/exhibits. Panels consist of
subtitle, text and image (or extra specimen/
model). Each item of exhibition is created and
involved in more than two aspects of
experience but not complied with the
hierarchy or structure of the textbook's
content (Table 2). The complicated and
multidisciplinary aspects of experience create
a wide-ranging idea of design to instigate the
various responses of the visitors (Fig. 9).
Those aspects of experiences are
as follows,

9
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
 A new communication model in the natural history museum

Table 2 Description List of Exhibit Items

Aspect Main Title Panel Mark Item Content

Title Theme Title Lucky Animals vs. Night Monsters— the Bat
p/ae A1
Poem Panel Legend Poem : Myth and Magic of the Bat ____
ae (A) A2 Fiber Art Lucky (Bat) Symbol Wall
ae Introduction A3 Fiber Art Bat Figures
p/ae A4 Glass Art Bats in Art Form (Western vs.Eastern Symbol)
P1-2 Subtitle: Lucky Animal or Evil Symbol ?
ae/au B1-B7 Multimedia Montage A Variety of Portrait and Behavior of the Bat
/n/p
Panel
Light Box Video/ 3D
Image Video/ Image
(B) Glass/ TV Screen
Bat Images Specimen
au/n P3 Subtitle: The Origin of Order Chiroptera (Bats) &
Bat Fossil
au/n P4 Subtitle: Order Chiroptera of the
au/n P5 World Subtitle: Order Chiroptera of

au/n P6 Taiwan
Subtitle: Insects Predator
Subtitle: Insects Gleaner
au/n P7 Subtitle: Bird-eating Bats
Subtitle: Frog-eating Bats
Subtitle: Fish-eating Bats
au/n P8 Subtitle: Nectar-eating Bats
Subtitle: Fruit-eating Bats
au/n
P9 Subtitle: Vampire Bat
au/n/i
C1 Object All related to Bats for pollination or seed-
& (C)
dispersal, Product: Tequila, Cloves, Nuts, Sisal
Fiber, Herb Medicine, etc.
Key Roles in
Imitation of Fruit: Banana, Mango, Peach, Guava,
Ecosystems
Papaya etc.
3D Model of Bat Portrait
C2 Object
Mount Specimen and Bone Specimen of Bat
au/i C3 Specimen
Replica of Bone Specimen of Bat
Show Case
C4 Video of Bat Life
au/n AVSet
Subtitle: Bats vs. Economics
au/n
P10 Subtitle: Long-nosed Bats vs. Agaves
au/n
P11 Subtitle: Bats vs. Fruits
au/n
P12 Subtitle: Bats vs. Productions
au/n
P13
au/n Specimen Subtitle: Bat’s Echolocation
Object
au/n Subtitle: Seeing with Ear!

au/n P14-18 Subtitle: Nose vs. Ear & 3D Model of Bat Ear

au/n Subtitle: Biosonar & Specimen: Dolphin Skull

(D)
Subsistence
i/s D1 Hands-on Exhibit Modified Bat “Sound” (5 Species)
P19 Subtitle: Hibernation & Heterotherm
au/n
P20 Subtitle: Migration & Aggregation
au/n
Subtitle: Courting/ Subtitle: Mating/
P21-24
au/n Subtitle: Breeding/ Subtitle: Nursing ______
 i/s E1-E4 Hands-on Exhibit
Diorama of Roost: Caves/Heliconia Leaf/
Foliage/Tree Hollow
(E) Roost
au/n P25 Subtitle: Caves & Crevices Subtitle: Foliage &
au/n P26 Hollows
au F1 Flying Animals: Bird, Flying Squirrel, Flying Fox
Display Specimen
au/ae F2 Images or Objects of Bat Motif in Architecture or the
(F) Magic
Artifacts Show Case Other Materials
Flapper
i/ae F3 3D Image Film Montage Image: Flying Behavior of the Bat

au/n Dreams for P27-30

Flying
Subtitle: Flight Hypotheses Subtitle: True Flyer

i/s
Subtitle: Upside down
3D Model of the Bat Pollinating Matisia Flower as
F4 Furniture Θ the Part of Furniture
au/n Tactics for P31-34 Subtitle: Bat vs. Flower I -Hearing the Honey
Surviving
Subtitle: Bat vs. Flower II -Perfect Partner Subtitle:
Bat vs. Predator—Endangered Status Subtitle: Bat
vs. Prey—Bat-Detecting Ears
Fig. 11 The exhibits of aesthetic aspect

a. The fiber art marked as A2 b. The glass art marked as A4

Fig. 12 The exhibits of narrative aspect

-(

a. Text panel marked as P1-2 b. The image and video panel marked as B4-B7

l· -e
-

11

INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
 A new communication model in the natural history museum
Fig. 13 The exhibits of authentic aspect
a. The bat specimen marked as C3 in the floor plan
Fig. 14 The exhibits of social
aspect
a. Hands-on exhibit of bat roost b. Leisure furniture of
marked as E4 bat motif marked as F4
poetic aspect (p): poem, proverb, legend
and tale of literature, semiotic context (Fig.
10);
aesthetic aspect (ae): objects related to
bat motif, the work of fiber art, glass craft,
visual art and furniture design (Fig. 11);
narrative aspect (n): text, image and audio-
visual media (Fig. 12);
authentic aspect (au): bat fossil, mounted
specimen, objects and symbols related to bat
motif, bat images of portrait and ecological
behavior, products (e.g. Tequila) of everyday
life related to the topic of the ecological key
role of bat (Fig. 13);
social aspect (s): sensory and kinetic
hands-on exhibit, leisure furniture (Fig.14);
imitation aspect (i): magnified 3D model of
small bat and full size 3D model of big bat,
b. The object of bat motif marked as F2
Fig. 15 The exhibits of imitation aspect
a. The statue of bat (30x) marked as C2
b. A diorama of the bats in the roost marked as E3
artificial fruit and bat roost, etc (Fig. 15).
The feedback from the visitor study and
the interview of docents indicated that this
exhibition is very attractive, especially in two
features: the surprising feeling about the
diversity of bat and that some bats are so
good-looking enough to overthrow the
stereotype of bat/vampire (38% in Table 3
and 70% in Table 4), and the variety of
experience aspects to satisfy the visitors (the
responses of section A, B, and C, in Table 3).
The increasing proportion of the aesthetic
aspect is much more than the other
exhibitions in natural history/science
museums appreciated and emphasized (70%
in Table 4). Some visitors further took the
picture of the exhibit of glass art (Fig. 11b)
 12

INTERCOM 2006 Conference Paper

A new communication model in the natural history museum

Table 3 The visitor interview result of bat exhibition

Rejecter of interview
Subject of interview Percentage (Total subjects=100)
84% 16%
Location of the Most
Satisfactory Items Surprised Items Precious Items Unsatisfactory Items

Section of Venue
A 29% 28% 17% 0%
B 38% 26% 10% 4%
C 22% 19% 43% 10%
D 6% 8% 3% 11%
E 6% 5% 2% 0%
F 13% 9% 15% 9%
Panels 0% 0% 0% 4%
no comment 0% 5% 7% 47%

Note: The ansewrs from some subjects are multiple choices in different.

Table 4 The visitor interview result of bat exhibition

Percentage (Total subjects

Summarized perspectives of most satifactory/ surprised/ precious items
=100)

The satisfaction and surprise came from the variety of bat. 49%

Aesthetic of bat images and art exhibits/objects 70%

Creativity of art exhibits 32%

Authentication of bat specimens and art objects 52%

Narration in panels and in the video 24%

Comfortable seat of bat pollination motif 10%

Summarized perspectives of unsatisfactory items

Venue area B: too dark Venue area D: too crowded Bat specimen in venue 22%
area C: too ugly Venue area F: too many panels

Panels: too many 15%

and got a replica of exhibit from the same
craft workshop to keep a concrete memory. In
the authentic aspect, to see the real thing is
still very important and is the only purpose of
a museum visit for some people. (Bat
specimen marked as C3, 43% in Table 3 and
52% in Table 4)
2. The characteristics of instigating model
The Bat Legend Exhibition appropriated
the innovative communication theory from
memetics for a revolutionary developing
model of exhibition design, the instigating
model. It isbased upon a culture-centered
criterion in experience aspects. The
preliminary result indicated that design
approach of creating a variety of experience
aspects made a big contribution to the
participation of cultural diversity and bio-
diversity for visitors in the natural history
museum. It also offered the pluralistic and
creative vision for the designer.
As a new theory of how we think, memetics
is a very inventing concept linked to cultural
study. It is the culture analogue to the study of
how disease-causing pathogens are

13
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
A new communication model in the natural history museum

(A) Educational model

Visitor survey (Front-end Formative
evaluation) evaluation

Brief of content/ Exhibit/Media/

Object/Storyline Graphic design

Authentication Taxonomy of
& Authority educational objectives

Holding & Attracting power in exhibit items

Criteria (summative and goal-oriented evaluation)
of effectiveness
Transmission model of communication

(B) Interpretative model

Visitor survey Formative
(Front-end evaluation) evaluation
Criteria
of mutual beliefs
and values Brief of content/ Exhibit/Media/
Object/Storyline Graphic design

Meaning Multiple channels

negotiation
in culture construction
Signal-instigators interaction
Evaluation Matrix in communication channels

Brief of content/ Exhibit/Media/

Object/Storyline Graphic design
Curator

Meaning Variety of
negotiation experience aspects

Criteria of
Evaluation Matrix in experience aspects
culture
(qualitative, naturalistic or interactive methods)
selection

Evolutionary & Coevolutionary approaches of

communication model
people

| principle meme infection loop information

►
process transmission loop

product

Conceptual Developmental Functional Assessment Phase

Phase Phase Phase
evaluation
gathering

gathering
operational

terminating
planning

production
stage

stage

stage

stage
idea

idea

Exhibition project model (illustrated by Dean, David, 1994)

(responsive and goal-free evaluation)
Culture model of communication

(C) Instigating model

Fig. 16 The diagram comparison among three developing models of exhibition design

diffused through population. This surviving in society, by the force of meme infection.
process of meme is displayed in our everyday The most interesting feedback from the
life and we call it popular culture. Therefore if evaluation of visitors is to know that some
the wide-ranging visitor's experiences can be visitors visited the venue repeatedly and
created as the instigators in popular culture, made the replicas of exhibit. The visitor
all related stakeholders of the museum duplicated the exhibit. It is an evidence of
include not only the visitors, but the curator, meme infection.
and the designer, may be entangled together The exhibition project model of David Dean
in the evolutionary and coevolutionary culture illustrated the design developing process as

14

INTERCOM 2006 Conference Paper

A new communication model in the natural history museum

Table 5 The Comparison of critical elements among three developing models of exhibition
design
Critical Element Exhibition Developing Model

Educational model Interpretative model Instigating model

Principle of exhibition design
Key concept
Education Learning Evolution of culture
Curator-centered Visitor-centered criterion Culture-centered criterion
criterion
Metaphor Education tools in
the metaphor of modernist Communication media in the Communication instigator in the
museum metaphor of post-museum metaphor of meme or mine viruses
Communication
theory Culture model of Evolutionary & Co-evolutionary
Transmission model of communication based on approaches of communication in
communication based on constructivist paradigm memesCfeye view
scientific paradigm.
Evaluation
criteria Effectiveness Culture Selection
Shared Beliefs and Value
The predetermined
objectives usually included A selection process goes on in
the Cognitive Domain, the All parties work together to social groups. Ideas compete
Affective Domain and the produce a shared interpretation; among themselves for the righl to
Psychomotor Domain. beliefs and values are shared. occupy the mental niche thal is
Process of consultation and devoted to the description or
collaboration with visitors and explanation of some phenomenon.
stakeholders will be in place.
Evaluation Responsive and goal-free
methods evaluation Ethnographic research (gualitative,
naturalistic and interactive
Formative & Summative methods)
(goal-oriented) evaluation
People of exhibition design
Designer The decorator or catalyst The interpreter for the The creator for the
for the exhibition exhibition signal-instigator
To structure the exhibition To improve the channels and To created the
according to the textbook of media of experience aspects of
discipline and to improve the communication for each variety and to instigate
noise which interferes with the subgroup or construct of society the active selection of
message To construct a situation that culture evolution.
allows and encourages learning To remove the gap
________________________ between hosts of memes.

the sender vs. The sender (curator) offers Active receivers construct their The sender and the
the receiver authentication and authority of experiences in museum. All receiver both are not
information and treats the participants (curator, design only competitors and
receiver (visitor) as the passive visitor, and stakeholder) work cooperators in the
or reactive receiver. together in the process of construction of
negotiating meaning. evolutionary culture, but
also share the infection
of meme (replication
unit).
Visitor/viewer General and homogeneous Heterogeneous subgroup in Potential host of meme
audience different constructions (real (as metaphor of mind
people) __________________ virus)________________
Process of exhibition design
Characterized as a chain of phases in an interaction of learning an infection of meme
teaching (with extra loop of meme
infection)

15
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
sequential arrangement of conceptual phase,
development phase, function phase and
assessment phase. This model and four
elements of design, “people” , e.g. curator,
exhibition designer and visitor (i.e.
viewer/audience); “product” , e.g. theme of
content, exhibit, and experience, etc.;
“process” , e.g. team-working, interaction or
transmission among different parties of
people, etc.; “principle” , e.g. communication
theories, methods and criteria of evaluation,
etc., are the illustrative foci of three
developing models (Fig. 16, Table 5).
Two loops around the instigating model,
one for information transmission, the other for
meme infection, this distinguishing character
makes up a variety of aspects i.e. poetic,
aesthetic, narrative, authentic, social, and
imitation aspect, etc. The various aspects of
each exhibit will be created and selected as
the instigator of the meme. Those ideas
(meme) compete among themselves for the
right to occupy the mental niche that is
devoted to the description or explanation of
some phenomenon. It will be the more
interesting and more active experience of
museum going. Afterwards, the result will
construct the criteria of culture selection that
the process goes on in social groups.
In this instigating model, the position of
power, the definition of message, and the
boundary of academic disciplines all are
blurred. Every visitor can have the
experience-making of museum-going and
might be inspired by some new ideas. The
exhibition serves the culture coevolution more
than the pedagogy in society. The memetics
how to interact with visitors should be
explored by the ethnographic research
comprehensively.
III. Conclusion
Natural history/science museums
conventionally are considered as the informal
educational place before the crises emerging
in “new” museum age and the competition
coming from the other cultural and/or
commercial organizations. Considering the
influence of constructivism became the
popular perspective around 1989, the
concerns of learning process gradually
dominated. The interpretative perspectives
from the marginal and various subgroups of
the visitor (real people) were encouraged to
be accommodated in museums.
Hooper-Greenhill used the metaphor of the
modernist museum, the educational model
(curator-centered); and the metaphor of the
post-museum, the interpretative model
(visitor-centered), to describe those
differences. The democratic considerations
change the hierarchy concept in exhibition
content and the communication chain in team
work. The content meaning is negotiated
between the curator and the designer in the
interpretative model. The feedback loop of
information transmission between the curator
and the visitor is considered as the active
participation of cultural society. The meaning-
making in museum is shifting from the
curator-centered (educational model) point to
the visitor-centered (interpretative model)
point.
Three models are compared in this study.
This study argues that the understanding of
the learning process and meaning-making are
the core values of a new communication
model. The first two models concern only the
learning value in the museum, no matter what
the perspective was used to develop the
exhibition. The designer only technically
played a part to improve the communicative
channels or media which were assumed is
detached from the content or the knowledge
value. Both models ignored the participation
of the communicative channels and media
which would be the interpretative participants
in evolutionary culture. This viewpoint shrinks
the vision of designer and takes away the
chance of involving into the interesting culture
of technology.
A new communication model in the natural history museum
16
INTERCOM
2006
Conference
Paper
 This new instigate model (culture-
centered) develops the exhibition in a natural
history museum from a memetic view; the
perspectives of learning involve an infection
process of meme. The meme's host could be
anyone relevant to the exhibition. The
instigator of signal could be anything: object,
artifact or text, graphic design, specimen etc.
It is the responsibility of the museum designer
to create the variety of experience aspects to
instigate the active selection of culture
evolution and to remove the gap between
hosts of memes. This viewpoint reinvents the
vision of the designer in exhibition design and
instigates the active involvement of exhibition
design in cultural progress. The problem
solving in the instigating model may be more
interesting and creative more than the noise
removing in the model of Shannon and
Weaver.

References
Aunger, R. (2002). Electric meme- A new theory of how we think. The Free Press. New York, pp. 392.
Bicknell, S. (1995). Here to help: Evaluation and effectiveness. Museum, Media, Message, by Eilean Hooper-Greenhill,
London and New York: Routledge, 281-293.
Bitgood, S. (1994). Designing effective exhibits: Criteria for success, exhibit design approaches, and research
strategies. Visitor Behavior 9 (4), 4-15.
Blackmore, S. (1999). The meme machine. New York: Oxford, 43.
Bloom, B. (ed). (1969). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: The cognitive domain. London: Longman.
Carey, J. (1989). Communication as culture. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman, 13-36.
Dean, D. (1994). Museum exhibition: Theory and practice. London, Routledge, 9.
Guba, Egon G. (ed.). (1990). The paradigm dialog. London: Sage Publications, 17.
Hauenschild, A. (1995). New museology: A critical evaluation. Resume d'une these de doctorat, soutenue a Bremen,
Das ecomusee de la Haute-Beauce, musee territoire. Office of Museum Programs, Smithsonian Institution, 1988, 117-
198. http://museumstudies.si.edu/ claims2000.htm
Hein, George E. (1995). Evaluating teaching and learning in museums. In Museum, Media, Message, by Eilean Hooper-
Greenhill, London and New York: Routledge, 189-203.
Hein, George E. (1998). Learning in the museum. London and New York: Routledge, 36-38.
Hein, George E. (1999). Is meaning making constructivism? Is constructivism meaning making? Exhibitionist, Vol. 18,
No.2, Fall, 15-18.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1994). Education, communication and interpretation: towards a critical pedagogy in museum. In
The Education Role of the Museum, by Eilean Hooper-Greenhill, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 3-27. Hooper-
Greenhill, E. (1994). Communication in theory and practice. In The Education Role of the Museum, by Eilean Hooper-
Greenhill, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 28-43.
Kaplan, Flora E. S. (1995). Exhibitions as communicative media. In Museum, Media, Message, by Eilean Hooper-
Greenhill, London and New York: Routledge, 37-58.
Kelman, I. (1995). Responsive evaluation in museum education. In Museum, Media, Message, by Eilean Hooper-
Greenhill, London and New York: Routledge, 189-203.
Knez, Eugene I. and Wright, G. (1970). The museum as a communications system: An assessment of Cameron's
viewpoint. Curator, 13(3), 204-212.
Kotler, N. and Kotler, P. (1998). Museum strategy and marketing- Designing missions, building audiences, generating
revenue and resources. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Inc. U.S.A. pp.395.
Kotler, N. and Kotler, P. (2000). Can useums be all things to all people?: Missions, goals, and marketing's role. Museum
Management and Curatorship 18/3:271-287.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 3rd. edition published in
1996. p.10&175.
Mensch, Peter van. (1996). About new museology-Defining museums and galleries. Retrieved from
http://www.city.ac.uk/ictop/mus-def.html
McLean, K. (1999). Museum exhibitions and the dynamics of dialogue. In Reinventing the museum: Historical and
contemporary perspectives on the paradigm shift, by Gail Anderson, Walnut Creek, AltaMira Press (2004), pp.193-211.
McQuail, D. (1975). Communication. London and New York: Longman.
McQuail, Denis and Windahl, Sven. (1993). Communication models: For the study of mass communications. London

17

INTERCOM 2006 Conference Paper

A new communication model in the natural history museum

and New York: Longman.

Miles, Roger S. et al. (1982). The design of educational exhibits, 2nd Ed., London, Unwin Hyman Ltd., 193.
Miles, Roger S. (1985). Exhibition: Management, for a change. In The management of change in museums, by N.
Cossons (ed.). London: National Maritime Museum, 31-33.
Noble, J. V. (1970). Museum manifesto. Museum News, April. Quoted in Sonja Tanner-Kaplash, Basic museum studies:
Training resource package, 1/4-1/5. Victoria: British Columbia Museums Association, 1996.
Pekarik, A. J., Doering, Z. D., and Karns, D. (1999). Exploring satisfying experiences in museums. Curator 42/2: 152-
180.
Pine II, B. Joseph and Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every business a stage.
Boston, Massachusetts, Harvard Business School Press, pp. 254.
Rounds, J. (1999). A new paradigm for museum exhibits? Exhibitionist, Vol. 18, No.2, Fall, 5-14.
Silverman, L. H. (1995). Visitor meaning-making in museums for a new age. Curator, Vol. 38, No.3, 161-170.
Simpson, M. G. (1996). Making representations- Museums in the post-colonial era. London and New York: Routledge,
71.
Stake, R. (1975). Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.
Stam, D. C. (1993). The informed muse: The implications of “The New Museology” for museum practice. Museum
management and curatorship. 12: 267-283.
Weil, S. E. (1990). Rethinking the museum: An emerging new paradigm. Museum News (March/April): 57-61. Also in
Reinventing the museum: Historical and contemporary perspectives on the paradigm shift, by Gail Anderson, Walnut
Creek, AltaMira Press (2004), pp. 74-79.

About the author

Ms. Hui-Chuan Chen 1 has worked as an assistant curator for 15 years at Exhibition Department of National Museum
of Natural Science. She has completed more than twenty projects of museum exhibition and a few research projects of
museum exhibition planning & design. She has attended the international design conferences on the topics such as
exhibition design. Her internship for the study of museum exhibition evaluation was in Natural History Museum, London.
She has received the research grant from National Endowment for Culture and Art for the study of conservation in
museum exhibition in USA. She has received both of B.S. and M.S. in biology and now is a Ph.D. student at the
Graduate School of Design in National Yunlin University of Science and Technology.
Dr. Chuan-Kun Ho 2 Education: 1) 1985, PhD of Anthropology, Washington State University, USA. 2)1977, Master of
Anthropology, Washington State University, USA. 3)1971, Bachelor of Anthropology, Department of Anthropology,
National Taiwan University, Taiwan, ROC. Professional Experience: 1) 1998-presernt, Professor, Department of History,
National Chung Hsing University, Taiwan, ROC. 2)1998-presernt, Professor, Department of History, Tunghai University,
Taichung, Taiwan, ROC. 3)1998-present, Curator and Chair, Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural
Science, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC. 4)1996-presernt, Professor, Graduate Institute of Anthropology, National Tsing Hua
University, Taiwan, ROC.
Dr. Ming-Chyuan Ho 3 has worked in his field for 26 years, for reputable companies like SAMPO Technology
Corporation, which manufactures electronic products for international markets. Additionally, he has spent twelve years
as the director of various departments and centers, including his current position as dean of the College of Design at
National Yunlin University of Science & Technology, and as the President of Chinese Institute of Design. While teaching
at the university, he has been working closely with the industry and completed more than forty design and research
projects. Dr. Ho is the author of numerous publications for various academic journals of design, and has attended more
than seventy design conferences on topics such as new product R & D, user interface design, creative craft design, as
well as design strategy and management. He received both of his M. F. A. and Ph.D. in design from the University of
Kansas.

18

INTERCOM 2006 Conference Paper