Visualizing Museum Visitors' Behavior
Visualizing Museum Visitors' Behavior
Visualizing Museum Visitors' Behavior
Joel Lanir, Tsvi Kuflik, Nisan Yavin, Kate Leiderman, Michael Segal
University of Haifa, Mt. Carmel, Haifa, 31905, Israel
ylanir@haifa.ac.il, tsvikak@haifa.ac.il, nisan.yavin@gmail.com, kateleiderman@gmail.com,
msegal14@campus.haifa.ac.il
Copyright © 2016 for this paper by its authors. Copying permitted for
private and academic purposes.
museum map. The blue circles show the percentage of visitors moderate holding power. Exhibits 5 and 6, show two points in the
visiting that location from all visitors at the museum (attracting main attraction of the museum – a 2400-year old ship extracted
power). The grey opaque circle, shows the average time spent at from the sea. Thus the high holding power of point 6, is not
that location (holding power). In addition, it is possible to filter surprising. Finally, location 7 shows the second floor. It can be
the data according to age range, sex or language used in the seen that very few visitors visit the second floor – a point for
mobile guide (the mobile guide supports 3 different languages – concern for the museum staff. Figure 5 shows the same view,
Hebrew, Arabic and English). The image can show various using a heatmap on the attraction power. In addition to the map
patterns of different behaviors at different exhibits. For example, view, the system shows the exact numbers for the average time
the location annotated with “1” is the entrance to the museum. spent and the percentage of visitors attending (holding and
Because explanations and initial use of the mobile guide was attracting power) of each exhibit using a simple bar chart (graph
performed there, the both attraction power (every visitor starts not shown here).
there) and holding power there are high. Locations 2 and 3 are at Finally, for providing overall information, the system shows the
eh corridor in which visitors go through to enter the museum. This distribution of visitors at the museum according to visitor hours
explains both the high attraction and holding power. Location 4 is using a stream graph [3]. Figure 6 shows for the distribution of
the main decision point of the museum where visitors decide visitors per hour of day at the museum. Each line color shows the
whether to go to the left exhibit, straight ahead, or up the stairs (to average number of visitors at a different exhibition room.
the right). That explains the high attraction power and relative Hovering over the line provides the name of the room and the
number of visitors at that hour. The overall width of the graph
shows the overall number of visitors at that time at the museum.
At the Hecht museum, opening hours are 10:00 to 16:00 (with
Tuesdays open till 18:00). Looking at the graph, we can see that
by far, 14:00 is the busiest time at the museum, with most visitors
vising between 13:00 and 15:00.
5. CONCLUSIONS
We presented a system that visualizes various visitors’ behaviors
at the museum. A curator can use the system to investigate what
happens at the museum by looking at the paths of individual
visitors, small groups of visitors, or general aggregated
information. We intend to evaluate the system by presenting it to
museum curators and museum personnel and conducting semi-
Figure 6. Distribution of visitors per hour at the different structured interviews. By receiving qualitative feedback, we hope
exhibition rooms to gain insight regarding the useful features and the general
usability and usefulness of the system. After receiving feedback, visit phases. Information Technology & Tourism, 15(1),
we plan to deploy the system at the Hecht museum for the actual pp.17-47.
use of the staff. [8] Lanir, J., Kuflik, T., Dim, E., Wecker, A.J. and Stock, O.,
2013. The influence of a location-aware mobile guide on
6. REFERENCES museum visitors' behavior. Interacting with Computers,
[1] Bitgood, S., 2006. An analysis of visitor circulation:
p.iwt002.
Movement patterns and the general value principle. Curator:
The Museum Journal, 49(4), pp.463-475. [9] Lanir, J., Bak, P. and Kuflik, T., 2014. Visualizing
Proximity-Based Spatiotemporal Behavior of Museum
[2] Bollo, A. and Dal Pozzolo, L., 2005, July. Analysis of visitor
Visitors using Tangram Diagrams. Computer Graphics
behaviour inside the museum: An empirical study.
Forum. 33(3), pp. 261-270.
In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Arts
and Cultural Management, Montreal (Vol. 2). [10] Leinhardt, G. and Knutson, K., 2004. Listening in on
museum conversations. Rowman Altamira.
[3] Havre, S., Hetzler, E., Whitney, P. and Nowell, L., 2002.
Themeriver: Visualizing thematic changes in large document [11] McManus, P.M., 1989. Oh, yes, they do: How museum
collections. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE visitors read labels and interact with exhibit texts. Curator:
Transactions on, 8(1), pp.9-20. The Museum Journal, 32(3), pp.174-189.
[4] Kanda, T., Shiomi, M., Perrin, L., Nomura, T., Ishiguro, H. [12] Serrell, B., 1997. Paying attention: The duration and
and Hagita, N., 2007, April. Analysis of people trajectories allocation of visitors' time in museum exhibitions. Curator:
with ubiquitous sensors in a science museum. In Robotics The museum journal, 40(2), pp.108-125.
and Automation, 2007 IEEE International Conference [13] Yalowitz, S.S. and Bronnenkant, K., 2009. Timing and
on (pp. 4846-4853). IEEE. tracking: Unlocking visitor behavior. Visitor Studies, 12(1),
[5] Klein, H.J., 1993. Tracking visitor circulation in museum pp.47-64.
settings. Environment and Behavior, 25(6), pp.782-800. [14] Zancanaro, M., Kuflik, T., Boger, Z., Goren-Bar, D. and
[6] Kuflik, T., Lanir, J., Dim, E., Wecker, A., Corra, M., Goldwasser, D., 2007. Analyzing museum visitors’ behavior
Zancanaro, M. and Stock, O., 2011. Indoor positioning: patterns. In User Modeling 2007 (pp. 238-246). Springer
challenges and solutions for indoor cultural heritage sites. Berlin Heidelberg.
In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on
Intelligent user interfaces (pp. 375-378). ACM.
[7] Kuflik, T., Wecker, A.J., Lanir, J. and Stock, O., 2015. An
integrative framework for extending the boundaries of the
museum visit experience: linking the pre, during and post