Abstract
Science centres are informal learning spaces embedded with artefacts embodying mediational affordances. This exploratory and small-scale mixed methods study juxtaposes eye-tracking technologies and qualitative interviews to examine how visitors to a gallery navigated this space and interacted with different artefacts. A total of 15 visitors to the science centre gallery, Energy Story, participated in the study. The findings revealed inconclusive results about the directionality of their navigation. The mediational affordances of the artefacts, as interpreted from the interactive elements and interaction of the visitors and interviews, suggested that it was better to distribute the mediational affordances across a few artefacts in an exhibit rather than have one artefact embody several affordances. The concept of “mediational threshold” was suggested as a topic for future study. The findings contributed to the academic literature on eye-tracking studies at science centres. They also provided ideas for science centre curators and teachers who bring students with diverse learning needs to this mediational space.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, S. (2004). Designs for learning: Studying science museum exhibits that do more than entertain. Science Education, 88(S1). https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20016. 17—S33.
Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. (2004). Designing with multiple interactive: Five common pitfalls. Curator, 47(2), 199–212.
Archer, L., Dawson, E., Deweiit, J., Seakins, A., & Wong, B. (2015). Science capital: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922–948. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21227.
Asan, O., & Montague, E. (2014). Using video-based observation research methods in primary care health encounters to evaluate complex interactions. Inform Primary Care, 21(4), 161 – 70. https://doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v21i4.72. PMID: 25479346; PMCID: PMC4350928.
Asan, O., & Yang, Y. (2015). Using eye trackers for usability evaluation of health information technology: A systematic literature review. JMIR Human Factors, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.2196/humanfactors.4062.
Barab, S. (2022). Design-based research: A methodological toolkit for engineering change. In R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 177–195). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888295.012.
Carcellar, I. I. I. (2017). B. G. Perception modelling of visitors in Vargas museum using agent-based simulation and visibility analysis. The international Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLII-4/W5, 45–51. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W5-45-2017.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Harvard University Press.
Eghbal-Azar, K., & Widlok, T. (2013). Potentials and limitations of mobile eye-tracking in visitor studies evidence from field research at two museum exhibitions in Germany. Social Science Computer Review, 31(1), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439312453565.
Elliott, R., & Timulak, L. (2021). Essentials of descriptive-interpretive qualitative research: A generic approach. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000224-000.
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2013). The museum experience revisited. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2013). The museum experience revisited. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Farah, M. J., & Wolpe, P. R. (2004). Monitoring and manipulating brain function: New neuroscience technologies and their ethical implications. Hastings Center Report, 34(3), 35–45.
Jouibari, F. R., Faizi, M., Khakzand, M., & Shekari, M. J. (2021) Navigation behaviour of visitors in museums based on visibility analysis and neural network simulation. Museum Management and Curatorship, 36(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2020.1773302
Jung, Y. J., Zimmerman, H. T., & Pérez-Edgar, K. (2018). A methodological case study with mobile eye-tracking of child interaction in a science museum. TechTrends, 62, 509–517.
Kredel, R., Vater, C., Klostermann, A., & Hossner, E. J. (2017). Eye-tracking technology and the dynamics of natural gaze behaviour in sports: A systematic review of 40 years of research. Frontiers in Technology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01845.
Krogh-Jespersen, S., Quinn, K. A., Krenxer, W. L. D., Nguyen, C., Greenslit, J., & Price, A. (2020). Exploring the awe-some: Mobile eye-tracking insights into awe in a science museum. Plos One, 15(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239204. Article e0239204.
Kulik, T. K., & Fletcher, T. S. (2016). Considering the museum experience of children with autism. Curator the Museum Journal, 59(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12143.
Lai, M. L., Tsai, M. J., Yang, F. Y., Hsu, C. Y., Liu, T. C., Lee, W. Y. S., Lee, M. H., Chiou, G. L., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from 2000 to 2012. Educational Research Review, 10, 90–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.10.001.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Magnussen, R., Zachariassen, M., Kharlamov, N., & Larsen, B. (2017). Motivational gaps and perceptual bias of initial motivation additional indicators of quality for e-learning courses. The Journal of e-Learning, 15(1), 46–58.
Morse, J. M., Niehaus, L., Varnhagen, S., Austin, W., & McIntosh, M. (2008). In N. K. Denzin, & M. D. Giardina (Eds.), Qualitative researcher’s conceptualisations of the risks inherent in qualitative interviews (pp. 195–218). Left Coast.
Museum environments (n.d.) Museum experience. https://museumenvironments.com/museumexperience/.
Palinko, O., Kun, A. L., Shyrokov, A., & Heeman, P. (2010). Estimating cognitive load using remote eye-tracking in a driving simulator. ETRA’10: Proceedings of the 2010 Symposium on Eye-Tracking Research & Applications, 141–144. https://doi.org/10.1145/1743666.1743701.
Rennie, L. J., & Feher, E. (2003). Informal education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 105–256. (special issue).
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(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10068.
Sandoval, W. A. (2004). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634–656. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20065.
Schiele, B. (1993). The creative interaction of visitor and exhibition. Visitor Studies: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 28–56. Visitor Studies Association.
Schiele, B. (2008). Science museums and science centres. In M. Bucchi, & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 27–39). Routledge.
Science Centre Singapore. (2023). About Science Centre Singapore; https://www.science.edu.sg/home/about-us/about-science-centre-singapore
Sharafi, Z., Soh, Z., & Guéhéneuc, Y. G. (2015). A systematic literature review on the usage of eye-tracking in software engineering. Journal of Information and Software Technology, 67, 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.06.008.
Shvarts, A., & Abrahamson, D. (2023). Coordination dynamics of semiotic mediation: A functional dynamic systems perspective on mathematics teaching/learning. Constructivist Foundations, 18(2), 220–234.
Subramaniam, R., & Hoh, Y. K. (2021). Informal science education in Singapore. In O. S. Tan, E. L. Low, E. G. Tay, & K. Y. Yaw (Eds.), Singapore math and science education innovation (pp. 169–187). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1357-9_10.
Tzortzi, K. (2007). Museum building design and exhibition layout: Patterns of interaction. Proceedsings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Instanbul.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. Oxford University Press.
Wickman, P. O. (2004). The practical epistemologies of the classroom: A study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88(3), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10129.
Wickman, P. O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86, 601–623.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953/2001). Philosophical investigations, Blackwell.
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the support of the Science Centre Singapore in providing the research site for data collection and collaborating in this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
Approval to conduct this study was granted by the Nanyang Technological University (Singapore) Institutional Review Board (IRB-2020-11-035). The data collected from this project were obtained with the necessary clearance from the partner institutions, guardians and the students involved in the study. The names of the institution and participants used in this study are all pseudonyms.
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic Supplementary Material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Teo, T.W., Loh, Z.H.J., Kee, L.E. et al. Mediational Affordances at a Science Centre Gallery: An Exploratory and Small Study Using Eye Tracking and Interviews. Res Sci Educ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10163-8
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10163-8