tom Dieck, C., M.; Timothy, J. at ENTER2016 eTourism Conference

1. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 1
Value of Augmented Reality to
enhance the Visitor Experience: A
Case study of Manchester Jewish
Museum
Dr. Mandy Claudia tom Dieck & Dr. Timothy Jung
Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
{c.tom-dieck; t.jung}@mmu.ac.uk
http://www.creativear.org

2. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 2
Content
• What is Augmented Reality?
• Background
• Research problem and aim
• Case study
• Methods
• Findings
• Limitations and further research

3. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 3
What is Augmented Reality?
• “the overlay of digital
information into the
real environment”
through a device
(smartphone, tablet or
wearables)
(Merriam-Webster, 2013)

4. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 4
Background
• The pace of Augmented Reality (AR)
adoption in the tourism sector is speeding
up
• Increased research on user requirements,
acceptance and behavioural intentions
• However, high costs involved in
implementing AR for small organisations

5. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 5
Research Problem and Aim
• Small organisations fear that costs of investing
in AR do not outweigh benefits received
afterwards
The present study uses the case study of a
small museum to examine the perception
towards the value of AR

6. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 6
Case Study
• Manchester Jewish
Museum
• Founded in 1984
• Aiming to preserve and
honour the heritage of
Manchester Jewry
• Strong educational
programme

7. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 7
Methods
• Exploratory Study
• Aiming to test how AR can add value and
enhance the visitor experience
• Interviews and focus groups (18 participants)
– CEO
– Curator
– Volunteers
– School teachers on field trip
– Visitors (2 focus groups)

8. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 8
Methods cont.
• 14th
-16th
July 2015
• Semi-structured questions
– Prior AR experience
– Perceived value of AR for the museum experience
– Suitability for target markets
– Potential of enhancement of visitor experience through AR
– Content required for the museum AR application
• Analysed using thematic analysis

9. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 9
Findings
• Value for different target markets
• Value for museum
• Value for visitor experience

10. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 10
Value for different target
markets
• Strong value for school children and
learning experience  Gamification
• Intention to return for old and young
visitors
• “it would be very useful for young people
and make them aware and more interested
in going into a museum” (senior visitor)

11. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 11
Value for museum
• Fresh approach of visitor engagement to
ensure
– Strong future footfall numbers
– Visitor satisfaction
– Positive word-of-mouth
• New target markets
• Clever usage of space
• “More content without cluttering the space” (CEO)
• Preserving experiences and stories

12. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 12
Value for visitor experience
• Interactive and enjoyable experience
• Personalised tours
• Translations from Hebrew
• More personal experience
– “to tell the story behind displays and give
personal recollections of the past” (Volunteer)

13. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 13
Limitations and further research
• Participants were all very positive
– Not tested AR, just exploratory approach
• Future research should move to development
stage and test the app through observations
• Negative aspects of AR were not identified
although specifically asked for during the
interviews
• Interviews with a wider range of stakeholders,
especially school children

14. ENTER 2016 Research Track Slide Number 14
Thank you!
Any questions?