Thesis - Teknisk Design

Conceptual Design of Temporary Exhibition Platform and Smart Grid Exhibitionfor Siemens Urban Sustainability CentreAppendix VII - Qualitative Observation studiesUniverseum, Gothenburg, 2011-03-30• All the decoration, furniture, lighting and music etc. worked together and created a sense of a whole. This added to the experience.• In an exhibit where the task was to solve a crime the feedback was very confusing. It was hard to understand if anything happened when thebuttons were pressed and if it gave the correct result. This generated at disappointed and embarrassed feeling since I didn’t manage to solve thetask.• The part of the exhibition where you got to act as a TV reporter and record a weather forecast was very appreciated and engaging. It was fun toget to act as a famous person and then see oneself on TV. You automatically wanted to look and talk exactly like the TV reporters which triggeredcompetition.• The exhibit where you got to act as a handball goalkeeper was very fun and engaging. It was very entertaining to use your whole body and try tocatch as many balls as you could. This triggered competition between the participants.• The exhibit that showed that pain can be controlled didn’t really work. This caused frustration and scepticism.• The “memory floor” triggered competition and was very addictive for the user although it was a bit unclear what you actually learned from it.• The idea to be able to create your own music from your pulse and hear what your body sounds like caught the participant’s attention. The useof both lights and sounds was fascinating.• Enclosed environments around installations made it easier to focus on the exhibits.• The “creepy” interior and framing at one of the installations created a lot of anticipation and excitement. It was very obvious that something scarywas going to happen but it wasn’t clear exactly what.• It wasn’t clear how to use the “frog sound installation”. You were supposed to press two buttons at the same time which was very problematic.This caused frustration and annoyance.The Gothenburg museum of Natural History, 2011-04-20• Hard to follow the “story” and focus on items if there is no clear “red thread”.• Annoying not to have a clear heading of what an exhibit is about. Too much information on a small space feels cluttered.• The wooden cabinets the exhibits were displayed in and the old fashioned interior design gave a sense of “Carl von Linné” and the categorisationof the species.• Exhibitions placed with one big exhibit in the middle and smaller ones around it.• Very few interactive exhibits. No sound. No haptic experiences.• Big, macabre, scary, disgusting or in other ways bizarre exhibits fascinated, attracted attention and got more viewing time.• 3D-objects enhanced the spatial experience and gave depth to the exhibits.• Touching the sharkskin was interesting and the feel of the texture on your fingertips gave a more vivid experience.• The huge model of the killer whale attracted interest. Its big sculptural forms fascinated and were beautiful to look at.• The many drawers with different butterflies in them were fun to investigate.• Some of them didn’t come out smoothly which was annoying.• There were so many of them that you couldn’t look in them all. This was a bit frustrating. “Where is the prettiest one?”98• There was no overview of them. You just opened them randomly.