Skip to main content
Log in

Situated Knowledge and the Virtual Science and Industry Museum: Problems in the Social-Technical Interface

  • Published:
Archives and Museum Informatics

Abstract

The Museum is a perspicuous site for analysing the complex interplay between social, organisational, cultural and political factors which have relevance to the design and use of ‘virtual’ technologies. Specifically, the introduction of virtual technologies in museums runs up against the issue of the situated character of information use. Across a number of disciplines (anthropology, sociology, psychology, cognitive science) there is growing recognition of the ‘situatedness’ of knowledge and its importance for the design and use of technology. This awareness is fostered by the fact that technological developments are often associated with disappointing gains for users. The effective use of technology relies on the degree to which it can be embedded in or congruent with the ‘local’ practices of museum users. Drawing upon field research in two museums of science and technology, both of which are in the process of introducing virtual technologies and exploring the possibilities of on-line access, findings are presented which suggest that the success of such developments will depend on the extent to which they are informed by detailed understanding of practice-practices that are essentially socially constituted in the activities of museum visitors and the daily work of museum professionals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bennett, T., The Birth of the Museum (London: Routledge, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, P. and T. Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (New York: Doubleday, 1961).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgin, V., Between (Oxford: Blackwell in association with the ICA, 1986a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgin, V., The End of Art Theory: Criticism and Postmodernity (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1986b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Button, “Going up a Blind Alley”, in P. Luff, N. Gilbert and D. Frohlich (eds.), Computers and Conversation (San Diego: Academic Press, 1990), pp. 67–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., T. Ng, J. Martinez, and B. Schatz, “A Concept Space Approach to Addressing the Vocabulary Problem in Scientific Information Retrieval: An Experiment on the Worm Community System”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 48 (1997): 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulter, J. and E.D. Parsons, “The Praxiology of Perception: Visual orientations and practical action”, Inquiry 33 (1990), pp. 251–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danto, A.C., “The Museum of Museums”, Beyond the Brillo Box (New York: 1992).

  • Donato, E., “The Museum's Furnace: Notes Towards a Contextual Reading of Bouvard and Pechuchetí”, in J. Harrari (ed.), Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, J.D. ed., Understanding Everyday Life: Toward the Reconstruction of Sociological Knowledge (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1971).

  • Divall, C., “Theories and Things: Using the History of Technology”, in L. Fitzgerald and G. Porter (eds.), Museums, Collection and Interpreting Domestic Artefacts (Manchester: Science and Industry Curators Group, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E., The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (London: Allen and Unwin, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eglin, P., “Leaving Out the Interpreters Work; A Methodological Critique of Ethnosemantics Based on Ethnomethodology”, Semiotica, 17 (1976): 339–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frake, C., Language and Cultural Description (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, D., “Negotiation, Decision-Making and Formalism”, in J. Wagner and K. Ehlich (eds.), The Discourse of Business Negotiation (Berlin: Mouton-De Gruyter, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. and Woofitt, R.C., “Orienting to Rules”, in N. Gilbert (ed.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Complex Systems, Ethnomethodology and Interaction Analysis (Boston: American Association for Artificial Intelligence, 1990), pp. 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H., Studies in Ethnomethodology (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmings, T. et al., “Hype and Reality in the Virtual Museum: Some Initial Problems”, Proceedings of the EVA Conference (London: The National Gallery, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J., Randall, D. and Shapiro, D. “CSCW: Discipline or Paradigm? A Sociological Approach”, in L. Bannon and M. Robinson (eds.), Proceedings from Second European Conference on CSCW (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jirotka, M. and J. Goguen, Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues (London: Academic Press, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopytoff, I., “The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditisation as Process”, in A. Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  • Landow, G.P. ed., Hyper/text/Theory (London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994).

  • MacDonald, S. and G. Fyfe, eds., Theorising Museums (Oxford: Blackwell/The Sociological Review, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, S. and R. Silverstone, Rewriting the Museums Fiction Taxonomies, Stories and Readers, CRICT Discussion paper No. 7 (Brunel University, 1990).

  • MacDonald, S. and G. Gyfe, Theorising Museums (Oxford: Blackwell/The Sociological Review, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, D., 1996, “Beyond Hypertext: Adaptive Interfaces for Virtual Museums”, Proceedings of the EVA Conference (London: The National Gallery, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, G., “Seeing through Solidity: A Feminist Perspective on Museums”, in S. Macdonald and G. Fyfe (eds.), Theorising Museums (Oxford: Blackwell/The Sociological Review, 1996), pp. 105–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Heritage report, January 1997, A Common Wealth: Museums and Learning in the UK.

  • Sledge, J., “Points of View”, in D. Bearman (ed.), Multi-Media Computing and Museums (Pittsburgh: AMI, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sola, T., “Museum Professionals — the Endangered Species”, in P. Boylan (ed.), Museums 2000 (London: Routledge, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, S., Leigh, and Griesemer, J.R., “Institutional Ecology, Translations and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39”, Social Studies of Science 19 (1989): 387–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L., Plans and Situated Actions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  • Twidale, M., Randall, D. and Bentley, R., “Situated Evaluation for Cooperative Systems”, Transcending Boundaries: Proceedings of CSCW '94 (Chapel Hill: ACM Press, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergo, P., The New Museology (London: Reaktion Books, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hemmings, T., Randall, D., Francis, D. et al. Situated Knowledge and the Virtual Science and Industry Museum: Problems in the Social-Technical Interface. Archives and Museum Informatics 11, 147–164 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009007316752

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009007316752

Navigation