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

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.

[1]  Graham Button,et al.  Going Up a Blind Alley: Conflating Conversation Analysis and Computational Modelling , 1990 .

[2]  Richard Bentley,et al.  Situated evaluation for cooperative systems , 1994, CSCW '94.

[3]  L. Suchman Plans and situated actions , 1987 .

[4]  P. Berger,et al.  Social Construction of Reality , 1991, The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society.

[5]  mile .QDurkheim mile Durkheim,et al.  The Elementary Forms of Religious Life , 1916 .

[6]  J. Douglas,et al.  Understanding everyday life: toward the reconstruction of sociological knowledge; , 1971 .

[7]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[8]  Igor Kopytoff The social life of things: The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process , 1986 .

[9]  S. Bruyn,et al.  Studies in Ethnomethodology. By Harold Garfinkel. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967. 288 pp. $6.95 , 1968 .

[10]  Dan Shapiro,et al.  CSCW: Discipline or Paradigm? A Sociological Perspective , 1991, ECSCW.

[11]  H. Garfinkel Studies in Ethnomethodology , 1968 .

[12]  LEAVING OUT THE INTERPRETER’S WORK: A METHODOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF ETHNOSEMANTICS BASED ON ETHNOMETHODOLOGY , 1976 .

[13]  Alan Robinson,et al.  The End of Art Theory: Criticism and Postmodernity@@@Between , 1986 .

[14]  Gaby Porter Seeing through Solidity: A Feminist Perspective on Museums , 1995 .

[15]  C. Frake Language and cultural description , 1980 .

[16]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  A concept space approach to addressing the vocabulary problem in scientific information retrieval: an experiment on the worm community system , 1997 .

[17]  J. Coulter,et al.  The praxiology of perception: Visual orientations and practical action , 1990 .

[18]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  Requirements engineering: social and technical issues , 1994 .

[19]  Line C. Pouchard,et al.  Hyper/Text/Theory , 1994 .

[20]  Robin Wooffitt,et al.  Orienting to rules , 1990 .