When we embarked on this project, our goal was to make museums more accessible, engaging, and meaningful for visitors with varying levels of expertise. To better understand the challenges, we visited two different museums and consulted with museum experts. These insights gave us a deeper understanding of the complexities of the museum experience. Based on our findings, we decided to create a solution to address these pain points. Enter Muse—a wearable device paired with a mobile app that gives visitors the agency to tailor their museum experience. Whether they wanted more detailed guidance or a more immersive, self-guided journey, Muse could adapt to meet their needs. We later incorporated features like an experience archive, personalized recommendations, and a point system to gamify the visit, aiming to make museums easier to discover and explore for everyone, regardless of expertise. Ultimately, this project was about rethinking the museum experience, making it not only easier to access but also more meaningful for every visitor who walks through its doors. Over the course of 12 weeks, we developed a robust, fully immersive, adaptive, and scalable solution—not just another app to download 🥱. This project made me realize that sometimes the best solutions are the ones we barely notice—those seamless, almost invisible experiences that quietly enhance the moment.

‍

Field Research

We visited the Henry Art Gallery and the Burke Museum of Natural History to familiarize ourselves with the domain we’d be working in. Our goal was simply to make observations about the space, exhibits, artifacts, kiosks, and other elements that shape the museum experience.

The Henry is an art gallery. The Burke is a natural history museum. As such, they each offered distinct approaches to exhibition design and visitor engagement.

We observed that the Burke showcased the “behind-the-scenes” process of how exhibitions are put together. In contrast, the Henry focused on presenting works with minimal explanatory context, encouraging open-ended interpretation.

We also noticed that the Burke made curatorial intentions more visible than the Henry. Curators play a significant role in shaping how works are presented, yet their perspectives and backgrounds are often invisible in art exhibitions. Visitors rarely receive insight into these decisions, which could further enhance their understanding and appreciation of the art.

Having visited both types of museums, we identified some shared pain points as well as challenges unique to each. However, the Henry stood out for lack of interactivity and reliance on passive viewing, leaving visitors to interpret works on their own. This gave us, as designers, a richer opportunity to deepen audience connections and offer new ways to experience exhibitions beyond passive observation, especially for those unfamiliar with art. Therefore, for the scope of this project, we focused on art museum spaces.

‍

Contextual Inquiry

At the Henry, we had the opportunity to speak with one of the gallery guides. Our goal was to leverage their expertise and observations of visitor interactions to identify problems and opportunities within the museum context. Here’s what stood out from our conversations:

Some of the biggest pain points encountered in visitor engagement included people touching the art, and signage getting ignored. They also struggled with figuring out what kinds of audience visit the space most, meeting accessibility needs, and translating exhibition intentions for people from different cultural backgrounds and those who speak other languages. For contemporary art especially, there was a need for preservation of artist intentions while meeting user needs for understanding.

‍

Expert Interviews

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 3 museum experts remotely via Zoom. These interviews deepened our understanding of the challenges within museum spaces and provided authoritative insights into our emerging ideas.

We used affinity diagramming and thematic analysis to extract nuanced and actionable insights. We began by affinity diagramming, grouping key quotes with similar ideas together. Here are some examples:

Now, Let's Dig Deeper...

We then reviewed the grouping to see if any higher-level patterns or themes emerge.

Intimidating Environment and Visitor Movement

The physical and emotional barriers to navigation—such as confusing layouts, rigid cultural norms, and implicit rules—contribute to the overall sense of intimidation in museums. Visitors often don’t know where to go or what’s expected of them, making navigation both physically and psychologically challenging.

Visitor Tracking and Data Gaps

Museums want to get to know their visitors, but the lack of detailed visitor behavior tracking hinders their ability to connect with them. Understanding where visitors spend time and what they engage with would help museums design better space layouts.

Language Accessibility

Because museums get diverse international visitors, experts suggested the need for more robust multilingual support.

Instruction Clarity

Visitors often struggle with understanding the cultural and behavioral expectations in museums, as these are not always clearly communicated. Signage is often non existent per artist intentions intentions, or only in English. Additionally, people don’t read (unless they have a reason to). These rules and instructions should be communicated in a more universal and clear manner to ensure the safety of guests and the artwork.

Balancing Interpretation and Visitor Autonomy

Museums want to create a balance between offering sufficient context for understanding and allowing space for personal reflection. Visitors with different levels of expertise need varying amounts of interpretation. Striking the right balance would enhance engagement without overwhelming the visitor or limiting their own interpretations.

so the question was...

‍

In terms of lowering the barriers for exploration, we narrowed our focus to 3 things

‍

Our Answer

‍

‍

‍

Why all 3?

The concept was to make a product that adapts to the needs of the user and their desired level of guidance. They start with a bracelet; all else is optional. The user has agency over their entire experience. The solution is descriptive for those who need it, and descriptive for those who don’t.

‍

Our Users

Our personas reflect individuals who face the greatest challenges in museum spaces — these are the people we aim to empower.

‍

Our Vision

Here's how we envision our solution working for each persona — empowering visitors of all backgrounds to connect with museum content on their own terms.

‍

‍

In order to understand, one must first be able to access. So, we addressed common challenges people face when trying to experience an artwork. This included ensuring visitors can see and hear the piece, as well as overcoming language barriers. We incorporated captions, behind-the-scenes images of the piece and exhibition, features for the blind and visually impaired (BVI) community, and sign language translations for the hard of hearing.

‍

What’s in it for the Museums?

‍

The wearable tech and mobile app would help monitor visitor movement and guide them effectively through exhibits. Gathering foot traffic data would enable museums to track who is entering the space, where they are going, and why.

‍

Preliminary User Survey

We asked 24 potential users for their thoughts on our proposed solution, Muse. Here's what they had to say:

‍

We found that there’s...

‍

A Problem that Precedes the Problem

When asked what factors currently limit their engagement with or visitation of museums:

• 8/24 participants mentioned cost of tickets.
• 5/24 mentioned limited hours.
• 3/24 mentioned both.

‍

There were underlying issues related to the museum infrastructure itself. Museum hours are limited, preventing some visitors from attending and causing museums to miss out on certain demographics. Additionally, while people want to visit museums more, they are deterred by the high cost of tickets.

‍

so we went back to the drawing board with a slightly different question:

‍

and we added the following new interactions:

Creating Reciprocity

between the visitor and the museum

Re-visit Your trip

An archive of experiences—since we’re capturing the user's visit anyway, why not create a way for them to remember it? This is a value add for the user.

Personalized recommendations

With the foot traffic data we’re already collecting, we’ll use it to benefit the user by offering AI-powered recommendations tailored to their interests.

Point System

Users will now be able to accumulate points for visiting museums, which can be redeemed for discounts, tickets, and even merchandise from the gift shop. Gamifying the experience encourages users try new things outside their comfort zone while helping museums bring in more visitors through the door.

‍

Annotated Wireframes

‍

Design

Malique's Experience

‍

Rekha's Experience

‍

Caleb's Experience

‍

Meet Muse

‍

Although our research primarily focused on the museum's perspective, the experts also provided valuable insights into what visitors might be feeling. We incorporated feedback from potential users during our iterations, but we didn't have the opportunity to test the product with actual users to assess how they would engage with it.

‍

What I Learned

• How to navigate a more conceptual space with emerging technologies.
• The importance of iteration in the design process.
• The best products often don’t feel like products at all. The most effective solutions are those that seamlessly integrate into the experience, almost unnoticed.

‍

If I could Do it Again

• I’d include a feature that adjusts content to different reading levels to make it accessible to all age groups.
• I’d test the final product with users to better understand how they interact with it, and iterate again.

‍

Names of study participants have been omitted or changed to protect their anonymity.