21 JANUARY 2000
LIFT THE LABEL: HOW MUCH DID IT COST?
PROTOTYPING RESEARCH REPORT 23
Date of evaluation: 12 January 2000
Brief for evaluation
The Museum needs to know the following information about the Victorian ‘How much did it cost?’ Lift The Label activity:
• Whether referring to decimal and imperial money is confusing for visitors.
• Whether visitors like the proposed multiple choice format for possible answers.
This piece of research is about the content rather than design.
Description of prototype and testing situation
The prototype label was set up on a lectern adjacent to the three objects involved, two of which were displayed in a case and one behind a rope barrier. The objects were a Moorcroft vase, a Liberty teapot and a bamboo cabinet, all dating from the 1890’s.
One sheet on the lectern explained the activity, directed visitors to the facsimile catalogue of the period for price guidelines, provided information about the relation between imperial and decimal currency and gave the typical 1890’s weekly wages of three occupations expressed in imperial and decimal formats. The occupations were doctor, jewellery maker and unskilled farm worker.
The second sheet had ‘Lift the label’ flaps for each of the three items and was headed ‘Lift the label to find the answers’. Each flap had on it: object title; museum number and an ‘1890’s price’ heading above three graded price options, a, b and c. Under each flap was the correct price with an estimate of the proportion it would take from one of the 1890’s weekly wages.
To the left of the lectern was a table with a facsimile copy of the Victorian Catalogueof Household Furnishing on it. The book was marked up on three relevant pages with ‘post it’ notes so that visitors would not be discouraged by having to hunt through the book for the prices of items similar to those on display.
The task for visitors was to estimate, with the information provided, the original cost in the 1890’s of the three nearby objects. The objects were numbered on the glass case to the left of the lectern which contained the teapot and vase and on the floor label of the bamboo cabinet, which was directly in front of the lectern. The numbers corresponded to those on the activity materials.
The facsimile catalogue could only give the visitors broad price indications as the teapots in it were electroplated (the Liberty teapot used in the activity was pewter), and decorative oil lamps were offered for comparison to the Moorcroft vase (there were no vases in the catalogue).
Visitors were invited to test the activity. Use of the catalogue was recorded. Visitors were asked whether they felt comfortable with the use of old and new currencies and monetary values and the use of a multiple choice format. They were also asked ‘Did you feel encouraged to estimate the costs of the furnishings?’ and ‘Did you reflect on who could afford these items at the time?’
Description of sample
Number of people
/ 20Gender / Male = 9
Female =11
Age / Under 25 yrs = 3
25-34 yrs = 5
35-44 yrs = 7
45-54 yrs = 3
55 plus yrs = 2
English as first language / Yes =16
No = 4
Visitors were from UK (11), USA (4) and one each from Canada, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and Taiwan. Ten people were interviewed as a group of two.
Findings relating to brief
• When asked if they felt comfortable in dealing with the imperial and decimal currencies, eleven visitors said yes, four said ‘yes and no’ and five said no. Hesitancy over the denominations and their 1890’s values did not appear to spoil the enjoyment of the activity for any visitor, but rather seemed to make them reflect about the monetary value of the objects.
• All twenty visitors said that they enjoyed the multiple choice format of the activity.
Other findings
• Twelve of the visitors used the facsimile pages to help them estimate prices. The remaining eight used the wage values and the appearance of the objects to help estimate original costs. No-one made a blind guess.
• Visitors spend a lot of time at this activity, thinking and looking at the objects.
• The estimates made by visitors reflect, to a certain extent, the price guidelines suggested by the catalogue. Only one visitor made correct estimates for all three items. Estimates were as follows:
Teapot : Correct = 10; over estimate = 5; under estimate = 5
Vase : Correct = 7; over estimate = 13
Cabinet : Correct = 8; over estimate = 12
Six people got all the prices wrong: four of these were visitors who did the activity as a pair, so they may have influenced each other.
Visitor comments
Did you feel encouraged to estimate the costs of the furnishings?
Replies of all those who said more than just ‘yes’ are given.
• Yes. You should think about these things. Perhaps you should have bigger price ranges.
• Yes. It’s a double problem. What was fashionable and what money was worth.
• Yes. Especially when I got one right. The book helped a lot.
• Yes. The catalogue is helpful.
• Yes. I went by the catalogue.
• Yes. You need direct references (like those provided).
• Yes. I worked on the weekly wages.
• Yes. I went on the equivalent designs today and how much I would pay.
• Yes. The price is not the most interesting thing - the look is.
• Yes. It makes you think. And you reflect on the setting when the things were in everyday use in their own time.
• Yes. Quite interesting.
• Yes. I would not have thought of costs otherwise.
• Yes. It was the time of my great grandmother. This is interesting.
• Yes. I under estimated the teapot because I thought pewter was cheap.
Did you reflect on who could afford these items at the time?
Replies of all those who said more than just ‘yes’ are given.
• I did so at the end but not so much at first.
• In a way. You need a skilled person equivalent in there.
• I compared the wage levels.
• Yes. Looking at the wages - especially with the furniture. I’m angered at the differences in wages. What sort of jeweller was that? Semi-skilled? Very skilled?
• Yes. I estimated on that line of thought.
General comments
• I’m all for activities.
• It was fun.
• Very interesting.
• Enjoyed it.
• Great.
• Enjoyable. Very good.
• Good idea.
• Enjoyed it. Interesting.
• Very enjoyable. Like a game show. Fun.
• Very good. Excellent.
• Fun. Interesting.
Visitors’ recommendations
• Think of adding one or two extra occupations.
• Think of putting the typical wages beside the multiple choice on the flap.
• Put the letter (a, b or c) of the correct estimate beside that price (under the flap).
• Why have the multiple choice prices for the bamboo cabinet in such close range? Should be wider.
Evaluator’s recommendations
Recommendations for this device
• Visitors enjoyed this activity very much. It appears to offer a sound learning situation. Small refinements would make it easier to undertake and help more visitors to succeed with their estimates. It is considered that the failure rates during the test were a little high though no visitor seemed dismayed. Visitors should not be put in a position where failure is very likely. Attention to the spread of prices could help this situation, i.e. giving three prices over a wider range.
• The majority of visitors found the use of imperial and decimal currencies were expressed was not confusing. However, the wording should be reviewed to see if any improvements are possible.
• All the visitors’ recommendations should be given due consideration. An extra occupation in the mid earning range (clerk, shop-keeper, train driver etc.) and wider price spread for the bamboo cabinet in particular (see visitor estimate outcomes) would be especially helpful. Putting the typical wages on the multiple choice flap and the relevant letter next to the answer should also be considered.
• It is recommended that the facsimile pages are marked. Visitors appear to have enough to do without browsing through a book for crucial information.
• As the catalogue was not really helpful with regard to the cost of the vase, and not ideal for the teapot, the choice of objects should be revised to relate more closely to object types in the catalogue.
• It may be advisable to remove, or alter, the reference to a wedding gift from the bamboo cabinet label as visitors may have tended to think that a specially made wedding gift would be expensive. This could be a major reason for twelve visitors over estimating the cost of this item.
• It could be of interest to visitors, and reinforce their learning, if they were told what the prices used in the activity, or £1.00, would be worth at today’s values. The Bank of England Museum is a possible source for this information.
Recommendations for other devices in the series
• The multiple choice format was liked and should be adopted for others in the series.
Actions
• The choice of objects will be changed in order to ensure that they more closely match object types in the catalogue.
• A wider spread of prices will be given for each question in order to make it easier for visitors to guess the right answer.
• An extra occupation in the mid earning range (clerk, shop-keeper, train driver etc.) will be considered.
• The relevant letter should be put next to the answer should, but it is considered that it would complicate the activity unduly if the typical wages were put on the multiple choice flap as well as in the general information section.
• Facsimile pages will be marked, perhaps using ribbons permanently attached in the relevant places.
• Research into the fact that the bamboo cabinet was a wedding gift needs to be carried out, as mention of this on the label misled visitors into thinking it would have cost more than it did. It might be the case that the original was made as a wedding gift but then the design went into wider production.
• The modern value of 1890’s prices will not be given as this is something that changes over time. The approach being taken is to give visitors an idea of how prices related to wages at the time.
• The multiple choice format will be adopted for others in the series.