An excellent article on this is Minda Borun and Katherine Adams,
"From Hands On to Minds On: Labelling Interactive Exhibits,"
_Visitor Studies: Theory, Research, and Practice, Volume 4_
(Jacksonville, AL: Center for Social Design, 1992), 115-20.

It describes a formative evaluation study on a label for an
interactive device to counteract misconceptions about gravity. As
they write: "As long as the label was written didactically the two
did not interact. Device and label were sequential, but not
interdependent. Once a visitor understood how to operate the
device, the device was used, a label was read and the visitor moved
away.... What we needed was a label that created a loop, sending
the visitor back to the device to test the information, then back
to the label to interpret experience."

Minda Borun ([log in to unmask]) has done numerous evaluation studies
on labels at the Franklin Science Center. If you have trouble
finding the _Visitor Studies_ article, try contacting Steve Bitgood
([log in to unmask]).

Lisa Mackinney
Program Evaluator
California Academy of Sciences
[log in to unmask]

-----

Marta Lourenco <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I am doing a research project about labels in interactive science
>centers/museums.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Should they be merely informative (instructions regarding how the
>hands-on works)?
>Should they include explanations on the scientific principle?
>Should they include historical and social context?
>Should they be a mixture of the above three?
>Should there be ANY labels at all? (pros and cons)