5 Studies on Audience
Participation/Engagement
- The Tangled Web
- engagement through social media
- Making Sense of Audience Engagement
- the long arc of audience engagement
- Getting In on the Act
- the rise of “active participation”
-The Arts Ripple Effect
- encouraging value by taking art from private to public
- Counting New Beans
- focusing on quantifying the private art experience
By Devon V. Smith
Edited by Clayton Lord
Commissioned by Theatre
Bay Area with funds from the
Wallace Foundation, Grants
for the Arts, the San Francisco
Foundation, the William and
Flora Hewlett Foundation and
the Koret Foundation
What is it?
207 nonprofit organizations
Multi-genre
Multi-budget
Geographically diverse
Varying levels of social media expertise
Attempting to lay out a baseline for
social media engagement by arts
organizations, and to highlight bright
spots and best practices for the field.
Where is it?
Research report:
http://www.theatrebayarea.org/datapoint
Contact:
clay@theatrebayarea.org
On average:
3 social networks
66 pieces of content/month
162 user responses in return
99% of orgs active on at least 1
social network in study period
% of orgs active within study period
Foursquare
17%
Blog
28%
Flickr
30%
Yelp
33%
YouTube
59%
Twitter
64%
Tweet
91%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Bright spots:
Facebook: Update multiple
times/day, custom URL, feature a
Welcome tab.
Twitter: Update 4x+/day, do not
auto-update from Facebook.
YouTube: Update 1x+/week.
median monthly activity/arts org
YouTube Videos Uploaded
1
Blog Posts
4
Facebook Posts
17
Flickr Photos Uploaded
20
Twitter Tweets
24
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
average FB likes by update frequency
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Multiple Daily
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
average FB comments/post by update frequency
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Multiple Daily
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
average Twitter followers by update frequency
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
4x+/day
2-4x/day
Every other day-2x/day
Less than every other day
0
average @ mentions by update frequency
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
4x+/day
2-4x/day
Every other day-2x/day
Less than every other day
0
Arts organizations blogging on a
self-hosted platform 2x/week or
more have more subscribers and
comments/post than otherwise.
value of a self-hosted blog
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Posts
Subscribers
Self-hosted
Blogspot/Wordpress
Comments
By Alan Brown and Rebecca
Ratzin
Commissioned by the San
Francisco Foundation, Grants
for the Arts and the Wallace
Foundation
What is it?
“This report takes stock of a growing
body of practice in the arts sector
referred to as ‘audience engagement’.”
Attempts to understand and refine the
wide array of “engagement” programs
into an “Arc of Engagement” to
understand the audience’s experience
over time.
Where is it?
Research report:
http://www.wolfbrown.com
Audience engagement: “a guiding philosophy in the
creation and delivery of arts experiences in which the
paramount concern is maximizing the impact on the
participant.”
The Arc of Engagement: “a five-stage process through
which audiences pass, including build-up and
contextualization, the artistic exchange, post-processing
and extended impact echo.”
6 Audience Typologies with
respect to Engagement
- Readers
- Critical Reviewers
- Casual Talkers
- Technology-based Processors
- Insight Seekers
- Active Learners
By Alan Brown and Jennifer
Novak-Leonard, in
partnership with Shelly
Glibride
Commissioned by the James
Irvine Foundation
What is it?
“This report aims to illuminate a growing
body of practice around participatory
engagement and dispel some of the
anxiety surrounding this sphere of
activity.”
Written in conjunction/to support the
Irvine Foundation’s new granting
strategy, which highly favors
“participatory arts practice.”
Where is it?
Research report:
http://www.irvine.org
Participatory Arts Practice: “various
forms of arts participation in which
people play an expressive role.”
Arts Engagement: “the entire
spectrum of ways that people can be
involved in the arts.”
“General population studies of
arts participation consistently
find that active participants are
more likely to be audience
members in the conventional
sense.”
Variations on participatory art
programs:
-Audience-based programs
- main focus on consumption of an artistic product
- Participant-based programs
- main focus on the process of artistic creation
Intended goals/outcomes of
participatory arts programs:
- In Service of Community Need
- Programs designed around specific goals of social justic,
activism or giving voice to the disenfranchised.
- In Support of Artistic Vision
- Mission-driven but not connected to core programming.
Usually the process of participating is more important than the
artistic outcome.
- In Service of Artistic Process/Product
- Audiences are allowed to co-create or actually create art.
- As the Fundamental Goal
- Participation is paramount, product is secondary.
What is it?
Year-long investigation into what
arguments for public support of the arts
work and what arguments don’t.
Posits that the best messaging around
the arts are that a thriving arts sector
creates “ripple effects” of benefits
throughout the community.
Produced by the Topos
Partnership
Commissioned by Fine Arts
Fund (now ArtsWave) with
funds from Carol Ann and
Ralph V. Haile Jr./US Bank
Foundation and the Greater
Cincinnati Foundation.
Where is it?
Research report:
http://www.fineartsfund.org
Contact:
mwaller@fineartsfund.org
“Public responsibility for the arts
is undermined by deeply
entrenched perceptions that have
nothing to do with government
and everything to do with
understanding of the arts.”
Assumptions of the public that work against
the objective of positioning the arts as a
public good:
-The arts are a private matter
- The arts are a good to be purchased
- People expect to be passive, not active
- The arts are a low priority
Objective: to create a “sense of
broadly shared responsibility for
the arts” in the community.
The “Ripple Effect”
- Useful in highlighting the “vibrant, thriving
economy” that comes from artistic
investment
- Showcases the more “connected
population” that emerges from shared arts
experiences
1) Surveying the landscape
- The arts as entertainment
- The arts as personal expression
- The arts as beauty
- The arts as a school subject
2) Which lead to these consequences:
- The arts are a private matter
- The arts are a good to be purchased
- The arts are passive, not active
- The arts are a low priority
3) Changing the landscape
(moving from problematic understandings to constructive ones)
- The arts exhibit community beliefs
- The arts are a public concern
- The arts are necessary
- The arts are everywhere
- Arts opportunities are active and clear
- The arts are emotional and practical
“The arts create ripple effects of benefits
throughout our community.”
Approaches that Missed the Mark with Focus Groups
- Civic inspiration (great civilizations always have art)
- Great cities (great cities always invest in art)
- Health/science (science says art makes you healthier)
- Broadening our horizons (art’s benefits are unique)
- Human universal (art has always been a basic need)
- City planning (cities need art to prosper)
- Innovation (art inspires creativity and innovation)
- Works of beauty (human spirit needs beauty)
- Transcendence (takes us away from the everyday)
- Kids (art engenders empathy and problem-solving)
- House/Home (art turns a “house” into a “home”)
“Measuring the Intrinsic
Impact of Live Theatre”
By Alan Brown and Rebecca
Ratzkin
Edited by Clayton Lord
Commissioned by Theatre
Bay Area with funds from the
Doris Duke Charitable
Foundation, the NEA, the
Mellon Foundation, the Pew
Center for Arts & Heritage,
Theatre Development Fund,
Arts Midwest, San Francisco
Arts Commission, City of San
Jose and others
What is it?
58 productions
18 theatres
6 cities
60,000 surveys out
19,000 surveys back
Attempting to measure the
intellectual, emotional, social,
and empathetic impact of art on
an individual using standard
metrics and a common
vocabulary.
Where is it?
Book:
http://www.theatrebayarea.org/intrinsicimpact
WolfBrown research report:
http://www.intrinsicimpact.org
Contact:
clay@theatrebayarea.org
High response rates (45% on
average) suggest theatre patrons
are aching to give meaningful
feedback.
Select Impact Indicators - Subscribers vs. Single Ticket Buyers
Single Ticket Buyers
Social Bonding
(Celebrate my
Identity)
Captivation:
Absorbed
4.5
4.0
Subscribers
Captivation:
Felt Involved as an
Audience Member
3.5
Social:
Sense of
Connectedness
Emotion:
Overall Strength of
Response
3.0
2.5
2.0
Aesthetic:
Will Follow
an Artist
Emotion:
Feelings of
Empathy
1.5
1.0
Emotion:
Felt Emotionally
Charged
Aesthetic
Validation
Aesthetic:
Explosed to New
Art
Intellectual:
Gained New Insight
Intellectual:
Reflect on Own
Opinions
Intellectual:
Eyes Opened to a
New Idea
Motivations for Attending, by Age Cohort
60%
50%
To relax or escape
To be emotionally moved or
inspired
40%
To revisit a familiar work or artist
30%
To spend quality time with family
members
To see the work of a specific
actor or director
20%
Because someone invited you
For work or educational purposes
10%
0%
15-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75+
Incidence of Participating in Post-Performance
Engagement Activities, by Age Cohort
70%
60%
Email or speak to friend
50%
Reflect privately
40%
Read program book
Search for info online
30%
React online or thru social
media
20%
Attend a post-performance
discussion
10%
0%
15-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
Age Cohorts - Ticket Type
Subscribers
Single Ticket Buyers
87%
90%
70%
70%
75%
81%
80%
60%
63%
60%
51%
49%
50%
37%
40%
40%
25%
13%
19%
20%
10%
30%
30%
0%
15-24
(2% of
sample)
25-34
(5% of
sample)
35-44
(7% of
sample)
45-54
(16% of
sample)
55-64
(30% of
sample)
65-74
(26% of
sample)
75+
(14% of
sample)
Key Impact Results, by Decision-Making Role
My decision
My spouse or partner's decision
Captivation:
Absorbed
Social:
Sense of
Connectedness
4.5
4.0
Captivation:
Awed by Skill &
Artistry
3.5
3.0
Aesthetic:
Will Follow
an Artist
Captivation:
Felt Involved as
an Audience
Member
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Emotion:
Overall Strength
of Response
Aesthetic
Validation
Aesthetic:
Explosed
to New Art
Emotion:
Feelings of
Empathy
Intellectual:
Reflect
on Own
Opinions
Intellectual:
Gained New
Insight
25% of people said they did
anything to “prepare.”
But 30-40% said they read a
preview or review.
Major form of preparation:
Wikipedia.
35% of people said they left with
unanswered questions.
98% of those people actually
wrote down their questions.
Causal model of impact
(“How absorbed were
you…?”)
Correlation=.34;
R Square=.16
Anticipation
Correlation = .40;
R Square = .16
(“How much were
you looking forward
to this performance?”)
R Square = .13
Correlation=.70;
R Square=.48
Correlation=.39;
R Square=.15
Summative
Impact
(“Future Impression”
Indicator)
Correlation = .52;
R Square = .28
Familiarity,
Preparation, and
Feeling Welcome
Start Here
Repeat
Attendance?
PostPerformance
Engagement
Loyalty
(Likelihood to
Recommend)
Implied Relationship
Captivation
Thank you!