Document Type

Article

Publication details

Postprint of: Van Dijk, PA, Smith, LDG & Weiler, B 2012, 'To re-enact or not to re-enact? Investigating the impacts of first- and third- person interpretation at a heritage tourism site', Visitor Studies, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 48-61.

The publisher's version of article available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2012.660842

Peer Reviewed

Peer-Reviewed

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impacts of first-person street theatre reenactments versus third-person interpretation at a recreated 1850s gold-rush heritage tourism site. Data collected from 357 visitors following 7 different interpretive activities indicated that third-person interpretation produced significantly higher mean respondent ratings than those activities that used first-person interpretation on 6 of 10 cognitive, affective, and behavioral indicators. Further scrutiny revealed that third-person interpretation resulted in higher levels of cognitive and affective outcomes for some visitor audiences when compared to first-person interpretation, but that there was no difference between first- and third-person interpretation on most behavioral outcomes. Both types of interpretation may be needed in order to achieve a full range of visitor outcomes. A multivariate analysis of covariance illustrated the potential implication of activity length in determining visitor outcomes; that is, the longer the activity, the greater impact of interpretation on measured outcomes. Isolating the effect of type of interpretation versus duration requires further research.

Find in your library

Share

COinS