Currently browsing tag


A literary view of gaming

What I should be doing today is creating the structured interview questions for my research on Cultural Institutions and Tech SMEs. But I’m distracted by this series of articles on gaming from playwright Lucy Prebble. Lucy is most famous for her play ENRON about the stocks and shares scandal surrounding the eponymous US energy company. More recently, her The Effect has had positive reviews. But she is also a gamer, and writes  a monthly column on games for the Observer. Continue reading →

Bodiam data again

Yesterday, I said that I expected to see a strong negative correlation between “I didn’t learn very much new today” and “I learned about what Bodiam Castle was like in the past.” In fact, when I ran the correlation function in R, it came out at a rather miserly 0.33, much lower than I expected. So I asked R to draw me a scatterplot: And there it is, some correlation, but not as much as I was expecting. Continue reading →

A first look at my Bodiam data

Last week, I had a look at the developing script for the new Bodiam Castle interpretive experience (for want of a better word). It’s all looking very exciting. But what I should have been doing is what I’m doing now, running the responses from the on-site survey I did last year through R, to see what it tells me about the experience with out the new … thing, but also what it tells me about the questions I’m trying out. A bit of a recap first. Continue reading →

Motivation segmentation and a mobile app at Kew

This statistics course, data collection and other stuff has taken up so much time that I feel I’m a bit behind on actual reading. Today is the first day I’ve been able to get into a back-log of things I thought might be interesting. And one thing that was near to the top of the list has proven to be a fascinating read, that’s worth sharing. Ages ago, Kew Gardens announced a new app to help visitors find their way around and find out more about the gardens. Continue reading →

Evaluating emotional triggers

The organisation I work for asks a question of it’s visitors, along the lines of “how strongly do you agree or disagree with the statement ‘this place had a real emotional impact on me’?” We can see that the more people agree with that statement (even if only the minority strongly agree), the more likely people are to have a very enjoyable day, and recommend a visit to friends and relations. But we don’t really measure what drives that emotional response. Continue reading →