What is it about?
Museums increasingly put their collections online, but they do this in very different ways. This research examined hundreds of museum websites from the UK, USA, Spain, and Germany to understand how museums communicate with online visitors. We compared the same museums in 2008 and 2017 to track changes over time. We found that museum websites reflect different philosophies about learning and knowledge—some museums carefully select what to show you (like a traditional guided tour), while others let you freely explore everything (like wandering through open storage). Using educational theory, we identified four distinct types of museum websites, each representing a different approach to sharing collections information. The most significant finding is a dramatic shift over the decade: museums have moved away from tightly controlling what visitors see toward giving people freedom to explore and construct their own understanding. By 2017, nearly two-thirds of museums adopted this more open approach. We also found widespread use of social media, suggesting museums are becoming more participatory spaces where visitors don't just consume information but contribute to it.
Featured Image
Photo by Wilhelm Gunkel on Unsplash
Why is it important?
This research provides the first systematic, large-scale analysis of how museums present their collections online and how this has evolved over a significant time period. While many studies examine museum websites generally, few have looked specifically at online collection catalogues or tracked changes across a decade, and none have connected the technical features to underlying educational philosophies. The findings reveal fundamental shifts in how cultural institutions view their role in the digital age. Museums are moving from gatekeepers who filter knowledge to platforms that enable people to construct their own meanings. This has practical implications: museum professionals can use our framework to evaluate their own digital strategies and understand what their technical choices communicate about institutional values. The timing is particularly relevant as museums worldwide accelerate digital transformation. Understanding these trends helps institutions make informed decisions about investing in searchable databases, educational resources, and social media engagement. The research also raises critical questions about what "participation" really means online—having a Facebook page doesn't automatically make a museum participatory. For the broader cultural heritage sector, this work demonstrates that digital technologies aren't neutral tools; they embody and communicate specific educational philosophies that profoundly shape how audiences engage with cultural content.
Perspectives
This research has been close to my heart for over a decade, evolving alongside the digital transformation I've witnessed throughout my career. I started this work in 2007 when I was at the Department of Cultural Technology and Communication at the University of the Aegean in Greece (2003-2013), and completed the second phase in 2017 after moving to the University of Glasgow in 2013. When we began, museums were just beginning to grapple with putting substantial parts of their collections online. I was fascinated by the gap between institutions that simply digitised their card catalogues versus those reimagining how people might engage with collections in fundamentally new ways. Working with my co-author Ion Gil Fuentetaja has been invaluable—this collaboration began when he was a Marie Curie CHIRON Research Fellow at the University of the Aegean, coming from the Basque country in Spain to work with me in Mytilene. Ion not only impressed me with how quickly he learned Greek and mastered traditional Greek dances, but also worked incredibly hard on this research! Together we were able to combine my longstanding interest in museum visitor experience with rigorous quantitative analysis across multiple countries. The ten-year comparison revealed something I'd intuited but hadn't seen proven so clearly: museums are genuinely evolving toward more democratic models of knowledge sharing, not just in rhetoric but in actual practice. What continues to intrigue me is the tension between technological possibility and institutional culture. The same CMS (collections management system) can be implemented in radically different ways depending on a museum's philosophy of communication. This connects directly to my current work on emotional engagement and participatory design—technical features matter less than the values and assumptions driving their implementation. The participatory museum findings particularly resonate with my research on the EMOTIVE project and community co-creation. While we found widespread social media adoption, I remain curious about whether museums are truly opening up their processes or simply broadcasting through new channels. This question became even more central through my POEM (Participatory Memory Practices) MSCA project (2018-2023), where I supervised Cassandra (Cassy) Kist's PhD on the use of social media in museums for socially inclusive work. After she completed her doctorate at Glasgow, we collaborated on the GKEF project together, which included a fascinating National Museums Scotland case study examining the use of images in their online catalogues—bringing us full circle to the questions raised in this paper. These threads—participatory practices, audience engagement, and online collections—continue to interweave throughout my work, including my current British Academy Fellowship research. Looking back, this paper represents a crucial foundation for understanding digital cultural heritage not just as a technical challenge but as a fundamental rethinking of how museums relate to their audiences in an networked age.
Maria Economou
University of Glasgow
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Communicating Museum Collections Information Online, Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, February 2019, ACM (Association for Computing Machinery),
DOI: 10.1145/3283253.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page







