Pub Date : 2024-06-13DOI: 10.1108/aam-11-2022-0063
Adi Alić, Merima Činjarević
PurposeTo understand how three features of online consumer reviews - the strength of persuasiveness in online consumer reviews (argument quality), the number of online consumer reviews (volume of reviews), and source credibility – are related to the behavioural intentions in the movie consumption context. Besides, the present study aims to explore intergenerational differences (X, Y, and Z) in the patterns of association between three characteristics of online consumer reviews (argument quality, volume of reviews, and source credibility) and an individual’s choice of a movie intended to be watched.Design/methodology/approachThe study sample (n = 518) was recruited from a population of users of IMDb living in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Structural equation modelling and multi-group analysis were used to test the proposed hypotheses.FindingsThe results revealed that argument quality, the volume of reviews, and source credibility of movie-related online consumer reviews are positively related to the intention to watch a movie for all three generational cohorts (X, Y, and Z). Regarding biases in processing information cues, our findings indicate that movie viewers from all three generations (X, Y, and Z) make inferences between source credibility and argument quality. However, biases in the relation between the volume of reviews and the argument quality were found only among X-ers and Y-ers but not among Z-ers.Originality/valueThe present study contributes to the eWOM research stream by examining the role of different characteristics of online consumer reviews (argument quality, the volume of reviews, and the source credibility) in movie consumption. Moreover, it sheds light on how argument quality, the volume reviews and the source credibility interact with the behavioural intentions of different generations and whether these interactions exhibit similarities or differences across three distinct generation cohorts: X-ers, Y-ers, and Z-ers.
{"title":"Influence of movie-related online consumer reviews on movie choice: are there generational differences in processing information cues?","authors":"Adi Alić, Merima Činjarević","doi":"10.1108/aam-11-2022-0063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-11-2022-0063","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeTo understand how three features of online consumer reviews - the strength of persuasiveness in online consumer reviews (argument quality), the number of online consumer reviews (volume of reviews), and source credibility – are related to the behavioural intentions in the movie consumption context. Besides, the present study aims to explore intergenerational differences (X, Y, and Z) in the patterns of association between three characteristics of online consumer reviews (argument quality, volume of reviews, and source credibility) and an individual’s choice of a movie intended to be watched.Design/methodology/approachThe study sample (n = 518) was recruited from a population of users of IMDb living in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Structural equation modelling and multi-group analysis were used to test the proposed hypotheses.FindingsThe results revealed that argument quality, the volume of reviews, and source credibility of movie-related online consumer reviews are positively related to the intention to watch a movie for all three generational cohorts (X, Y, and Z). Regarding biases in processing information cues, our findings indicate that movie viewers from all three generations (X, Y, and Z) make inferences between source credibility and argument quality. However, biases in the relation between the volume of reviews and the argument quality were found only among X-ers and Y-ers but not among Z-ers.Originality/valueThe present study contributes to the eWOM research stream by examining the role of different characteristics of online consumer reviews (argument quality, the volume of reviews, and the source credibility) in movie consumption. Moreover, it sheds light on how argument quality, the volume reviews and the source credibility interact with the behavioural intentions of different generations and whether these interactions exhibit similarities or differences across three distinct generation cohorts: X-ers, Y-ers, and Z-ers.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141347839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-14DOI: 10.1108/aam-01-2023-0002
M. Cuadrado-García, Maja Šerić, Juan D. Montoro-Pons
PurposeThis paper aims to analyze the relationship between watching dance and mood enhancement considering potential differences across gender and age brackets.Design/methodology/approachExploratory research was undertaken through a personal survey, using a structured questionnaire on a large sample of young participants between 18 and 35 years old, split into generational cohorts (Millennials or Generation Y and Centennials or Generation Z). Quota sampling (gender and age) was the method used to select respondents.FindingsResults show that after watching dance, more positive mood changes were observed in general. However, they were stronger among women and younger Millennials. These findings are important as they open a new area of study; show the effects of culture on people; and help design programming strategies to enlarge audiences.Originality/valueThe effects of specific forms of arts and cultural participation on people’s moods have been analyzed from a diversity of disciplines. In the case of dance, studies have tested this relation among practitioners (active participants) but not among viewers (attendees) as this paper does.
目的本文旨在分析观看舞蹈与情绪提升之间的关系，同时考虑到不同性别和年龄段之间的潜在差异。设计/方法/途径探索性研究是通过个人调查的方式进行的，采用了结构化问卷，调查对象为年龄在 18 至 35 岁之间的大量年轻参与者，分为不同的世代群体（千禧一代或 Y 世代和百禧一代或 Z 世代）。调查结果显示，观看舞蹈后，人们的情绪普遍发生了积极的变化。但是，女性和年轻的千禧一代的情绪变化更大。这些研究结果非常重要，因为它们开辟了一个新的研究领域，显示了文化对人们的影响，并有助于设计节目策略以扩大观众群。原创性/价值特定形式的艺术和文化参与对人们情绪的影响已从多个学科进行了分析。就舞蹈而言，有研究在从业人员（积极参与者）中测试了这种关系，但没有像本文这样在观众（出席者）中进行测试。
{"title":"Dance consumption and mood changes: Examining the role of gender and generational cohorts","authors":"M. Cuadrado-García, Maja Šerić, Juan D. Montoro-Pons","doi":"10.1108/aam-01-2023-0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-01-2023-0002","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to analyze the relationship between watching dance and mood enhancement considering potential differences across gender and age brackets.Design/methodology/approachExploratory research was undertaken through a personal survey, using a structured questionnaire on a large sample of young participants between 18 and 35 years old, split into generational cohorts (Millennials or Generation Y and Centennials or Generation Z). Quota sampling (gender and age) was the method used to select respondents.FindingsResults show that after watching dance, more positive mood changes were observed in general. However, they were stronger among women and younger Millennials. These findings are important as they open a new area of study; show the effects of culture on people; and help design programming strategies to enlarge audiences.Originality/valueThe effects of specific forms of arts and cultural participation on people’s moods have been analyzed from a diversity of disciplines. In the case of dance, studies have tested this relation among practitioners (active participants) but not among viewers (attendees) as this paper does.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140979350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-12DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0041
Szilvia Nagy
PurposeThis article explores the applicability of participatory action research (PAR) on two levels: on the one hand, as a participatory evaluation method for community engagement and community development; on the other hand, as a tool to link ex ante and ex-post evaluation that situated at various stages of the policy cycle.Design/methodology/approachThrough a practice-based case study of the community engagement process of Valletta Design Cluster, this paper aims to illustrate how PAR can offer collaborative and continuous evaluation by facilitating social action through a practical, situative, context-bounded, responsive and transformative framework.FindingsThe study explores how PAR can contribute to cultural sustainability by linking community development with participatory evaluation, and it offers new perspectives on the applicability of PAR as a tool to link ex ante and ex-post evaluation, situated at various stages of the policy cycle.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough based on a single case, the paper demonstrates that the method has the potential to be applied in various contexts, as it helps to foster local ownership and to develop future cultural strategies, thus providing a base for cultural sustainability.Originality/valueThe novelty of this study is to link evaluation – a majorly top-down and ex ante approach – with participatory planning. PAR-E offers a continuous participatory framework for the whole European Capitals of Culture (ECoC) cycle, as well as serving as a tool for empowerment and community development.
{"title":"Participant-oriented evaluation through participatory action research: a case study of a community engagement approach","authors":"Szilvia Nagy","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0041","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis article explores the applicability of participatory action research (PAR) on two levels: on the one hand, as a participatory evaluation method for community engagement and community development; on the other hand, as a tool to link ex ante and ex-post evaluation that situated at various stages of the policy cycle.Design/methodology/approachThrough a practice-based case study of the community engagement process of Valletta Design Cluster, this paper aims to illustrate how PAR can offer collaborative and continuous evaluation by facilitating social action through a practical, situative, context-bounded, responsive and transformative framework.FindingsThe study explores how PAR can contribute to cultural sustainability by linking community development with participatory evaluation, and it offers new perspectives on the applicability of PAR as a tool to link ex ante and ex-post evaluation, situated at various stages of the policy cycle.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough based on a single case, the paper demonstrates that the method has the potential to be applied in various contexts, as it helps to foster local ownership and to develop future cultural strategies, thus providing a base for cultural sustainability.Originality/valueThe novelty of this study is to link evaluation – a majorly top-down and ex ante approach – with participatory planning. PAR-E offers a continuous participatory framework for the whole European Capitals of Culture (ECoC) cycle, as well as serving as a tool for empowerment and community development.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138632971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-16DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0037
Barbara Grabher
Purpose García and Cox (2013) have clarified that there is an urgent need for comparative studies of city/capital of culture (COC) events. With the ambition to foster exchange and learning, knowledge production concerning cultural initiatives requires to think beyond the individual case study of a singular event. Simultaneously, the two scholars observe comparability and context-sensitivity between events as a major issue in these particular canons of research. Design/methodology/approach Drawing upon the research experience of the project, this article experiments with a novel reading of city/capital of culture events. Findings Beyond the singularity of a case study but with attention to context-sensitivities, the article proposes a relational reading practice to study the culture-led event framework. The author illustrates the proposed approach with material collected in ethnographic fieldwork in the cities of Donostia/San Sebastián, European COC 2016, and Hull, UK COC 2017. Originality/value By using one case study as a metaphorical pair of glasses framing the investigative perspective on the other, an analytical relationship between two COC events is established, fostering a broader prism of analysis and connected learning.
{"title":"Reading relationally: a proposal for relational-comparative research concerning city/capital of culture events","authors":"Barbara Grabher","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0037","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose García and Cox (2013) have clarified that there is an urgent need for comparative studies of city/capital of culture (COC) events. With the ambition to foster exchange and learning, knowledge production concerning cultural initiatives requires to think beyond the individual case study of a singular event. Simultaneously, the two scholars observe comparability and context-sensitivity between events as a major issue in these particular canons of research. Design/methodology/approach Drawing upon the research experience of the project, this article experiments with a novel reading of city/capital of culture events. Findings Beyond the singularity of a case study but with attention to context-sensitivities, the article proposes a relational reading practice to study the culture-led event framework. The author illustrates the proposed approach with material collected in ethnographic fieldwork in the cities of Donostia/San Sebastián, European COC 2016, and Hull, UK COC 2017. Originality/value By using one case study as a metaphorical pair of glasses framing the investigative perspective on the other, an analytical relationship between two COC events is established, fostering a broader prism of analysis and connected learning.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136077428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-10DOI: 10.1108/aam-09-2021-0046
Hans-Peter Degn, Steven Hadley, Louise Ejgod Hansen
PurposeDuring the evaluation of European Capital of Culture (ECoC) Aarhus 2017, the evaluation organisation rethinkIMPACTS 2017 formulated a set of “dilemmas” capturing the main challenges arising during the design of the ECoC evaluation. This functioned as a framework for the evaluation process. This paper aims to present and discuss the relevance of the “Evaluation Dilemmas Model” as subsequently applied to the Galway 2020 ECoC programme evaluation.Design/methodology/approachThe paper takes an empirical approach including auto-ethnography and interview data to document and map the dilemmas involved in undertaking an evaluation in two different European cities. Evolved via a process of practice-based research, the article addresses the development of and the arguments for the dilemmas model and considers its potential for wider applicability in the evaluation of large-scale cultural projects.FindingsThe authors conclude that the “Evaluation Dilemmas Model” is a valuable heuristic for considering the endogenous and exogenous issues in cultural evaluation.Practical implicationsThe model developed is useful for a wide range of cultural evaluation processes including – but not limited to – European Capitals of Culture.Originality/valueWhat has not been addressed in the academic literature is the process of evaluating ECoCs; especially how evaluators often take part in an overall process that is not just about the evaluation but also planning and delivering a project that includes stakeholder management and the development of evaluation criteria, design and methods.
{"title":"Towards an “Evaluation Dilemmas Model” – designing an evaluation scheme for a European capital of culture","authors":"Hans-Peter Degn, Steven Hadley, Louise Ejgod Hansen","doi":"10.1108/aam-09-2021-0046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-09-2021-0046","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeDuring the evaluation of European Capital of Culture (ECoC) Aarhus 2017, the evaluation organisation rethinkIMPACTS 2017 formulated a set of “dilemmas” capturing the main challenges arising during the design of the ECoC evaluation. This functioned as a framework for the evaluation process. This paper aims to present and discuss the relevance of the “Evaluation Dilemmas Model” as subsequently applied to the Galway 2020 ECoC programme evaluation.Design/methodology/approachThe paper takes an empirical approach including auto-ethnography and interview data to document and map the dilemmas involved in undertaking an evaluation in two different European cities. Evolved via a process of practice-based research, the article addresses the development of and the arguments for the dilemmas model and considers its potential for wider applicability in the evaluation of large-scale cultural projects.FindingsThe authors conclude that the “Evaluation Dilemmas Model” is a valuable heuristic for considering the endogenous and exogenous issues in cultural evaluation.Practical implicationsThe model developed is useful for a wide range of cultural evaluation processes including – but not limited to – European Capitals of Culture.Originality/valueWhat has not been addressed in the academic literature is the process of evaluating ECoCs; especially how evaluators often take part in an overall process that is not just about the evaluation but also planning and delivering a project that includes stakeholder management and the development of evaluation criteria, design and methods.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136254665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-29DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0042
Mark Scott, Jonothan Neelands, Haley Beer, Ila Bharatan, Tim Healey, Nick Henry, Si Chun Lam, Richard Tomlins
Purpose It is well known that culture is a catalyst for change, helping economies respond to societal problems and demands and that culture is where people turn to in moments of crisis. In this case study around designing and implementing evaluation methodologies/frameworks for Coventry UK City of Culture 2021, it is suggested that in English public policy and within publicly invested arts there is a maturation of thinking around recognising/measuring the public value of culture including its social value. The purpose of this paper is to chart the recent policy of justifying cultural expenditure with social value claims and highlight challenges for evaluating activity within Coventry UK CoC 2021 as a change in wider policy is taking place. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides creative insights into the design and implementation of the evaluation methodologies/frameworks for Coventry UK City of Culture 2021. The authors of this paper as the collective team undertaking the evaluation of Coventry's year as UK City of Culture 2021 bring first-hand experiences of challenges faced and the need for a cultural mega-event to evidence its value. Findings The case study aims to address the concepts of measuring value within cultural events and argues that a paradigm shift is occurring in methods and concepts for evidencing the aforementioned value. Research limitations/implications The case study within this paper focuses on the build-up period to the UK City of Culture 2021 year and the thinking and logic behind the creation of the evaluation/measurement framework and therefore does not include findings from the actual cultural year. Originality/value It is acknowledged that there are papers examining measuring and evidencing the “value” of cultural mega-events, the authors bring real-life first-hand experience of the concepts being utilised by them on the ground in the delivery and evaluation design of Coventry, UK City of Culture 2021.
{"title":"Measuring the changes: how can a perceived cultural mega-event evidence its “value”? Insights from implementing evaluation methodologies for Coventry 2021","authors":"Mark Scott, Jonothan Neelands, Haley Beer, Ila Bharatan, Tim Healey, Nick Henry, Si Chun Lam, Richard Tomlins","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0042","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose It is well known that culture is a catalyst for change, helping economies respond to societal problems and demands and that culture is where people turn to in moments of crisis. In this case study around designing and implementing evaluation methodologies/frameworks for Coventry UK City of Culture 2021, it is suggested that in English public policy and within publicly invested arts there is a maturation of thinking around recognising/measuring the public value of culture including its social value. The purpose of this paper is to chart the recent policy of justifying cultural expenditure with social value claims and highlight challenges for evaluating activity within Coventry UK CoC 2021 as a change in wider policy is taking place. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides creative insights into the design and implementation of the evaluation methodologies/frameworks for Coventry UK City of Culture 2021. The authors of this paper as the collective team undertaking the evaluation of Coventry's year as UK City of Culture 2021 bring first-hand experiences of challenges faced and the need for a cultural mega-event to evidence its value. Findings The case study aims to address the concepts of measuring value within cultural events and argues that a paradigm shift is occurring in methods and concepts for evidencing the aforementioned value. Research limitations/implications The case study within this paper focuses on the build-up period to the UK City of Culture 2021 year and the thinking and logic behind the creation of the evaluation/measurement framework and therefore does not include findings from the actual cultural year. Originality/value It is acknowledged that there are papers examining measuring and evidencing the “value” of cultural mega-events, the authors bring real-life first-hand experience of the concepts being utilised by them on the ground in the delivery and evaluation design of Coventry, UK City of Culture 2021.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135133243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-06DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0038
Daniel Ashton, Ronda Gowland-Pryde, Silke Roth, Fraser Sturt
PurposeSocioeconomic aims and impacts are an explicit part of the UK City of Culture (UKCoC) application, bidding, delivery and evaluation stages. This article engages with existing debates on evaluating cities of culture and introduces perspectives from critical data studies to examine the collection and analysis of different data for the purposes of the CoC application and evaluation processes.Design/methodology/approachThe meta-methodological concept of accompanying researcher is used to analyse the experiences of researchers based within a city bidding for UKCoC 2025 in dialogue with the evaluation reports from past UKCoC host cities.FindingsFindings are analysed under three themes: defining data morsels; local histories and infrastructures of data generation and sharing; and resources, capacities and expertise for data generation and evaluation. The discussion examines data still to be generated and/or brought into relation; tensions around data and measurement; and how constructing an evaluation baseline is generative—creating new organisations, relationships and practices.Practical implicationsThe conceptual and methodological approach and empirical findings will be relevant for academic, policymakers and practitioners engaging with cultural evaluation.Originality/valueIn focussing on the bidding stage in real time through the accompanying researcher position, this article presents original empirical insights into the process of creating a baseline for cities of culture evaluation. The conceptual originality of this article is in using critical data studies to explain strategies of data generation and analyse data relations and frictions.
{"title":"Creating the baseline: data relations and frictions of UK City of Culture evaluation","authors":"Daniel Ashton, Ronda Gowland-Pryde, Silke Roth, Fraser Sturt","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0038","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeSocioeconomic aims and impacts are an explicit part of the UK City of Culture (UKCoC) application, bidding, delivery and evaluation stages. This article engages with existing debates on evaluating cities of culture and introduces perspectives from critical data studies to examine the collection and analysis of different data for the purposes of the CoC application and evaluation processes.Design/methodology/approachThe meta-methodological concept of accompanying researcher is used to analyse the experiences of researchers based within a city bidding for UKCoC 2025 in dialogue with the evaluation reports from past UKCoC host cities.FindingsFindings are analysed under three themes: defining data morsels; local histories and infrastructures of data generation and sharing; and resources, capacities and expertise for data generation and evaluation. The discussion examines data still to be generated and/or brought into relation; tensions around data and measurement; and how constructing an evaluation baseline is generative—creating new organisations, relationships and practices.Practical implicationsThe conceptual and methodological approach and empirical findings will be relevant for academic, policymakers and practitioners engaging with cultural evaluation.Originality/valueIn focussing on the bidding stage in real time through the accompanying researcher position, this article presents original empirical insights into the process of creating a baseline for cities of culture evaluation. The conceptual originality of this article is in using critical data studies to explain strategies of data generation and analyse data relations and frictions.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42098328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-02DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0045
S. Crone, R. Ganga
PurposeIn this paper, the authors reflect critically on their experience as researchers on the Impacts 18 programme: a re-study concerned with the long-term effects of Liverpool European Capital of Culture (ECoC) 2008. Situating Impacts 18 at the confluence of three important debates within the cultural policy field, the paper considers the causation, nature and significance of the shortcomings of the research, with a view to advancing cultural evaluation practices and encouraging re-studies in a field where they are seldom used.Design/methodology/approachThe authors draw on documentary analysis of unpublished research outputs, along with their own research notes and critical reflections. The paper focuses on two projects from the Impacts 18 programme, in particular, in order to illustrate the broader issues raised in terms of the epistemological framing, methodological design and execution of the Impacts 18 research.FindingsThe paper highlights and explores the various issues that affected Impacts 18 in terms of its epistemological framing and methodological design, as well as problems encountered in terms of data management and stakeholder relationships.Originality/valueAs a large-scale re-study of a cultural event, Impacts 18 represents an exceedingly rare occurrence, despite the acknowledged dearth of evidence on the longer-term impacts of such events. Similarly unusual, however, are critical and candid retrospectives from research authors themselves. The paper is thus doubly unusual, in these two respects, and should help to advance research practice in an under-researched area.
{"title":"Revisiting the impact of Liverpool as ECoC 2008: the lost opportunity to reconcile cultural policy and evaluation","authors":"S. Crone, R. Ganga","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0045","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeIn this paper, the authors reflect critically on their experience as researchers on the Impacts 18 programme: a re-study concerned with the long-term effects of Liverpool European Capital of Culture (ECoC) 2008. Situating Impacts 18 at the confluence of three important debates within the cultural policy field, the paper considers the causation, nature and significance of the shortcomings of the research, with a view to advancing cultural evaluation practices and encouraging re-studies in a field where they are seldom used.Design/methodology/approachThe authors draw on documentary analysis of unpublished research outputs, along with their own research notes and critical reflections. The paper focuses on two projects from the Impacts 18 programme, in particular, in order to illustrate the broader issues raised in terms of the epistemological framing, methodological design and execution of the Impacts 18 research.FindingsThe paper highlights and explores the various issues that affected Impacts 18 in terms of its epistemological framing and methodological design, as well as problems encountered in terms of data management and stakeholder relationships.Originality/valueAs a large-scale re-study of a cultural event, Impacts 18 represents an exceedingly rare occurrence, despite the acknowledged dearth of evidence on the longer-term impacts of such events. Similarly unusual, however, are critical and candid retrospectives from research authors themselves. The paper is thus doubly unusual, in these two respects, and should help to advance research practice in an under-researched area.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45921612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-01DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0033
Charles Ingram
PurposeThis article's purpose is to examine the case for the use of the theatre arts in the evaluation of UK City of Culture (UKCC) programmes, specifically headphone verbatim.Design/methodology/approachThrough an analysis of secondary evidence, supported by some primary research, this article analyses past and present evaluation practices surrounding UKCC programmes and the case for headphone verbatim to be included as a method of gathering and distributing research data. The article also observes the challenges in how data may be disseminated through verbatim theatre performance practices, given the limited examples of its use in this context.FindingsThe author argues that the theatre arts can provide a different way of knowing and understanding the impacts of UKCC projects on the host city. Specifically, that headphone verbatim can bring an experiential perspective that is rarely if ever captured by existing UKCC evaluation methods and policymaking in general.Originality/valueThis article details an innovative method of evaluating social impacts associated with UKCC projects.
{"title":"Theatre arts in UK city of culture evaluation practices: the case for headphone verbatim","authors":"Charles Ingram","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0033","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis article's purpose is to examine the case for the use of the theatre arts in the evaluation of UK City of Culture (UKCC) programmes, specifically headphone verbatim.Design/methodology/approachThrough an analysis of secondary evidence, supported by some primary research, this article analyses past and present evaluation practices surrounding UKCC programmes and the case for headphone verbatim to be included as a method of gathering and distributing research data. The article also observes the challenges in how data may be disseminated through verbatim theatre performance practices, given the limited examples of its use in this context.FindingsThe author argues that the theatre arts can provide a different way of knowing and understanding the impacts of UKCC projects on the host city. Specifically, that headphone verbatim can bring an experiential perspective that is rarely if ever captured by existing UKCC evaluation methods and policymaking in general.Originality/valueThis article details an innovative method of evaluating social impacts associated with UKCC projects.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44227612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-24DOI: 10.1108/aam-08-2021-0043
Michael Howcroft
PurposeThis article explores the cultural politics of civic pride through Hull's year as UK City of Culture (UKCoC) in 2017. It unpicks some of the socio-political meanings and values of civic pride in Hull and critiques the ways in which pride, as an indicator of identity and belonging, was mobilised by UKCoC organisers, funders and city leaders. It argues for more nuanced and critical approaches to the consideration and evaluation of pride through cultural mega events (CMEs) that can take account of pride's multiple forms, meanings and temporalities.Design/methodology/approachA multidimensional, mixed methods approach is taken, incorporating the critical analysis of Hull2017 promotional materials and events and original interviews with a range of stakeholders.FindingsThe desire for socio-economic change and renewed identity has dominated Hull's post-industrial sense of self and is often expressed through the language of pride. This article argues that UKCoC organisers, cognisant of this, crafted and tightly controlled a singular pride narrative to create the feeling of change and legitimise the entrepreneurial re-branding of the city. At the same time, UKCoC organisers overlooked the opportunity to engage with and potentially reactivate the political culture of Hull, which like other “left behind” or “structurally disadvantaged” places, is becoming increasingly anti-political.Originality/valueThrough the case study of a relatively unresearched and under-represented city, this paper contributes to cultural policy literatures concerned with critically assessing the benefits and shortcomings of Cultural Mega Events and to a more specific field concerning Cities of Culture and the political cultures of their host cities. This paper also contributes to an emerging literature on the centrality of pride through the UK's post-Brexit Levelling Up agenda, suggesting that pride in place is becoming figured as a “universal theme” of the neoliberal city script.
{"title":"The cultural politics of civic pride through Hull UK City of Culture 2017","authors":"Michael Howcroft","doi":"10.1108/aam-08-2021-0043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aam-08-2021-0043","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis article explores the cultural politics of civic pride through Hull's year as UK City of Culture (UKCoC) in 2017. It unpicks some of the socio-political meanings and values of civic pride in Hull and critiques the ways in which pride, as an indicator of identity and belonging, was mobilised by UKCoC organisers, funders and city leaders. It argues for more nuanced and critical approaches to the consideration and evaluation of pride through cultural mega events (CMEs) that can take account of pride's multiple forms, meanings and temporalities.Design/methodology/approachA multidimensional, mixed methods approach is taken, incorporating the critical analysis of Hull2017 promotional materials and events and original interviews with a range of stakeholders.FindingsThe desire for socio-economic change and renewed identity has dominated Hull's post-industrial sense of self and is often expressed through the language of pride. This article argues that UKCoC organisers, cognisant of this, crafted and tightly controlled a singular pride narrative to create the feeling of change and legitimise the entrepreneurial re-branding of the city. At the same time, UKCoC organisers overlooked the opportunity to engage with and potentially reactivate the political culture of Hull, which like other “left behind” or “structurally disadvantaged” places, is becoming increasingly anti-political.Originality/valueThrough the case study of a relatively unresearched and under-represented city, this paper contributes to cultural policy literatures concerned with critically assessing the benefits and shortcomings of Cultural Mega Events and to a more specific field concerning Cities of Culture and the political cultures of their host cities. This paper also contributes to an emerging literature on the centrality of pride through the UK's post-Brexit Levelling Up agenda, suggesting that pride in place is becoming figured as a “universal theme” of the neoliberal city script.","PeriodicalId":42080,"journal":{"name":"Arts and the Market","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42410971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：