In order to gain a baseline indication of interest levels before engagement, respondents were asked to rate their interest in Stonehenge and the wider landscape prior to using the application. The data discussed below are taken from the 121 questionnaire responses that included an answer to all of the quantitative questions discussed below.
| Interest level | Total response |
|---|---|
| 1-5 | 39% |
| 6-10 | 61% |
Respondents were then asked about the impact of the application on their overall interest in the monument and landscape, and whether this would prompt them to find out more about past societies, and the past in general. The following data include a total response, and for comparison the 1-5 (Group A) and 6-10 (Group B) interest groups as determined by Question 1 above. It should be noted all respondents were given the same questions in the same order regardless of their answer to Question 1.
| Interest level | Total response | Group A | Group B |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-5 | 7% | 11% | 5% |
| 6-10 | 93% | 89% | 95% |
It is clear when comparing the data obtained from Questions 1 and 2 that interaction with Seeing Beneath Stonehenge has had a significant impact on users. Respondents record a substantive rise of over 30% in levels of interest at 6 or more, after having used the application.
In Group A, 91% of respondents recorded an increase in interest with use of the application, with an average increase in score of over 3 points. It could be argued that as these participants originally gave themselves lower scores they therefore had comparatively more of the 1-10 scale to use. However, the jump in response is striking, and also very consistent between users in this group. The remaining few respondents in Group A recorded no change between Questions 1 and 2.
In Group B, 39% of users recorded an increase in interest after using the application, with a lower average of just over 1.5 points each. In comparison with Group A, the main difference is that 47% of these users gave the same value for Questions 1 and 2, with 28% made up of those who gave the maximum score of 10. A small number of users in this group did record a drop in interest (14%), but only by 1-2 points. Examining the free text comments associated with these latter responses, it is interesting to note that they all indicate challenges with technology (see section 4.3).
| Interest level | Total response | Group A | Group B |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-5 | 26% | 23% | 28% |
| 6-10 | 74% | 77% | 72% |
| Interest level | Total response | Group A | Group B |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-5 | 24% | 26% | 23% |
| 6-10 | 76% | 74% | 77% |
The responses to Questions 3 and 4 have a very similar breakdown and indicate minimal variation between the two groups. It is interesting to note that respondents appear to be slightly less interested in these broader subject areas than for the monument and landscape itself.
Finally, respondents were asked how the application might impact on their likelihood of visiting the monument itself. Here the results are very striking, with a marked difference between Groups A and B.
| Answer | Total response | Group A | Group B |
|---|---|---|---|
| No | 22% | 10% | 30% |
| Yes | 88% | 90% | 70% |
A free text box was also provided to gather additional qualitative feedback, and a selection of responses is provided below.
'A great tool for aiding in the understanding of Stonehenge and its landscape.'
Questionnaire Feedback, January 2012.
'...this is an excellent use of technology. Should be a lot more like it.'
Questionnaire Feedback, February 2012.
'I'm not 100% confident/familiar using Google Earth, but the tutorial helped me get my bearings, although it was tricky at first. The best bit(s) for me were all the little pop-up insight boxes into the findings and locations. I feel I learnt a lot more even though I've visited Stonehenge twice in recent years, I learnt a few things I'd not known before. The guided audio was good too. Excellent!'
Questionnaire Feedback, March 2012.