IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcitxx/v17y2014i6p518-538.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The visitors' perception of authenticity at the museums: archaeology versus modern art

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Gabriel Brida
  • Marta Disegna
  • Raffaele Scuderi

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyse quantitatively the visitors' perception of authenticity in two different types of museums: archaeology versus modern and contemporary art. The research is based on 1288 questionnaires collected from June to September 2011 among the visitors of the South Tyrol Museum of Archaeology (ÖTZI) in Bolzano and the Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art (MART) in Trento-Rovereto. Logit models were used in order to estimate the set of independent variables that significantly influence both the perception of the authenticity and the ‘virtual’ choice between the two types of museums considered. The results suggested that the authenticity perception was related to peculiar authenticity-related factors and by specific socio-demographic characteristics of the interviewee, although some common elements emerge. In particular, ÖTZI authenticity is linked to its uniqueness in the world, whereas MART visitors relate authenticity to the museum's building and the perception that it was not just a tourist attraction. The empirical evidence confirms the well-known concept that authenticity perception is a dynamic experience, depending on the peculiar characteristics of the attraction analysed.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Gabriel Brida & Marta Disegna & Raffaele Scuderi, 2014. "The visitors' perception of authenticity at the museums: archaeology versus modern art," Current Issues in Tourism, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 518-538, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:17:y:2014:i:6:p:518-538
    DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2012.742042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13683500.2012.742042
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13683500.2012.742042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:17:y:2014:i:6:p:518-538. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.