Neuro-Exhibition: How the Method of Art Display Stimulates the Senses? Analysis and Findings from the Conducted Survey
The traditional model of museum exhibitions, based on passive viewing of objects, is increasingly being subjected to critical analysis—both by artists and researchers. Contemporary studies in neuroscience and perception psychology confirm that exhibition conditions play a fundamental role in how we experience works of art.
In this study, I examine the relationship between exhibition design and viewer perception by analyzing the results of a survey conducted among professionals involved in exhibition planning. The study aimed to determine whether exhibition creators take into account research methods related to art reception and to what extent they apply the principles of neuromuseology in their practice.
Are cultural institutions ready for a more sensory and interactive approach to exhibitions? What challenges do designers and curators face when attempting to incorporate neuroscience insights into museum spaces? The answers to these questions will help us better understand the future of exhibition design and the role that a scientific approach to art perception can play in shaping it.
Inspiration for Conducting the Study
El Lissitzky, a 20th-century artist and designer of exhibition spaces in museums in Hanover and Dresden, described the museum space as a “painted coffin for our living bodies.” Paul Valéry, a 20th-century French poet, essayist, and writer, portrayed his state after leaving a museum:
“Sadness, fatigue, admiration, beautiful weather outside, guilt, and the overwhelming presence of great creators walk with me. (…) I leave with a splitting head and unsteady legs.”
Elsewhere, El Lissitzky outlined his vision for an exhibition format that experiments with perception:
“In my exhibition hall, objects should not assault the viewer all at once. While traditionally, viewers were lulled into passivity by merely passing by consecutive paintings, our project will compel activity. This is the intended function of our exhibition. The viewer will be physically forced to interact with the objects on display.”
I reference these quotes because they accurately reflect the relationship between the viewer and the exhibition. Attempts to describe and define this relationship have accompanied art exhibitions since the inception of the museum institution and continue into the 21st century. In 2008, renowned art historian John Onians introduced the concept of neuroart history.
In his 2014 article The Unnoticed and Revolutionary Neurohistory of Art, Łukasz Kędziora explores why Onians’ publication Neuroarthistory: From Aristotle and Pliny to Baxandall and Zeki was almost entirely overlooked by the Polish academic community and why Onians’ project was initially a scientific false start that is only now being understood. The uniqueness of Onians’ work lies in its integration of humanities with natural sciences, demonstrating the potential of interdisciplinary collaboration.
Today, neuroscience is one of the fastest-growing scientific fields, significantly impacting medicine, psychology, and technology. Thanks to its advancements, we are also witnessing significant changes in museum studies—particularly in recognizing the needs of the human body within exhibition spaces.
Preliminary Information on the Conducted Survey
I conducted the survey, aimed at individuals involved in exhibition design, as part of the Designer’s Competence Development in Art Exhibitions and Narrative Displays scholarship program, focused on accessibility, sensory engagement, and sustainability. The program was implemented through specialized courses funded by the European Union. The purpose of the survey was to determine whether exhibition creators recognize the need for and apply research methods related to audience perception in the exhibition design process. The survey was conducted via Google Forms between December 11, 2024, and December 22, 2024.
The participants included curatorial professionals (55.6%), design professionals (33.3%), and artists (11.1%).
Out of nine respondents, 55.5% held a PhD, 33.3% had a master’s degree, and 11.1% were bachelor’s students in progress. More than half completed their education at a university or an art university, 33.3% at the Academy of Fine Arts, and 11.1% at a technical university. Aside from one respondent who studied in Warsaw, Paris, and London, all others completed their studies in Poland.
The largest group of respondents (44.4%) had been involved in exhibition design for 15-20 years, while 22.2% had 5-10 years or 0-5 years of experience, and one person had over 20 years of experience.
Regarding the types of institutions for which the respondents create exhibitions, the most frequently indicated were public institutions (state and municipal) – 88.9%, followed by legal entities (companies, organizations, associations, and foundations) – 66.7%, and private individuals – 22.2%.
In this section of the survey, participants provided single or multiple-choice responses.
All respondents agreed with the statement that the perception of a work of art changes depending on its surroundings, taking into account factors such as space, lighting, color, texture, and sound. However, when asked about the use of cognitive research findings (e.g., perception psychology, neurobiology, emotion studies), more than half of the participants stated that it is a rare practice or never used in their work; 33.3% use such research occasionally or only in selected cases, while just 11.1% apply it regularly.
Among those who declared using neurobiology in perception studies, 22.2% reported a change in their approach to designing exhibition spaces, while 44.4% noted a partial shift in their perspective.
When asked about incorporating a diversity of expressive means and sensory elements as factors influencing the viewer’s emotions, 77.8% of respondents stated that they definitely consider it in their practice, while 22.2% said they sometimes do. Even more agreement was observed regarding the influence of external factors on art perception—88.9% of respondents confirmed that a viewer’s mood, memory, or previous experiences shape their perception of art.
The participants also evaluated which aspects of exhibition design they consider most important from a cognitive and sensory perspective. This is illustrated in the diagram below:
This is reflected in their design practice.
One respondent commented that this largely depends on the client, space, and budget. Despite their personal interest in incorporating sensory techniques, they pointed out financial constraints, which often push such methods to a lower priority.
The majority of respondents acknowledged the importance of considering the interaction between different senses (sight, hearing, touch, smell) when designing a sensory exhibition, but with the caveat that this is highly dependent on the concept of the exhibition.
Similarly, when asked about the application of perception psychology principles (e.g., Gestalt theory, color theory) to guide visitors’ attention to specific elements of the exhibition, 66.7% stated that they use them occasionally, depending on the exhibition’s assumptions; 22% indicated that they rarely apply them, focusing more on aesthetics; while 11.1% stated they never use these principles.
A similar trend was observed regarding the understanding of how the brain processes sensory information in the context of exhibition space design. 66.7% reported that they pay some attention to this aspect, while 22.2% considered it not particularly important, prioritizing aesthetics and artistic concept instead. Only 11.1% found it very important and applied this knowledge at every stage of the design process.
The survey indicates that in the Polish context, exhibition creators do not widely use research techniques to understand how visitors react to exhibitions. Only 44.4% of respondents incorporate interviews and visitor reaction assessments in their practice. This is illustrated in the diagram below:
The final multiple-choice question focused on future plans regarding the use of cognitive research in designing more engaging sensory exhibitions. Nearly half of the survey participants plan to focus on better understanding visitor reactions through research, 22.2% would like to experiment more with interactivity, and 11.1% are considering the use of modern technologies to enhance the visitor experience. Meanwhile, 22% of respondents do not currently have such plans, as they are focusing on other aspects of exhibition design.
Challenges and Future Potential of Neuromuseology in Exhibition Design
At the end of the survey, respondents answered three open-ended questions.
The first question focused on specific cognitive or psychological studies that inspired them in the exhibition design process. Participant 1 highlighted their familiarity with a wide range of literature and their personal interest in the subject due to having children with sensory integration disorders. Participant 2 pointed to studies on the reactions of individuals with various cognitive impairments, while Participant 3 referenced different readings on brain function and perception. Among the responses, notable mentions included Filip Skowron’s article “Attention and Awareness in the Museum”, the Go/No-Go test, and a curator’s insight, emphasizing that these issues are crucial but often rely on designers’ expertise rather than curators’ direct engagement.
The second question aimed to explore challenges in integrating sensory and cognitive elements with traditional exhibition formats (e.g., classical art galleries) and to identify strategies that respondents have developed through their professional experience. Two respondents identified financial constraints as the biggest obstacle. Another respondent pointed out resistance from many professionals who favor traditional exhibition formats, stating:
“In my work, I often encounter a rather conservative mindset that assumes a guide/museum educator + simple display of paintings is enough to engage and interest visitors. Any additional elements are seen as unnecessary complications.”
Additionally, respondents highlighted the difficulty in encouraging curators to explore cognitive and sensory solutions. This responsibility is often shifted to the education department, which rarely collaborates with exhibition designers. As a result, education departments opt for the simplest solutions, primarily catering to children, leaving few interactive elements for adults without disabilities.
One respondent identified the biggest challenge as integrating cognitive and sensory elements with substantive exhibition content, particularly in narrative-based exhibitions that tend to be overloaded with information. They noted:
“I also work with complex and sometimes intricate themes, and the challenge is to translate them into an effective exhibition format without losing depth of meaning.”
Another difficulty mentioned was the tension between exhibition content and visitor experience—curators often prioritize showcasing as much information as possible, neglecting the visitor’s interaction with the space. This is particularly evident in exhibitions with limited space, where an excessive number of objects results in a 19th-century “salon-style” display, leading to passive viewing rather than engagement.
The final question sought to explore how neuromuseology could transform the future of curatorship and exhibition design.
All respondents recognized its potential. Although neuromuseology has not yet been widely appreciated in exhibition planning, there is growing recognition that its application is highly relevant and aligns with the diverse needs of different audiences, particularly in terms of accessibility.
A neuromuseological approach would allow a larger, often excluded, group of neurodivergent individuals to experience exhibitions in a more active and comprehensible way. It could also be beneficial for people with attention difficulties and children.
Some respondents emphasized that exhibitions would become more accessible to visitors without prior artistic or art historical knowledge. If museums aim to educate, they should do so in ways that align with design thinking methodology, focusing on meaningful audience research, proactive education, and innovative approaches to exhibition presentation.
Currently, there is a lack of initiatives in traditional Polish institutions that show promise in this area. Another response highlighted that in traditional museums, this is just the beginning, and it will take a long time before this way of thinking reaches exhibition creators and curators or becomes standard practice.
Several responses emphasized the need for knowledge-sharing and training to integrate audience perspectives into exhibition design from the very start. Support from specialists, training sessions, and lectures for museum professionals and directors should be the first step in implementing these principles.
Research Findings
The analysis of the survey results shows that while exhibition creators recognize the impact of the environment on the perception of artwork, research methods from neurobiology, perception psychology, and emotion studies are still applied in a limited capacity. Practices based on a scientific approach to understanding audience reactions remain the domain of only a few, with aesthetics, budget, and artistic concept being the dominant factors shaping exhibitions.
One of the key challenges in implementing cognitive research in exhibition design is financial constraints and the lack of widespread recognition of its value. There are also difficulties in integrating sensory approaches with the classical curatorial model, which in many institutions is still based on traditional presentation formats. Additionally, there is a clear division of responsibilities—the implementation of engaging and audience-adapted elements is often shifted to education departments, which do not always have the opportunity to collaborate with exhibition designers.
Importantly, the survey results indicate that respondents recognize the potential of neuromuseology and audience-centered design methodologies. There is also a growing awareness of the need to adapt exhibitions to diverse audiences, including people with disabilities and neurodivergent individuals. However, as respondents pointed out, this process is still in its early stages and requires further educational efforts and systemic changes in exhibition design approaches.
Conclusion
Contemporary exhibitions increasingly need to address the challenges of audience diversity and evolving visitor expectations. The survey results indicate that in Poland, the widespread use of perception and sensory research in exhibition design is still lacking. However, awareness of its importance is growing, which may lead to a gradual evolution of curatorial and design practices.
To effectively implement a more engaging, multisensory approach to exhibition design, it is essential to increase access to knowledge about perception psychology, emotion studies, and neurobiology. Equally important is creating a collaborative space between curators, designers, and experts in audience research. These efforts can not only enhance the attractiveness and accessibility of exhibitions but also contribute to a deeper understanding of art by a broader audience.
In the long run, integrating neuromuseology and audience perception research into exhibition design could become a standard practice, making cultural institutions more open, innovative, and accessible to all. However, this process requires further education, research, and a conscious shift in the approach to the role of the viewer in museum spaces.
Piotr Matosek
This text was created as part of the Designer’s Competence Development in Art Exhibitions and Narrative Displays scholarship program, focused on accessibility, sensory engagement, and sustainability, implemented through specialized courses funded by the European Union.
#NextGenerationEU #FunduszeUE #KPOdlaKultury