How can art museums develop new

business opportunities? Exploring young

visitors’ experience
Wided Batat

Abstract Wided Batat is based at the

Purpose – So far, most studies in cultural tourism have looked at visitors in relation to the experience Department of Marketing,
itself. This study aims to bring a broader view on what constitutes the daily environment of younger Suliman S. Olayan School
visitors and how museums could use this knowledge to develop a service delivery that is more adapted to of Business, American
their needs without sacrificing the museums’ integrity and authenticity. As such, this research brings a University of Beirut, Beirut,
unique and deeper analysis of young visitor behavior, in relation to arts and cultural practices that could
Lebanon.
be expanded to other areas of tourism experiences.
Design/methodology/approach – The present study examines the main art and cultural tourism
activities among adolescents. Using 32 in-depth interviews with adolescents between 13 and 18 years of
age, this research takes a closer look at their experience and perceptions of art museums and
exhibitions.
Findings – The findings show that adolescents’ perception of arts and exhibitions do not correspond to
museum art criteria held by cultural tourism professionals. Based on the key theoretical themes emerging
from the empirical investigation, a conceptual framework of adolescents’ attitudes toward arts and
exhibitions is now presented to provide insights into the dimensions of adolescents’ art consumption in
today’s western consumer society. Figure 1 provides a graphic model that visualizes adolescents’ art
consumption experiences and summarizes the main findings and marketing implications in the arts field.
Originality/value – Based on these findings, new ways of engaging with adolescents in the field of arts
are suggested to create new business opportunities for the museum. The findings lean toward the
necessity to develop a more youth-centric approach, which differentiates between how adults define art
and what adolescents believe art is supposed to be. Thus, the findings demonstrate that adolescents’ art
consumption experiences are deeply anchored within the context of their social environment and the
value judgments of their peers. The adolescent-centric logic within the arts experiential context is taken
into account to underline the gap existing in many current arts marketing strategies that are targeting
young visitors – and especially adolescents.
Keywords Adolescent, Arts marketing, Museum, Adolescent consumption culture, Cultural tourism,
Arts and exhibitions, Museum experience and perception, Youth subculture, Business
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Arts museums, as an important component of cultural tourism, have been the object of
limited academic attention (Franklin, 2018) despite the importance of art cultural tourism
and its supply via events, museums and other forms of the display to contemporary
societies (Plaza, 2000). Indeed, art museums have an essential role to play in terms of
preserving a society’s culture, as well as communicating its national heritage and identity to
all generations at home and abroad (Bertacchini et al., 2018; Scott, 2009). Most studies
show that the values including the value of a collection, the experience value, the social Received 23 September 2019
Revised 8 December 2019
value, the economic value and the educational value (Weide, 2011; Scott, 2006; Accepted 19 December 2019

DOI 10.1108/YC-09-2019-1049 VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020, pp. 109-131, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1747-3616 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 109
 Black, 2005), and the raison d’être of museums are well acknowledged by society. For
instance, there is fairly widespread awareness among people of the use, value and need to
maintain the existence of museums (Swanson and DeVereaux, 2017; Scott, 2009).
Moreover, art, compared to other museum objects, carries a very positive and strong status
image. For instance, it is often associated with sophistication, high culture and exclusivity
(Hagtvedt and Patrick, 2008). Indeed, research on art museum memberships confirms that
museums hold a strong status symbol in contemporary societies (Navarrete, 2019; Anto
n
et al., 2018; Lo
pez-Sintas et al., 2017; Di Pietro et al., 2015). In a study on museum
membership motivations, Paswan and Troy (2004) indicate that social recognition is a
central element associated with museum membership along with strong connections to
hedonism and art preservation. The tangible benefits related to membership are in fact
minimal for high-end users in their decision to adhere to such a scheme.
Museums are one of the prime institutions to disseminate knowledge about art, culture and
history to the public. Yet, their hegemonic position has gradually been challenged by
various competing forces (Black, 2005). One of the biggest challenges is the gradual
decrease in public support/funding in different countries (Batat and Frochot, 2012; Cox
et al., 1998a, 1998b), which has fuelled an acute necessity to actively seek alternative
funding, especially through admission fees and merchandising (Cox et al., 1998a, 1998b).
Museums also need to consider that they are now competing with a broader spectrum of
cultural and heritage sites, as well as leisure activities including sports, video games,
internet browsing or simply shopping (Giannini and Bowen, 2019).
The sphere of visitor attractions has evolved tremendously over the past two decades.
While art and historical/cultural museums used to be the primary visitor attractions, other
types of attractions have gradually appeared on the market. For instance, science
museums have expanded rapidly because their highly interactive approach to knowledge
transfer has been particularly successful with the public. This approach is also known as
edutainment, a mix of education and entertainment (Makarius, 2017). Thus, three-
dimensional vision, interactive displays, possibilities to appeal to different senses (smell,
taste, touch, etc.) and live interpretation have changed the visitor experience (Firat and
Ulusoy, 2011). This format has been challenged in art museums, where the distance to
paintings and sculptures or the more static presentation of the exhibits has limited the
possibilities for the type of interactions that scientific museums can more easily create: “the
lack of street sounds, the presence of guards, the prohibition against touching, reinforced
through signs, all curtail the tactile and other sensory apprehensions of the artifacts” (Joy
and Sherry, 2003, p. 265).
To remain competitive, museums need to innovate with their services drastically. The ways,
in which museums are conceptualized and disseminate knowledge, have also often been
criticized for being elitist. Thus, re-inventing the museum experience might contribute to
broadening its attractiveness to a wider public. For these various reasons, adopting a
marketing perspective of museums’ provision has become a central issue to ensure their
survival – and also an area that should deserve closer attention from marketers (Butler,
2000; Cox et al., 1998a, 1998b; Kotler and Kotler, 2001).
Taking into consideration these various evolutions, understanding how the art experience is
designed in the twenty-first century and how this can impact the types of visitors attracted to
those sites is essential. By looking at a relatively unexplored market, that of young visitors,
this study aims to bring a unique approach to understanding the experience by integrating
a new aspect, the experience and subculture of the visitors concerned. Therefore, this
research uses the youth subculture theory (YST) developed by Hall and Jefferson (1976) to
explore arts’ experience among adolescents 13-18 years of age during their museum visits.
The YST supports the idea that each youth subculture form represents an element of a code
by which members communicate and differentiate themselves from others.

PAGE 110 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

So far, most studies in cultural tourism have looked at visitors in relation to the experience
itself. This study aims to bring a broader view on what constitutes the daily environment of
younger visitors and how museums could use this knowledge to develop a service delivery
that is more adapted to their needs without sacrificing the museums’ integrity and
authenticity. As such, this research brings a unique and deeper analysis of young visitor
behavior, in relation to arts and cultural practices that could be expanded to other areas of
tourism experiences.

2. Literature review
2.1 Experiencing arts and exhibitions: an important component of cultural tourism
The development of cultural tourism has contributed to positive social and economic
impacts that can be seen through the vitalization of tourism destinations (Boukas, 2012) and
income generation (Silberberg, 1995). Further, cultural tourism offers can be considered as
a source of the mergence of other forms of tourism that are directly or indirectly related to
culture, which is an integral part of tourism experiences. Culture is a complex concept that
is multidimensional and depends on different interpretations and perspectives. Burns
(1999) defines culture as a set of eclectic components encompassing elements such as
religion, values, myths, ideologies, education, language, legal and political frameworks,
economics, technology, material culture, social organization and kinship. While Burn’s
globalized definition of culture considers a variety of elements, which makes its application
in cultural tourism studies difficult, Shaw and Williams (2004) based their research on
Bourdieu’s (1983/1986) works to offer a new definition of culture based on two categories,
namely, “high” and “low” culture. For Shaw and Williams (2004), low culture includes mass
and popular culture and high culture refers to cultural elements that are mostly appreciated
by high social categories and elites (Gray and McGuigan, 1993).
This categorization of culture is important in terms of defining visitors’ motivations, attitudes
and experiences during and after their visits and their profiles and expectations. Thus,
Bourdieu (1965/1991) identified cultural offers such as art museums, classical symphony,
ballet and dance companies, opera, art galleries and live theater as part of high and elite
cultures. This category of culture is then targeting highly educated and elite populations. In
contrast, low culture targets masses through botanical gardens, aquariums, film festivals,
movie theaters, nightlife activities, etc. This categorization of culture has contributed to the
diversification of audiences and visitors, and thus, to the multiplication of thematic museums
(Butler, 2000) with low and high art offers to meet the expectations of different groups of
visitors such as elite, non-elite, elderly, families, youth and so on. Therefore, cultural tourists’
markets may differ according to the cultural tourist product and its high or low category
(Boukas, 2012). As culture is a component of tourism experiences, cultural tourism can be
defined as travel aiming to experience cultural contexts, including landscapes, arts, local
lifestyles, traditions, customs, events, etc., through socialization and inter-cultural
exchanges. This definition emphasizes the idea according to which art consumption and
museum visits are very characteristics of today’s contemporary tourists who travel to
explore and experience other cultures with their own heritage and art cultures either low or
high.
A key element enhancing cultural tourists’ motivations to visit a destination remains the
availability and the diversity of cultural products such as art museums, exhibition galleries,
heritage sites, cultural events and so on offered by the destination (Silberberg, 1995).
Cultural tourism represents an area of significant benefit to high culture including museums
and galleries (Silberberg, 1995). Arts and exhibitions are important sections of cultural
tourism based on tourist motivation to visit a destination, self-cultivate him/herself and
experience new cultures. Scheff and Kotler (1996) argue that museums and galleries have
lost their main purpose to educate visitors and attract new ones. While art and cultural
products have been increased and diversified to meet the needs of low and high cultural

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 111

 tourists, museums and galleries are facing issues in terms of targeting and increasing the
rate of their visitors especially youth and unprivileged populations. Further, today’s
museums and galleries need to rethink their approach and art offers to best fit the
expectations of contemporary cultural tourists who are seeking as follows: new experiences
charged with emotions and symbolism, social interactions and are active within their
museum experiences.
The justification for developing a specific marketing approach for cultural tourism,
especially in art museums is motivated by the specificities of this mode of consumption.
Hirschman and Holbrook (1982) identify the arts as experiential consumption requires a
specific marketing approach. In the experiential consumption line of thoughts, museum
visits are conceptualized as an object-based organization where the experience is
intangible, aesthetic and emotional. Indeed, the majority of studies that looked at the
experience within museums have strongly emphasized the central role of emotions in its
consumption (Goulding, 2000; Joy and Sherry, 2003; McLean, 1994; Prentice et al., 1998;
Scott, 2009; Soren, 2009).
In fact, the whole experience within museums has evolved a great deal over the years. The
interpretation has not only changed the nature of the experience but also museums have
gradually been conceived to provide wider types of experiences than originally offered. For
instance, Lumley (1988) conceives that the purpose of museums now goes well beyond
their role of objects’ displayer. Museums also developed a role of communication and have
created sites where consumers come to communicate with each other, study, eat, meet
people, hold discussions, etc. While the intellectual stimulation and educational component
of these sites remain important, “many attractions consider that visitors come to participate
and interact, rather than simply look at exhibits and read the associated notation” (Bonn
et al., 2007, p. 346).
Globally, several studies have emphasized that, aside from learning, other motivations are
equally important. Sheng and Chen (2012), in a study on five Taiwanese museums, show
that one of the primary dimensions of visitors’ experience was to seek “easiness and fun”
and “historical reminiscence.” However, while older visitors put more emphasis on the latter
dimensions of experience, younger visitors, not surprisingly, expect some form of cultural
entertainment. Prentice et al. (1998) identify that “to be entertained,” “a social family outing”
or simply because they were “on holidays” represented important motivations of museums’
visitors. Kotler and Kotler (2001) also highlight the social dimension of the visit and note that
appreciating the surroundings and the experience itself are important motivations. The
notion of spending an enjoyable time, strolling along with the museum and getting a feel of
the place is also significant characteristics of visitors’ expectations (Kotler and Kotler, 2001;
Miles, 1987). Gil and Brent-Ritchie (2009) summarize these motivations into four
dimensions, namely, the richness of the experience (entertainment and learning),
socializing, specific exhibitions and being on holidays. In addition to visitors’ different
expectations, the design and contents of the displays are also essential to the overall
experience (Screven, 1986). For instance, the concept of atmospherics is one that should
deserve further attention, as it has been identified as a strong constituent of the visitor
experience (Frochot and Hughes, 2000; Bonn et al., 2007; Hede and Thyne, 2010).
Finally, other researchers simply focus on the truly hedonic dimension of museum visits,
where the visit produces a genuine, immediate and actively sought-after aesthetic pleasure
experience (Glynn et al., 1996; Hopkinson and Pujari, 1999; Paswan and Troy, 2004). Some
authors even investigate museum visits as potential transformative experiences (Soren,
2009) and as a translation of the extended self (Chen, 2009). Altogether, these studies
clearly identify that the motivations to visit museums are varied and that different types of
experiences can be sought beyond the primary educational and intellectual expectations.
Indeed, one has to keep in mind that those experiences are hedonic and highly emotional

PAGE 112 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

and museums are not simply associated with knowledge acquisition; they can also provide
sociable experiences.
Surprisingly, relatively few studies have been concerned with non-visitors even though their
attitude offers interesting and valuable insights into museum short-comings. Generally,
leisure participation is constrained by three types of factors, namely, intrapersonal,
interpersonal and structural constraints (Crawford et al., 1991). A fairly replicable set of
constraints exists across activities and these are mostly linked to, namely, activity cost, time
commitment, availability and quality of facilities, social isolation and personal abilities
(Jackson, 2000). Non-visitors usually mention three different types of reasons for their
attitudes toward visiting museums and arts, namely, practical constraints (lack of time, lack
of money, transport costs, problems of access, etc.), educational and emotional constraints
(lack of socialization with museums as children – meaning no visiting habitus as a child –,
incapacity to understand what is shown, perception of class distinction – museums are
perceived as elitist) (Arts Council of Great Britain, 1991). Another study of US visitors
identifies that non-visitors perceive museums as too formal, inaccessible and not allowing
social interactions and active participation (Hood, 1983). Kyle and O’Leary (2006) examine
constraints among North-American museum visitors “– not enjoying –” museum visits and
find that people with lower levels of income and a greater number of children are more likely
to perceive constraints. The whole cultural environment needs to be taken into
consideration. For instance, while it is well-known that museum visitors tend to be of higher
social classes and educational levels, it is also true that museum visits during childhood
play an active role in motivating individuals to visit museums at a later stage in their life. A
study on cultural practices in France clearly shows that museum visiting during childhood
impacts adult visitation of museums as much as social class (INSEE, 2003).
Cited studies (Navarrete, 2019; Anto
n et al., 2018; Lo

pez-Sintas et al., 2017; Di Pietro et al.,
2015; Paswan and Troy, 2004) offer a useful understanding of arts and museum
developments but still fail to provide a broader understanding of the visitor experience of
museums and arts in cultural tourism. Further, understanding adolescent visitors, their
cultural tourism experiences and the reasons behind their lack of interest in museums is
limited. Could it be that younger visitors have a lower interest in the arts? Are museums, in
themselves, sites that do not match adolescents’ expectations? The second part of this
article investigates the specificities of this target audience to understand how they may
differ from other types of visitors. The authors of this research argue that for arts marketing
to be more efficient, the adolescent subculture and cultural tourism experiences need to be
fully understood first. Most existing studies in cultural tourism focus mostly on adult visitors
or families. However, adolescents because of their different perspectives on life, might need
to be treated differently from other visitors. As adolescents are tomorrows’ visitors and
cultural tourists, studying in-depth this specific youth market is important to cultural tourism
scholars and museums to adapt their offers and attract the youth market. Therefore,
targeting youth audiences and growing the necessity for appropriate marketing tools define
the need for understanding adolescent behaviors and experiences in the arts sector.

2.2 Youth cultural tourism: the place of museums in adolescent visits’ experience
Youth tourism is an important form of tourism, as it involves a huge number of young tourists
from different countries and cultures (Batat and Frochot, 2012). Authors who focused on
exploring adolescents’ behaviors take different approaches to defining this group of
consumers (Batat and Tanner, 2019; Batat, 2014; Batat, 2015). Overall, the authors use the
term youth subculture to refer to adolescent subculture, which reflects a social group that is
distinguished by age or generation (Clarke et al., 1976). In cultural studies, the youth
subculture is associated with the works of neo-Marxist theorists in the UK such as Clarke
et al. (1976) and Cohen (1997). These scholars and other theorists of the Birmingham
Center for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) argued that the concept of youth is a

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 113

 cultural and social construction. According to the CCCS theorists, subculture refers to a “set
of social rituals, which underpin the collective identity of individuals they belong to and
define them as a group instead of a mere collection of individuals. They adopt and adapt
material objects – goods and possessions – and reorganize them into distinctive styles,
which express collectivity and become embodied in rituals of relationship, movement and
occasion” (Clarke et al., 1976, p. 47). In other words, in societies with consumption cultures,
adopting styles and norms associated with particular fields of consumption by using
products and brands is considered as important within the socialization process of young
consumers (Tanner and Batat, 2019). Viewing adolescents as part of a consumption
subculture shows that their behaviors are considered as a collective response to dominant
norms (Batat, 2014). According to Clarke et al. (1976), the creation of an adolescent
subculture is a response or – at least a symbolic response – to resolve conflicts with the
dominant “parent culture” or “adult culture” from which youth subcultures emerge.
As culture is one of the main important motivations that explain why young people travel
(Manna and Palumbo, 2018; Shaw and Williams, 2004), cultural tourism including heritage
sites, local cultures and customs, arts, museums, cultural events, etc. have to be
considered by destinations and museums to meet the expectations of youth who seek to
live other cultural experiences. Although there has been some progress in the field of youth
advancement, tourism and culture (Manna and Palumbo, 2018), there is a lack of studies
focusing on young tourists, particularly adolescents in experiencing cultural places and
destinations. The reason for excluding youth and adolescents from the field of cultural
tourism is based on the assumption that cultural activities and destinations have always
been considered as an adult field of consumption. Yet, studies show that young people are
important consumers of culture and there is a need to understand their youth consumption
culture, as their consumption of cultural content, arts and heritage sites is different from
adults (Batat and Frochot, 2012).
Marketing and consumer researchers have paid scant attention to the potential of young
visitors – and in particular adolescents – for arts marketing. Current studies show that young
people have special expectations toward museums’ offerings (Manna and Palumbo, 2018;
Skydsgaard et al., 2016; Brida et al., 2016). For Gofman et al. (2011), leisure and additional
services such as restaurants are important elements that can be used by museums to
attract young people 18-35 years old. Gofman et al. (2011) argue that attracting young
people to attend an exhibition is not an easy task, as marketers have to deal with their
existing preferences regarding youth consumption habits, social pressure and their free
time often being divided between media and internet use. Mason and McCarthy (2006)
explored the relationship between museums and art galleries and their potential audiences
with a particular emphasis on the under-represented cohort of young visitors 16-26 years of
age. These authors find that young people’s ideas of what constitutes modern, relevant art
do not match standard art criteria and that most exhibitions and marketing methods do not
match with their worldview, namely, “clearly, many young people do not feel at home in
art galleries or are inhibited from visiting them by the very way in which these institutions
collect and display art. The aspect of their architecture, exhibition content and design,
atmosphere, programs and advertising contribute to this feeling of exclusion” (Mason and
McCarthy, 2006, p. 28). Thus, young people do not feel comfortable when visiting museums
and cultural sites as they expect negative emotional experiences that might be created
when visiting art and cultural institutions.
In the leisure constraints literature, authors have emphasized some of these barriers by
analyzing the extent to which individuals perceive their leisure participation to be
constrained (Wade, 1985). Jackson (2000) identified three types of constraints that might
keep people away from leisure activities as follows: intrapersonal (psychological conditions
internal to the individual such as personality, attitudes and moods), interpersonal (arise from
social interactions with others) and structural, which results from external conditions within

PAGE 114 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

the environment (cost and few opportunities). Thus, we suggest that for young people, the
main leisure constraints are related to intrapersonal and interpersonal constraints, as they
are interested in leisure activities that match their identity and social practices.
Tentatively, the cited above suggest that there is a huge gap between what art museums
offer and how young visitors perceive these offers. Additional studies from other social
sciences such as tourism, anthropology of art and sociology emphasize this gap and
propose to explore the expectations, behaviors and perceptions of a new emerging target,
which includes young consumers. These studies also explore what strategies museums
and art galleries us to attract young people. Garibaldi (2015) states that digital and internet-
based services can help museums to enhance the engage young visitors’ engagement. In
line with these studies, Manna and Palumbo (2018) examined the ability of museums to
attract young visitors in Italy. The results of their research underline the importance of
designing tailored strategies and integrating digital tools to enhance the attractiveness of
museums among young people. Inter-organizational relationships and ancillary services
were also among the factors that can enhance the interest of your people in museums’ visits
(Manna and Palumbo, 2018). Luke (2002) underlines that museums are particularly
interested in attracting young attendees. Although young visitors constitute an important
target audience for art professionals and marketers, research shows that this generation is
underrepresented among museum visitors (McLean, 1997; Black, 2005).
This might be explained by the different perceptions of art galleries and museums, which
vary among age groups. Caldwell and Coshall (2002) found distinct differences in the
individual’s mental constructs associated with galleries among visitors’ under and over
35 years of age. These authors emphasize the fact that younger visitors may use more
aspects of their experience and youth subculture when evaluating the goodness galleries
while older visitors tended to have fewer criteria. Bartlett and Kelly (2000) studied another
aspect of young visitors, which is the psychological barrier or the threshold fear of young
visitors who do not feel comfortable when entering museums (Fleming, 1999). These
authors show that youth audiences have poor perceptions of museums, which they
consider to be boring, didactic, unapproachable and preoccupied with the past and, thus,
standing in sharp contrast to their general interest in the presence and future. These results
reflect the huge gap existing between the culture of museums and the adolescent youth
subcultures. Figure 1 provides an overview of the gaps existing between the youth
subculture and the arts culture.

Figure 1 Youth subculture vs the culture of arts

Youth Subculture The Culture of Arts

Cool & fun Formal & serious

Transgression Obedience

Digital interaction Non-tech & Distance

Juxtaposition Congruence

Fragmentation Unified

Socialization Desocialization

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 115

 The present study examines the main art and culture consumption habits and experiences
among adolescent youth subculture. The main objective is to understand how adolescent
defines arts and what they believe art consumption and visit experience is supposed to be.

3. Method
The qualitative study conducted by a female researcher trained in ethnography and
qualitative techniques included in-depth interviews (Chrzanowska, 2002) with 32 French
adolescents 13-18 years of age men and women (16 each) were equally represented in the
sample. Adolescents who participated in the study were from both rural and urban areas in
France. Table I shows the profile of the participants.
As Mason and McCarthy (2006) point out, visiting museums is not only related to class
culture but also to age culture, the selected purposive sample is relevant and suitable for
exploring the key habitus of visiting museums among this age cohort. In doing so, we argue
that adolescents have their own conception of art, a symbolic culture that finds expression
in alternative images, music or fashion that is not reflected in the official art world (Mason
and McCarthy, 2006). Adolescents recruited for the study came from different social
backgrounds. They were recruited through the researcher’s social and familial connections,
who had received formal consent from the parents to conduct these interviews. To minimize
the coercion related to the researcher’s social and family connection with adolescents, the

Table I Participants’ profiles

Participants Age Gender SES Location

Participant 1 13 Male High Urban

Participant 2 16 Female Middle Rural
Participant 3 14 Male Low Urban
Participant 4 17 Female High Rural
Participant 5 15 Male Middle Urban
Participant 6 18 Female Low Rural
Participant 7 13 Male High Urban
Participant 8 16 Female Middle Rural
Participant 9 15 Male Low Urban
Participant 10 18 Female High Rural
Participant 11 14 Male Middle Urban
Participant 12 17 Female Low Rural
Participant 13 13 Male High Urban
Participant 14 16 Female Middle Rural
Participant 15 14 Male Low Urban
Participant 16 17 Female High Rural
Participant 17 18 Male Middle Urban
Participant 18 15 Female Low Rural
Participant 19 15 Male Middle Urban
Participant 20 18 Female Middle Rural
Participant 21 13 Female Middle Rural
Participant 22 16 Male Low Urban
Participant 23 14 Female High Rural
Participant 24 17 Male Middle Urban
Participant 25 15 Female Low Rural
Participant 26 18 Male High Urban
Participant 27 14 Female Middle Rural
Participant 28 15 Male Low Urban
Participant 29 16 Female High Rural
Participant 30 12 Male Middle Urban
Participant 31 13 Female Low Rural
Participant 32 14 Male Middle Urban

PAGE 116 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

researcher asked two colleagues experts in the field of youth studies to conduct additional
informal interviews and ask the same questions she asked participants.
The researcher followed the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
guidelines for ethical research with children provided by the international research
committee, which approved the process. The study was conducted from October to
November 2012. The principle author/researcher who has a strong research background on
youth and was knowledgeable in conducting research with adolescents led all interviews,
which took place in a classroom at the university and a conference room at the library. Each
interview gathered the interviewer and the participants without any other person and pasted
between 1-2 h.
Interviewees were informed that the purpose of the study was to investigate youth leisure
activities and cultural tourism practices to understand how adolescents perceive art
museums and gallery exhibitions within their cultural tourism experiences. Each interview
began with a question asking the participants to “tell us about what they do during their free
time on weekends, holidays, after work and so forth.” The interview guide was divided into
three parts. The objective of the first part was to explore adolescents’ cultural activities and
leisure practices. The second part focused on their perceptions of their art galleries
and museum visits within their tourism experiences. The last part was projective and
encouraged participants to give museum professionals and marketers recommendations
and suggestions to meet the needs and expectations of adolescents regarding the
promotion of cultural tourism and arts to attract young visitors. The participants were
promised anonymity and no remuneration was provided in return for their participation.
However, they were offered beverages and biscuits to create a friendly and comfortable
environment for them. Each interview was conducted by the principle researcher, who also
videotaped and transcribed the entire data set. Videotaping the interviews allowed the
researcher to keep the focus on the interactions with adolescents. It also allowed her to
collect additional visual data and facial expressions to embed the discourse within the
context in which the conversation took place. The data saturation was achieved when the
researcher started to notice redundancy in the data collected and no additional new
information have been obtained. Data collected from each participant included both
general information about their leisure activities, the way they spend their spare time and
their consumption practices, as well as specific data related to their visits to museums and
art galleries, music, sports, family activities and their perceptions of traditional (high brow)
and popular (low brow) cultures.
An interpretive analysis of the collected data was conducted to explore how adolescents
perceive exhibitions and art galleries. Before coding the data, we explicated, explained and
explored the narratives in the transcription following a hermeneutic triad (Czarniawska,
2004). The principle researcher who conducted the field accomplished the coding of the
data through an iterative process going back and forth between the theory and the field.
Also, to manage the differences, two other researchers conducted a paralleled coding to
make sure the categories defined are consistent. First, an intratextual analysis was
conducted to understand each adolescent’s perceptions. Some of the conceptual
categories used include the cultural and artistic activities of adolescents, the perceptions
and the experience of art galleries and museum exhibitions and their definition of the ideal
exhibition in line with their own youth subcultures. Next, an intertextual analysis was
conducted through the comparison of conceptual similarities and differences among the
sample composed of 32 adolescents. This approach allowed us to identify emergent
themes and define the main features of adolescent art subcultures. During this phase, an
iterative hermeneutical approach of shifting back to the narratives and literature allows us to
identify evidence and establish a coherent adolescent art-experience interface.
Throughout the iterative process of analyzing and generating the main key drivers, the
primary data were used to challenge and enrich the evolving framework and ensure the

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 117

 accuracy of the findings (Thompson, 1997). By drawing on Thompson’s work, we analyzed
the data from both adolescents’ perspectives by decoding the meaning behind words and
embedding the merging themes related to adolescents’ perceptions of museums and arts
within a particular social-cultural setting. In so doing, we applied five main iterative
techniques recommended by Kekeya (2016) to generate meanings from the qualitative data
and enhance our understanding of the phenomenon being explored. The five iterative
techniques we followed in this study include as follows: data organization, generation of unit
meanings, construction of categories, developing themes and writing the theory. All the
names that appear in this research are pseudonyms, followed by the informants’ age.

4. Findings
4.1 Leisure culture vs art culture: an adolescent perspective
Unsurprisingly, the data show that adolescents have more time and less responsibility than
adults. They spend their free time “hanging out” with their friends, shopping and surfing
online (90 per cent of the adolescents interviewed have a Facebook account and 70 per
cent of them use it several times a day, compared to 30 per cent who use it once a week).
They also expressed their desire to stay alone without doing anything. These teenagers
distinguish between social and individual activities, but they can practice both activities at
the same time. This paradoxical behavior can be explained through the use of the internet
on their cell phones while they are with their friends as follows: “you know, sometimes I just
prefer to stay with my mates and we do fun things, and sometimes I prefer to stay by myself
on my computer and chat with friends on Facebook. But I can also do both, I mean to be
with my friends and chat with other friends on my iPhone, so I am at the same time alone
and with my friends, you see what I mean, I find it cool” (Sarah, 13).
The notion of a peer group is very important to adolescents, who tend to have a preference
for activities consumed socially such as cinema and sport. They go to the cinema twice a
month and they choose the film based on the actors, critical reviews or the suggestions of
their social group as follows: “I can go to Disneyland in Paris with my parents and my
brother, but for cinema, I prefer to go with my friends” (Capucine, 16). Although they prefer
to share their free time with their friends, adolescents also spend time with their families
(parents, brothers and sisters) as follows: “I also spend a lot of time with my family and my
brother, we do fun things, family type activities” (Antoine, 16).
Other leisure activities and cultural practices such as reading, playing a musical instrument,
theater and cooking, have been mentioned by adolescents – especially girls. However, they
are not very popular choices within this age group. The social background of this group of
adolescents 13-18 years of age does not impact on their choices and the type of activities
they practice in their free time. However, going to concerts and festivals depends on the
profession and the social class of the adolescents’ parents. Adolescents attend
international festivals if their parents can afford it and keep their pocket money (average of
e50 per month), to see their idols performing in concert as follows: “it depends on whether
my parents can give me money for a concert or not. Otherwise, I save my pocket money, as
I am a Rihanna fan and I am impatiently expecting her concert” (Susan, 15). Museum visits
are not popular among this age group. Adolescents may attend art museums and
exhibitions when they are school visits with their teachers. The main objective of these visits
is to teach adolescents the history of art civilization and art exhibitions as follows: “I am not
really interested in museums and exhibitions. It’s not my cup of tea. We do that at school
and I find that terribly boring. But it’s obligatory, since it’s part of my classes. So, I don’t
have a choice. It’s work, not really leisure” (David, 17).
To sum up, adolescents spend their free time with their friends on and offline and essentially
use it for shopping, cinema and sport. Leisure activities such as reading, playing a musical
instrument or cooking are marginalized among French adolescents and depend on their

PAGE 118 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

family’s social background and the parenting style. Regarding art activities, adolescents
perceive museum visits as a part of their homework and not as leisure time.

4.2 Adolescents’ experience of high culture: the case of arts and exhibitions
When asked to give names of artists they know, the adolescents listed a variety of names
that can be considered from an adult perspective as a non-art culture. Gintz (1979) defines
the non-art culture as an exploration of the opposite lane of arts. Thus, the paintings may
incorporate unexpected non-artistic elements like the example of Andy Warhol (Kerrigan
et al., 2011) paintings in the 1960s when appropriated images from industry techniques,
commercial art and popular culture, which has contributed to today’s high art. Furthermore,
individuals, who belong to non-art contexts such as sport or industry, might represent it.
It becomes apparent that adolescents tend to define artists according to their own
perception of what art culture is or should all be about from a youth perspective. Five
categories of artists are identified. The first category of artists represents musicians. This
category includes names of French and international singers, as well as Japanese
underground singers: “for me, those that I really consider as artists are Michael Jackson,
who is an international and intergenerational icon, some American and British, such as
James Blunt, Muse, Akon, Shakira, Rihanna, Nirvana, our national Johnny (Johnny
Haliday) – an intergenerational French icon - and also Grégoire (an artist produced by people
online, who invested money into his album to help him recording it back in 2008. It’s an online
phenomenon, which has become very popular among adolescents).” (Thomas, 15).
The second category represents the artists, who are painters. The most cited among French
adolescents is Picasso. This category includes other popular painters: “I can give you
names of painters such as Van Gogh, Monet, Dali and Michelangelo” (François, 16). Most of
the names mentioned by the adolescents are taught at school. This category is followed by
a third group of artists that consists of writers. The names of writers given by the French
adolescents are as follows: Shakespeare, Hugo, Zola and Proust. These writers and
novelists are a part of the mainstream French culture and are taught in French high schools.
The fourth category of artists includes film actors. The names given by adolescents refer to
intergenerational American actors and young actors alike as follows: “there are actors such
as Clint Eastwood, Brad Pitt, Will Smith, Ashton Kutcher, Jessica Alba, Eva Longoria, I saw
her in Desperate Housewives” (Angélique, 16). The last category of artists defined by
adolescents is composed of footballers and humorists. “For me, the most popular footballer
is Zidane (an international and intergenerational French-Algerian football star) and there is
also Gourcuff and Lissandro (local young footballers of Olympic Lyonnais). The comedians
are also artists, such as Gad Elmaleh. And, of course, there is Mozart.” (Simon, 17).
These five categories of artists represent the way today’s adolescents perceive art culture
and artists within the framework of their own youth subculture. The definition of art culture is
hybrid and reflects a juxtaposition of different opposite values (e.g. footballers and
composers are both perceived as artists). The adolescent’s definition of arts is then
fragmented and ambivalent. It also differs substantially from adults’ definition, which is
based on a more traditional view of art culture. For adults and museum professional’s art
culture is the product of human being activities addressing three aspects, namely, sense,
emotion and intellect (French Larousse Dictionary, 2012). Thus, museum professionals
define art culture as a high-brow art (Bourdieu, 1965/1991; Bourdieu et al., 1969/1990),
which should be both aesthetic and intellectual. The main purpose of this kind of arts is to
target high-brow art audiences (e.g. professors, artists, lawyers or doctors). Art objects are
then recognized as such by the group of individuals (Mauss, 1971), who have a high
cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1983/1986) and share the same perceptions, values, norms and
codes. Therefore, the way museums define and conceive art offerings does not match
adolescents’ interests and values.

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 119

 The data show that French teenagers do not often visit museums. The rare visits they have
done were either with their parents or their teachers and were considered as part of their
curriculum. “Yes, I rarely go to the museum and it is often within the framework of my school
activities, or sometimes with my parents” (Charlotte, 16). Thus, well-educated parents
(doctors, professors, lawyers [. . .]) are influential social agents, who push their children to
educate themselves by practicing cultural activities such as reading novels, visiting
museums and attending exhibitions. The majority of adolescents, however, consider this
activity as an obligatory task that they must do to satisfy the expectations of their parents
and teachers. “I don’t go to museums because it gives me headaches! I am weird, am I
not?” (Sophie, 13).
On the other hand, some of the interviewed adolescents mentioned that they could make a
decision on their own to visit museums if the exhibition theme or the artist matched their
personal interests. “I go to the museum if the exhibition fits my interests, that I don’t stay
locked in my own bubble, you see!” (Charlotte, 16). The reason why adolescents do not visit
museums might be their ignorance with regard to art culture. The data reveal that
adolescents do not have an adequate framework to understand the tacit and explicit
dimensions expressed by the artist as follows: “one day I’ve attended an exhibition in Lyon
by an artist called Ben. I found it good; but I did not have a clue about the purpose of his art
or the message he tried to communicate. I guess the guy is really mad, he’s so ‘spacy’ and
his art is some kind of bizarre messages written on blackboards” (Ludo, 13).
To sum up, adolescents’ attitudes toward art museums and exhibition galleries may be
divided in two types, namely, enthusiasm and reticence. Enthusiastic adolescents – both
male and female – were opened-minded and motivated to learn more about arts and
exhibitions. For these adolescents, art is seen as accessible to those young audiences, who
are able to feel very close to their favorite artist’s universe – especially in relation to
contemporary and urban arts.
Therefore, adolescents do not perceive contemporary exhibitions as representations of
traditional art dominated by adult values, but as an extension of their own identity and a way
to express themselves through the symbolic meanings expressed by the artist.
The second profile represents reticent adolescents, who perceive art culture as boring and
expressed their rejection of exhibitions and art culture in general. Both male and female
adolescents criticized the world of art and gallery exhibitions and were proud to show their
lack of interest and their lack of knowledge about art culture because it is not perceived as
a valuable activity within their peer groups.

4.3 Bottom-up approach to match adolescents’ art and exhibition expectations:

toward business opportunities for museums
The main obstacles that keep adolescents away from art museums and exhibitions are as
follows:
䊏 their budget; and
䊏 their lack of art knowledge: “I don’t go to museums because it’s expensive.
Furthermore, I don’t understand anything, it’s far too complicated for me” (Antony, 15).
The gender comparison shows that women are far more curious and enthusiastic than men
(about 70 per cent of the female portion) to learn about arts. “I am very keen. I like it! But my
boyfriend does not like it at all, it does his head in” (Jessica, 18). The low level of art
knowledge expressed by adolescents is also an obstacle because they perceive arts as
being part of an adult culture that they must overcome and keep away from their
consumption and leisure practices. For these adolescents, art exhibitions are boring and do
not match their personal “youth interests.”

PAGE 120 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

Although some efforts have been made to promote art exhibitions through social networks
such as Facebook to reach adolescents, the data reveal that about 80 per cent of the
informants did not know about the existence of such Facebook pages: “you have just given
me the information, I did not know it existed – even though I am constantly on Facebook”
(Alain, 15). The data show that adolescent subculture is based on certain common features,
where “having fun” is at the heart of their art consumption experiences. “There should be
more fun! You see what I mean?” (Ludo, 13). Thus, art exhibitions and communication
policies should take into account how this specific age group perceives and experiences
arts and their exhibitions in museums or galleries. Issues such as ethical engagement,
interactivity, youth-centric approach, originality and adolescent themes might be highly
relevant approaches in reaching and “seducing” adolescents and even in encouraging
them to buy art souvenirs if they feel emotionally touched by their art experiences.
These findings follow the logic of previous research on young people and students’ art
expectations. Authors such as Griffin (2004) and Gilmore and Rentscheler (2002)
suggested that museums should innovate and pay more attention to the opinions and
preferences of students. Interactivity and co-construction might also increase young
people’s interest in attending them (Anderson and Lucas, 1997; Goulding, 2000).
Hornecker and Stifter (2006) found that the elaboration of digitally augmented exhibitions
could lead young visitors to attend them in groups. Food is also considered as a crucial
factor enhancing young people’s involvement within museum experiences (McIntyre, 2008).
While young visitors are interested in socialization as part of their consumption experiences,
social interactions might also be taken into account by museums (Hooper-Greenhill, 1999;
Thyne, 2001).

5. Discussion and implications

5.1 Adolescent-centric approach to art museums in cultural tourism: a conceptual
framework
Based on the key theoretical themes emerging from the empirical investigation, a
conceptual framework of adolescents’ attitudes toward arts and exhibitions is now
presented to provide insights into the dimensions of adolescents’ art consumption in today’s
western consumer society. Figure 2 provides a graphic model that visualizes adolescents’
art consumption experiences and summarizes the main findings and marketing implications
in the arts field.
The findings lean toward the necessity to develop a more youth-centric approach, which
differentiates between how adults define art and what adolescents believe art is supposed
to be. Thus, the findings demonstrate that adolescents’ art consumption experiences are
deeply anchored within the context of their social environment and the value judgments of
their peers. The adolescent-centric logic within the arts experiential context is taken into
account to underline the gap existing in many current arts marketing strategies that are
targeting young visitors – and especially adolescents.
Figure 2 captures the multiplicity of meanings associated with the adolescent-centric
perception of arts and exhibitions. This approach provides a new challenge for marketing
and tourism researchers because it calls for a new orientation in the field of arts marketing.
The adolescent perception of arts is thereby identified as a dimension embedded within the
youth subculture that is shaped by a consumer society in which arts’ experience is
dominated by adult culture and a marketing approach based on those adult’s expectations.
In the conceptual adolescent art-perception framework, arts’ experience appears to be
based on a personal definition that is tied to adolescents’ perceptions characterized by the
main features of an adolescent subculture that emerged from the data analysis. These are
as follows:

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 121

 Figure 2 Adolescent art-experience framework

Adolescent consumption subculture

Socialization Digital
and belonging
belongi
g ng
g landscape
landscappe

Youth art-marketing approach

Adolescent’s
Ad l perception of artt and
d
- Viral communication exhibitions
- n
Juxtaposition and fragmentation
- Adolescent subculture focus - Boring activities
- Co-creation orientation - A part of adult’s
adu culture
d lt’s cultur
t e
- From indoors to outdoors - Non-tech oriented
- Art culture desacralization - consumption
Elitist consump
m tion practices
- Art digital devices - Obligation and duty
d ty
du
- Non-adolescent focus

Interaction and Fun and

collaboration consump
mption
consumption

䊏 the digital landscape in which today’s adolescents live in (Prensky, 2006);

䊏 the hedonistic element of adolescent consumption practices (Batat and Tanner, 2019;
Batat, 2014; Batat, 2008);
䊏 the socialization process and peer group belonging (Roedder-John, 1999); and
䊏 the interaction and collaboration with suppliers (Vargo and Lusch, 2008).
These main characteristics of the adolescent subculture lead us to go beyond the adult
definition of what arts experience is or what it should be all about. Following this
perspective, the conceptual adolescent art-perception framework provides an
understanding of explicit and implicit dimensions of the art consumption features as
perceived by adolescents 13-18 years of age. Thus, the results in Figure 2 show that
adolescent perceptions of arts and exhibitions might be classified into six main themes as
follows:

1. Arts and exhibitions are perceived as boring activities.

2. Arts and exhibitions are an element of adult culture.

3. Arts and exhibitions are not-type of technology-oriented consumption.

4. Arts and exhibitions are perceived as elitist consumption practices.

5. Arts and exhibitions do not take adolescent interest into account.

6. Arts and exhibitions are obligatory activities imposed by adults.

The results highlight the fact that adolescents 13-18 years of age view arts and exhibitions
as boring, which does not match the hedonistic desires of their youth consumption
subculture. This finding supports the works of Mason and McCarthy (2006) and Bartlett and
Kelly (2000), who have reported that youth audiences have poor perceptions of museums,
which they see as boring, didactic, unapproachable and preoccupied with the past.
Likewise, the results of this study are consistent with Manna and Palumbo’s (2018) research
that state young consumers have specific needs and museums should approach them in a
different way than adults. This finding also corroborates studies conducted on non-visitors

PAGE 122 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

who identified similar motives for not visiting museums (Hood, 1983). In addition to the
boring side of arts, adolescents perceive museums and exhibition galleries as a part of
adult culture, which does not match the interests of their age group. As argued by Willis
(1981), youth culture is a way of life for its members, which develops in opposition to
institutional and/or adult culture. Therefore, adolescents see art as a domain that is special,
remote and institutional and, hence, as something that exists apart from their common,
everyday culture (Willis, 1990).
This research stresses the fact that the adolescents interviewed tend to develop coping
mechanisms to resist the mainstream adults’ culture. Thus, they prefer to resist and to reject
art culture because of its adult symbol and content. Therefore, they adopt a youth
consumption culture based on fun consumption by engaging in leisure activities that
exclude and ban art culture and exhibitions completely.
The third key theme we have identified through the empirical investigation is that
adolescents perceive arts and exhibitions as non-technologically-oriented activities. Our
results contribute to Garibaldi’s (2015) research on the use of digital tools in developing
museums’ offerings targeting young people. In fact, the digital landscape of today’s
adolescents, who are often portrayed as digital natives, stands in sharp contrast to that of
adults, who are defined as digital immigrants (Prensky, 2006), as adolescents 13-18 years
of age tend to be strongly immersed within a multimedia consumption context. Hence,
adolescents tend to privilege interactive leisure activities (video games, internet, cinema,
etc.) over traditional cultural activities such as arts and exhibitions. Thus, they develop a
kind of anti-art culture that, based on their habit of using digital devices in virtually all of their
leisure activities (Batat, 2008), promotes the inherent expectation that multimedia devices
should be integrated into all the consumption domains – including the arts and exhibitions.
While other types of museums have increasingly incorporated a number of digital devices
into their offering, most art museums have not heavily invested in digital devices. A form of
conservatism from museum curators seems to have limited the use of those technologies in
the specific context of art. However, the inherent nature of the arts provides some significant
obstacles that prevent art museums from using some of the digital devices that are common
at other types of museums (Joy and Sherry, 2003). Therefore, the problem in itself is not
only the perception of art, teenagers’ non-attendance to museums but also linked to the way
art is presented and the mediums used to give that information. The lack of interactive and
technology-based interpretation within museums is also even more visible in French
museums than in American museums where edutainment is more present.
The fourth key theme shows that adolescents perceive art culture and exhibitions as “elitist.”
For adolescents, there are internal barriers to engaging with arts that require them to
concentrate and understand the tacit and the explicit aspect of exhibitions. Often, young
people – and especially adolescents – have not the energy and adequate arts knowledge to
engage fully with exhibitions in galleries and museums. This leads to the fifth key theme,
which points to the dissonance between the culture of museums and the culture and identity
of young people. Indeed, adolescents construct their own art culture with a focus on pop
cultures such as hip-hop, graffiti and/or urban arts, which stands in contrast to the formal
types of art in galleries and museums that disregard their artistic universe and youth
subculture. This perception of elitism is also experienced by other visitors; even some
adults feel that it is difficult for them to mentally access art in the way it is currently
presented in museums (Hood, 1983; Arts Council of Great Britain, 1991; Prentice et al.,
1998). However, it is interesting to note that adult visitors represent different segments, an
important one of which perceives museums as an entertaining leisure experience where you
can socialize and relax (Bonn et al., 2007; Gil and Brent-Ritchie, 2009; Kotler and Kotler,
2001; Lumley, 1988; Prentice et al., 1998; Sheng and Chen, 2012). This information further
highlights the gap that exists between young visitors and art museums. For adolescents, art

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 123

 museums are clearly not seen as a place that can have any other purpose than formal/adult
education.
The sixth key theme related to adolescents’ perceptions of arts and exhibitions shows that
these activities are regarded as an obligation that adults impose onto their children and
teachers onto their students. As most public art galleries and museums in France are
regarded as an important aspect of education, they have a hostile image among
adolescents. As a result, young people may accept that visiting a gallery would be
beneficial to them, but they do not consider it as a pleasure. To them, museums’ visits
represent duty and a rule imposed by parents, who want their children to be culturally
educated and by teachers, who follow the school curriculum. Again, this is also reinforced
by the way museums are managed and marketed in France; they are not “user-friendly”
when it comes to teenagers.
The presented perspective highlights once more the gap in the marketing literature that
exists between the arts’ experience of adults and the arts’ subcultures of adolescents. In
fact, the perception of arts and exhibitions is closely tied to the identity and subculture of
adolescents. The presented framework, subsequently, supports the idea of immersion into
the respective youth subculture as an essential research strategy to gain a deeper
understanding of adolescents’ perception of arts, which is expressed in their own words
and within the context of their own consumer subculture. In doing so, the arts’ experience is
understood as a subjective and flexible notion, which cannot be reduced to the
professionals’ definition or even the key six themes identified in this research. Indeed, these
ideas proposed by the conceptual adolescent art-perception framework might change the
way researchers are studying arts’ experience among youth groups and have several
implications for marketers targeting young visitors and tourists in the field of arts.

5.2 Implications and future research

The conceptual adolescent art-perception framework identifies a set of targeting
approaches that marketers and art professionals can apply to reach the youth market. In
doing so, the results of this exploratory study suggest a bottom-up strategy from a youth
perspective based on a dual policy. This approach is based on a deeper understanding of
adolescents’ consumption subculture and their perception of exhibitions and art culture. To
match adolescents’ expectations in terms of art and exhibition offers, museums should
carefully consider the following points for their marketing policy, as shown in Figure 2, as
follows: a viral communication policy, art offers based on the particular interests of
adolescent subcultures (e.g. street and graffiti arts), considering the co-creation of arts with
adolescents, mixing digital devices with art exhibitions, juxtaposing and fragmenting art
exhibitions, changing spots: from indoor to outdoor exhibitions, desacralizing art culture
and make it fun and accessible for various audiences, integrate a new dimension to the
visitor experience, namely, live performances, (e.g. visits guided by comedians or artists),
capture adolescents’ imagination by creating special evenings and/or specific museums
dedicated to them – even on a temporary basis, organize special exhibitions comparing, for
instance, urban art to more traditional forms of paintings, etc.
Museums and art professionals should pay very close attention to adolescents and their
inherent needs by placing them at the heart of their service offerings. This might be applied
through an interactive art where adolescents can participate and co-create the art offers
with museums. The co-creation (Vargo and Lusch, 2008) of arts by adolescents might be
achieved by involving them directly to the creation of the project (e.g. drawing, sculpturing,
painting or filming) or indirectly by voting and giving ideas and recommendations regarding
a specific theme. The participation of adolescents in the co-creation process of museums
does not destroy arts but it enriches it by incorporating new and fresh ideas. In the movie
industry, film directors and screenwriters such as the French Luc Besson and the American
Spielberg have popularized this practice by asking people to vote online and give their

PAGE 124 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

ideas, as well as send videos about their own daily lives to make films. The content of these
films will incorporate the individuals’ stories and scripts. It is also the case in the music
industry when one of the artists asked the people online to create the cover of his album or
participate in the video clip. Furthermore, some of the novelists asked their readers to co-
create the novel by writing the end of the story. Therefore, involving adolescents in the co-
creation of arts is the main key to participatory culture. In this case, the use of
crowdsourcing (Bayus, 2010) would help museum professionals to develop original arts
that match adolescents’ interests.
Indeed, the main feature that characterizes adolescent consumption subculture is the re-
appropriation of offers to create a new meaning of products and/or services, which matches
adolescents’ symbolic and tangible needs. Thus, adolescents would customize museum’
offers by adding elements from their own youth subculture. This could be integrated into
their school program, which downsizes the formal side of museum visits that they despise.
As adolescents are born in a digital landscape, where internet and cell phones are an
integral part of their daily lives, the viral communication with adolescents interest focus is an
efficient tool for museums and art marketers to target them through online social networks
such as Facebook and Twitter. These online networks are indeed very popular among
today’s adolescents, who spend more than 6 h a day online (Tapscott, 1998) and
multitasking (Bardhi et al., 2010) by using different technological devices (iPhone, iPad and
laptop). In addition, viral communication efforts aimed at adolescents must integrate a
“cool” and a fun dimension to capture their interest in art exhibitions. This kind of message
can be accepted and easily memorized by adolescents, as they do not feel being
manipulated by adults’ rules and agendas. Therefore, they are more willing to engage with
the presented art exhibitions because they fit with their youth subculture. In this prospect,
museums need to communicate directly with adolescents by integrating their consumption
subcultures’ features and adopt an offbeat humor style. This type of communication, which
addresses and incorporates relevant facets of the youth subculture, is an effective way for
art professionals and marketers to get the attention of adolescents.
For young visitors, there is not one art culture but a variety of arts especially those co-
created by adolescents. In the arts field, this can be realized by using digital devices as an
integral part of art exhibitions. Because adolescents are digital natives, they expect the
presence of multimedia devices in all consumption domains – including the arts. An
example of a digital art exhibition of paintings on iPads, which has been held in Paris, shows
that young visitors can interact and touch the screens and even change the painting on
each iPad. This example emphasizes the fact that art culture should take benefit from digital
devices and the internet and use them as a support for artistic creativity to match
adolescents’ exhibition expectations.
This article points out that today’s adolescents adhere to certain common art consumption
features, which reflect a paradoxical behavior (Decrop, 2008) within digital and interactive
western societies (Batat,2014, 2011). In this sense, the findings of this study suggest that
museums and art professionals may target adolescents through mixed and juxtaposed art
offerings that combine opposing elements. The paradoxical behavior of adolescents
suggests that today’s art museums and galleries need to juxtapose different opposite
values within their art exhibitions to reach adolescents. Therefore, combinations such as
popular/common and elitist, virtual and real, traditional and contemporary, nostalgic and
futuristic, youth culture and adult, information and fun, education and entertainment,
marketing/commerce and art, artists and marketers, isolation and socialization,
individualism and collectivism, nomadic and sedentary, indoors and outdoors are all
important elements to match the expectations of the paradoxical postmodern adolescent
especially in the field of arts’ experience, where offers still follow a traditional and global
policy based on adults’ expectations. Also, museums can integrate the sustainability aspect
and ecological issues as part of their museums’ offerings that can be used both to attract

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 125

 young people and raise their awareness about responsible behaviors (Batat and Tanner,
2019).
These propositions may contribute to the desacralization of art culture and make it
accessible to a larger and younger audience. A strategy based on the shift from indoor to
outdoor exhibitions by bringing museums to consumption temples such as malls or subway
stations, for example, is also a good way to change the elitist image of art culture and
exhibitions. This process should be based on interaction and consumer participation where
arts are everywhere and take different forms. Finally, if curators might not be favorable to
the introduction of new technology within museums, they might be interested in mobile
devices that can be suitably designed for specific audiences. For instance, Smartphone
applications could provide a very interesting tool to provide targeted information matched to
the youth market. The smartphones’ applications could provide a presentation of artworks
respecting the youth subculture language codes and could add information about the
painter life (thereby demystifying the formal side of museums), show-specific details using
augmented reality functions and display comments left by other visitors (of the same age),
which could bring an interactive dimension within the same community of customers.
The smartphone applications could provide a presentation of artworks while respecting the
youth subculture’s language codes and could add information about the artist’s life (thereby
demystifying the formal side of museums), show-specific details using augmented reality
functions and display comments left by other visitors (of the same age), which could bring
an interactive dimension within the same community of customers. In this regard, the
adolescent art-perception framework suggests that museum and art professionals have to
develop a youth-centric approach based on adolescent consumption subcultures and his
perception of arts to match the art expectations of this new emerging target. In terms of
academic implications, the results of this study provide a useful perspective for marketing
and consumer researchers in the arts field. This research contributes to the understanding
of adolescent perceptions of art museums and exhibition galleries from a youth perspective.
The findings of this research support a small but growing body of research that extends the
works of Manna and Palumbo (2018), Skydsgaard et al. (2016), Brida et al. (2016), Gofman
et al. (2011) and Mason and McCarthy (2006) on an important audience, which is
sometimes overlooked. This research also follows the YST (Hall and Jefferson, 1976;
Hebdige, 2007/1979) developed by CCCS, which considers each youth subculture form as
a part of a code by which the members communicate. In this sense, arts are an integral part
of young visitors’ socialization process, which contributes to the creation of their identities
according to the norms of their tribes within their own consumption subculture. This
supports the idea of art perception heterogeneities between adolescents and adults.

6. Conclusion
Despite the study’s limitation to one context where art museums and exhibition galleries
perception relates to a typical French culture and lifestyle, this research represents a
western context and is the first one to study the perception of arts and exhibitions among
adolescents 13-18 years of age. In doing so, this research provides a conceptual
framework that outlines the main art consumption habits of adolescents. Previously, much of
the research in the field of cultural tourism and arts has focused on investigating what
specific facets within visitors’ preconceptions, preferences or behaviors deter them from
visiting museums but did not explore adolescents’ experience and perceptions of arts
associated with their youth subculture. The findings of the present study support the view
that cultural tourism scholars and museums would be well-served to focus more on youth
audiences and their experiential, emotional and artistic consumption practices. This shift in
focus would require exploring different kinds of arts and exhibition experiences and how
they are perceived from the perspective of young visitors within the context of their
particular consumption subcultures. Further research needs to explore how the perception

PAGE 126 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

of arts and exhibition galleries evolves and varies among different groups of visitors
(children, tweens, pre-adolescents, young adults, seniors, families, students, etc.) and what
the nature of these differences is. This will provide more knowledge about the visitors’
leading experiences and significant expectations, which will help arts managers and
cultural tourism professionals to apply appropriate marketing tools and strategies to
address these motivations. Furthermore, although the findings of this exploratory study
provide a basis for excellent suggestions to museums while targeting young visitors, further
quantitative studies should be conducted by researchers to validate these findings.

References
Anderson, D. and Lucas, K. (1997), “The effectiveness of orienting students to the physical features of a
science museum prior to visitation”, Research in Science Education, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 485-495.

n, C., Camarero, C. and Garrido, M.J. (2018), “A journey through the museum: visit factors that
Anto
prevent or further visitor satiation”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 73, pp. 48-61.
Arts Council of Great Britain (1991), Report on qualitative research into public attitudes into “The Arts”,
NOP Research & Arts Council of Great Britain, London.
Bardhi, F., Rohm, A.J. and Sultan, F. (2010), “Tuning in and tuning out: media multitasking among young
consumers”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 316-332.
Bartlett, A. and Kelly, L. (2000), Youth audiences: Research Summary, Australian Museum Audience
Research Centre, available at: www.amonline.net.au (accessed 1 April 2015).
Batat, W. (2008), “Exploring adolescent development skills through internet usage: a study of French 11-
15-year-olds”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 379-381.

Batat, W. (2011), “An overview of postmodern research in the consumer behaviour field: towards the ‘new
consumer’ paradigm”, in Xiao, Y.Z., Cotte, J. and Price, L. (Eds), Asia-Pacific Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 9, Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, MN, pp. 304-312.
Batat, W. (2014), “How do adolescents define their own competencies in the consumption field? a portrait
approach”, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 27-60.
Batat, W. (2015), “An Adolescent-Centric approach to consumer vulnerability: new implications for public
policy”, Vulnerable Consumers, Routledge, London, pp. 103-117.
Batat, W. and Frochot, I. (2012), The Perception of Arts by Adolescents: A New Target for Museum and
Art Professionals, Advances in Consumer Research, Queenstown.
Batat, W. and Tanner, J. (2019), “Unveiling (in)vulnerability in an adolescent’s consumption subculture: a
framework to understand adolescents’ experienced (in)vulnerability and ethical implications”, Journal of
Business Ethics, pp. 1-18, available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-019-04309-
2#citeas
Bayus, B.L. (2010), “Crowdsourcing and individual creativity over time: the detrimental effects of past
success”, available at: www.hbs.edu/networkedbusiness/docs/BayusCrowdsourcing.pdf (accessed 14
February 2012).

Bertacchini, E.E., Dalle Nogare, C. and Scuderi, R. (2018), “Ownership, organization structure and public
service provision: the case of museums”, Journal of Cultural Economics, Vol. 42, pp. 619-643.

Black, G. (2005), The Engaging Museum: Developing Museums for Visitor Involvement, Routledge,
New York, NY.
Bonn, M.A., Joseph-Matthews, S.M., Dai, M., Hayes, S. and Cave, J. (2007), “Heritage/cultural attraction
atmospherics: creating the right environment for the heritage/cultural visitor”, Journal of Travel Research,
Vol. 3, pp. 345-354.
Boukas, N. (2012), “Young faces in old places’: perceptions of young cultural visitors for the
archaeological site of Delphi”, Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development,
Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 164-189.

Bourdieu, P. (1965/1991), Photography: A Middle-Brow Art, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Bourdieu, P. (1983/1986), “The forms of capital”, in Richardson, G.R. (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and
Research for the Sociology of Education, Greenwood, New York, NY, pp. 241-258.

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 127

 Bourdieu, P., Darbel, A. and Schnapper, D. (1969/1990), The Love of Art: European Art Museums and
Their Public, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Brida, J.G., Meleddu, M. and Pulina, M. (2016), “Understanding museum visitors’ experience: a
comparative study”, Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 6
No. 1, pp. 47-71.
Burns, P. (1999), An Introduction to Tourism and Anthropology, Routledge, London.
Butler, P. (2000), “By popular demand: marketing the arts”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 343-364.
Caldwell, N. and Coshall, J. (2002), “Measuring brand associations for museums and galleries using
repertory grid analysis”, Management Decision, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 383-393.
Chen, Y. (2009), “Possession and access: consumer desires and value perceptions regarding
contemporary art collection and exhibit visits”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 925-940.
Chrzanowska, J. (2002), “Interviewing groups and individuals in qualitative market research”, in Gill
Ereaut, M.I. and Callingham, M (Eds), Qualitative Market Research, Sage, CA.
Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T. and Roberts, B. (1976), “Subcultures, cultures, and class: a theoretical
overview”, in Hall, S. and Jefferson, T. (Eds), Resistance through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-War
Britain, Hutchison, London, pp. 9-74.
Cohen, P. (1997), Rethinking the Youth Question: Education, Labor, and Cultural Studies, Macmillan,
London.
Cox, S., Radbourne, J. and Tidwell, P.M. (1998a), “Museum marketing: implications for extending the
current literature”, in Hung, K. and Monroe, K.B. (Eds), AP - Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 3, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 180-187.
Cox, S., Radbourne, J. and Tidwell, P.M. (1998b), “Museum marketing: implications for extending the
current literature”, in Hung, K. and Monroe, K.B. (Eds), Asia-Pacific Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 3, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 180-187.
Crawford, D., Jackson, E. and Godbey, G. (1991), “A hierarchical model of leisure constraints”, Leisure
Sciences, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 309-320.
Czarniawska, B. (2004), Narratives in Social Science Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Decrop, A. (2008), “Les paradoxes du consommateur postmoderne”, Reflets et Perspectives de la Vie
Économique, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 85-93.

Di Pietro, L., Guglielmetti Mugion, R., Mattia, G. and Renzi, M.F. (2015), “Cultural heritage and consumer
behaviour: a survey on Italian cultural visitor”, Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable
Development, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 61-81.
Firat, A.F. and Ulusoy, E. (2011), “Living a theme”, Consumption Markets & Culture, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 193-202.

Fleming, D. (1999), “A question of perception”, Museums Journal, pp. 29-31.

Franklin, A. (2018), “Art tourism: a new field for tourist studies”, Tourist Studies, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 399-416.
Frochot, I. and Hughes, H. (2000), “HISTOQUAL: the development of a historic houses assessment
scale”, Tourism Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 157-167.
Garibaldi, R. (2015), “The use of web 2.0 tools by Italian contemporary art museums”, Museum
Management and Curatorship, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 230-243.
Giannini, T. and Bowen, J. (2019), Museums and Digital Culture New Perspectives and Research,
Springer, New York, NY.
Gil, S.M. and Brent-Ritchie, J.R. (2009), “Understanding the museum image formation
process: a comparison of residents and tourists”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 480-493.
Gilmore, A. and Rentscheler, R. (2002), “Changes in museum management”, Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 21 No. 10, pp. 745-760.
Gintz, C. (1979), Regards Sur L’art Américain Des Années Soixante, Editions Territoires, Paris.

Glynn, M.A., Bhattacharya, C.B. and Rao, H. (1996), “Art museum membership and cultural distinction:
relating member’s perceptions of prestige to benefit usage”, Poetics, Vol. 24 Nos 2/4, pp. 259-274.

PAGE 128 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

Gofman, A., Moskowitz, H.R. and Mets, T. (2011), “Marketing museums and exhibitions: what drives
the interest of young people”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, Vol. 20 No. 6,
pp. 601-618.
Goulding, C. (2000), “The museum environment and the visitor experience”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 3/4, pp. 261-278.

Gray, A. and McGuigan, J. (1993), Studying Culture. An Introductory Reader, Edward Arnold, London.
Griffin, J. (2004), “Research on students and museums: looking more closely at the students in school
groups”, Science Education, Vol. 88 No. S1, pp. 559-570.
Hagtvedt, H. and Patrick, V.W. (2008), “Art infusion: the importance of visual art on the perception and
evaluation of consumer products”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 379-389.

Hall, S. and Jefferson, T. (1976), Resistance through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-War Britain,
Routledge, London.
Hebdige, D. (2007/1979), Sous-Culture, le Sens du Style, Editions La Découverte, Paris.
Hede, A.M. and Thyne, M. (2010), “A journey to the authentic: museum visitors and their negotiation of the
inauthentic”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 26 Nos 7/8, pp. 686-705.

Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1982), “Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and
propositions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 92-101.
Hood, M.G. (1983), “Staying away – why people chose not to visit museums”, Museum News, Vol. 61,
pp. 50-57.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1999), The Educational Role of the Museum, Routledge, New York, NY.
Hopkinson, G. and Pujari, D. (1999), “A factor analytic study of the sources of meaning in hedonic
consumption”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33 Nos 3/4, pp. 273-290.
Hornecker, E. and Stifter, M. (2006), “Learning from interactive museum installations about interaction
design for public setting”, in Kjeldskov, J. and Paay, J. (Eds), Proceedings of Oz CHI 2006, Association
for Computing, New York, NY, pp. 135-142.
INSEE (2003), “Les pratiques culturelles: le rôle des habitudes prises dans l’enfance”, INSEE Première,
Vol. 883

Jackson, E.L. (2000), “Will research on leisure constraints still be relevant in the twenty-first century?”,
Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 62-68.
Joy, A. and Sherry, J.F. (2003), “Speaking of art as embodied imagination: a multisensory approach to
understanding aesthetic experience”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 259-282.
Kekeya, J. (2016), “Analysing qualitative data using an iterative process”, Contemporary PNG Studies,
Vol. 24, pp. 86-94.

Kerrigan, F., Brownlie, D., Hewer, P. and Daza-LeTouze, C. (2011), “Spinning ‘warhol’: celebrity brand
theoretics and the logic of the celebrity brand”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 27 Nos 13/14,
pp. 1504-1524.
Kotler, N. and Kotler, P. (2001), “Can museums be all things to all people? Missions, goals and marketing
role”, Museum Management and Curatorship, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 271-287.

Kyle, G. and O’Leary, J.T. (2006), “Perceived constraints to art museum attendance”, Proceedings of the
2006 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, pp. 459-468.

pez-Sintas, J., Rojas de Francisco, L. and Garcı́a-Álvarez, E. (2017), “Home-based digital leisure”,
Lo
World Leisure Journal, Vol. 59 No. sup1, pp. 86-92.
Luke, T. (2002), Museum Politics: Power Plays at the Exhibition, University of MN Press, Minneapolis, MN.
Lumley, R. (1988), The Museum Time-Machine: putting Cultures on Display, Routledge, London.

McIntyre, C. (2008), “Museum foodservice offers experience design dimensions”, Journal of

Foodservice, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 177-188.
McLean, F.C. (1994), “Services marketing: the case of museums”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 14
No. 2, pp. 190-203.
McLean, F.C. (1997), Marketing the Museum, Routledge, London.

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 129

 Makarius, E.E. (2017), “Edutainment: using technology to enhance the management learner experience”,
Management Teaching Review, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 17-25.
Manna, R. and Palumbo, R. (2018), “What makes a museum attractive to young people? Evidence from
Italy”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 508-517.

Mason, D. and McCarthy, C. (2006), “The feeling of exclusion”: young peoples’ perceptions of art
galleries”, Museum Management and Curatorship, Vol. 21, pp. 20-31.
Mauss, M. (1971), Manuel D’ethnographie (Cours Professé Entre 1926-1939), Payot, Paris.
Miles, R.S. (1987), “Museums and the communication of science”, Communicating Science to the Public,
Wiley, New York, NY.

Navarrete, T. (2019), “Digital heritage tourism: innovations in museums”, World Leisure Journal, Vol. 61
No. 3, pp. 200-214.
Paswan, A.K. and Troy, L.C. (2004), “Non-profit organization and membership motivation: an exploration
in the museum industry”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, pp. 1-15.
Plaza, B. (2000), “Guggenheim museum’s effectiveness to attract tourism”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 1055-1058.

Prensky, M. (2006), “Listen to the natives”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 8-13.
Prentice, R.C., Guerin, S. and McGugan, S. (1998), “Visitor learning at a heritage attraction: a case study
of discovery as a media product”, Tourism Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 5-23.
Roedder-John, D. (1999), “Consumer socialization of children: a retrospective look at twenty-five years of
research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 183-213.
Scheff, J. and Kotler, P. (1996), “Crisis in the arts: the marketing response”, California Management
Review, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 28-52.
Scott, A.A. (2009), “Exploring the evidence base for museum value”, Museum Management and
Curatorship, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 195-212.
Scott, C. (2006), “Museums: impact and value”, Cultural Trends, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 45-75.
Screven, C.G. (1986), “Exhibitions and information centers: some principles and approaches”, Curator:
The Museum Journal, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 109-137.
Shaw, G. and Williams, A. (2004), Tourism and Tourism Spaces, Sage Publications.
Sheng, C.W. and Chen, M.C. (2012), “A study of experience expectations of museum visitors”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 53-60.
Silberberg, T. (1995), “Cultural tourism and business opportunities for museums and heritage sites”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 361-365.

Skydsgaard, M.A., Andersen, M.H. and King, H. (2016), “Designing museum exhibits that
facilitate visitor reflection and discussion”, Museum Management and Curatorship, Vol. 31 No. 1,
pp. 48-68.
Soren, B.J. (2009), “Museum experiences that change visitors”, Museum Management and Curatorship,
Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 233-251.

Swanson, K.K. and DeVereaux, C.A. (2017), “Theoretical framework for sustaining culture: culturally
sustainable entrepreneurship”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 62, pp. 78-88.
Tapscott, D. (1998), Growing up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Thompson, C.J. (1997), “Interpreting consumers: a hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing
insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34,
pp. 438-455.

Thyne, M. (2001), “The importance of values research for nonprofit organisations: the motivation-based
values of museum visitors”, International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, Vol. 6
No. 2, pp. 116-130.
Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2008), “Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Wade, M. (1985), Constraints on Leisure, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL.

PAGE 130 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020

Weide, S. (2011), “The value of museums: stronghold for museum institutions in times of financial
instability”, Newsletter of the Network of European Museum Organization, Vol. 1, pp. 1-8.

Willis, P. (1981), Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs, Columbia
University Press, New York, NY.
Willis, P. (1990), Common Culture: Symbolic Work at Play in the Everyday Cultures of the Young, Open
University Press, Milton Keynes.

Further reading
Yung-Neng, L. (2006), “Leisure-A function of museums? The Taiwan perspective”, Museum Management
and Curatorship, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 302-316.

About the author

Wided Batat is Professor of Marketing at the American University of Beirut. Her work
focuses on consumer education, consumption cultures, vulnerability, well-being, food
culture and sustainable consumption. Her research has been in academic journals such as
Journal of Business Research, Marketing Theory, Journal of Marketing Management,
Qualitative Market Research, An International Journal, Journal of Macromarketing, Journal
of Business Ethics, Research and Application in Marketing, Kybernetes, International
Journal for Consumer Studies, Advances in Consumer Research, Journal of Research for
Consumers and Journal of Communications of the IBIMA. She is also a reviewer for
international peer-reviewed journals and the author of several books on consumption
cultures, consumer competency and experiential tourism and marketing. Wided Batat can
be contacted at: wided.batat@yahoo.fr

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 21 NO. 1 2020 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 131