This study explored the meanings visitors attach to three National Park Service sites in Washington, D.C.: the Lincoln Memorial, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and the Korean War Veterans Memorial. Researchers used focus-group interviews (21 interviews, 182 participants) to identify the meanings visitors attach to park resources, their interests relative to interpretive programming, and the extent to which connections between the meanings of the resource and the interests of the visitor occur as a result of exposure to interpretive programs. An analysis of focus-group interview data revealed four themes that reflect a sense of spiritual connection with the ideals of our nation; the role of Lincoln as the embodiment of our identity and aspirations; the elements of quality interpretation; and a sense of gratitude for those who served and of responsibility to maintain democratic traditions. Study results suggest several ways that an understanding of visitor meanings and place experience can improve interpretive programming.
BennettJ. R. (1998). From patriotism to peace: The humanization of war memories.The Humanist, 58 (5), 5–9.
2.
CableT.T., KnudsonD., UddE., & StewartD. (1987). Attitude changes as a result of exposure to interpretive messages.Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 5, 47–60.
3.
CheremG.J. (1977). The professional interpreter: Agent for an awakening giant.Journal of Interpretation, 2 (1), 3–16.
4.
CreswellJ. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
5.
D'AndreaM. (2000). Postmodernism, constructivism and multiculturism: Three forces reshaping and expanding our thoughts about counseling.Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 22 (1), 1–1.6.
6.
DanielsJ., & D'AndreaM. (1997, December). Respectful counseling: A new way of thinking about diversity counseling.Counseling Today, 30–31.
7.
DustinD. L. (1994). Managing public lands for the human spirit.Parks and Recreation, 29 (9), 92–96.
8.
FishwickL., & ViningJ. (1992). Toward a phenomenology of recreation place.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 57–63.
9.
GallianoS.J., & LoefflerG. M. (1999). Place assessment: How people define ecosystems.USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-462. Portland, OR: Pacific Northwest Research Station. 31 pp. (T. M. Quigley [Ed.], Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: Scientific assessment.)
10.
GergenK. (1994). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
GutermanJ.T. (1994). A social constructionist position for mental health counseling.Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 16, 226–244.
12.
HamS. H. (1992). Environmental interpretation: A practical guide for people with big ideas and small budgets.Golden, CO: North American Press.
13.
HamS. H., & KrumpE. E. (1996). Identifying audience and messages for non-formal environmental education—A theoretical framework for interpreters.Journal of Interpretation Research, 1 (1), 11–23.
14.
HammittW. E. (1982). Attention, familiarity, and effective interpretation.Journal of Interpretation, 7 (2), 1–9.
15.
HayesR. L. (1994). Counseling in the postmodern world: Origins and implications of a constructivist developmental approach.Counseling and Human Development, 26, 1–12.
16.
HaywardD. G., & LarkinJ.W. (1983). Evaluation of visitor experiences and exhibit effectiveness at Old Sturbridge Village.The Museum Studies Journal, 1 (2), 42–51.
17.
HiltenJ., & HiltenR. (1997). A sense of place for environmental education and interpretation.Legacy, 8 (2), 10–13, 36.
18.
HungerfordH. R., & VolkT. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education.The Journal of Environmental Education, 21 (3), 8–21.
19.
KnappD. H. (1997). Back to the basics: Interpreting to the lowest common denominator.Trends, 34 (4), 17–20.
20.
KruegerR. A. (1994). Focus group: A practical guide for applied research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
LippardL. R. (1997). The lure of the local: Senses of place in a multicentered society.New York: New Press.
23.
LittlejohnM., & HoffmanC. (1999). National monuments and memorials—Washington, DC: Visitor study. (Visitor Services Project Report 105). Washington, DC: National Park Service.
24.
LoomisR.J. (1996). How do we know what the visitor knows?: Learning from interpretation.Journal of Interpretation Research, 1 (1), 39–45.
25.
LustigL.W. (1982). The use of interpretation to reduce vandalism and maintenance costs: An interpreter's in-field formula.Journal of Interpretation, 7 (2), 19–29.
26.
MachlisG. E. (1992). Interpreting war and peace. In MachlisG. E., & FieldD. R. (Eds.), On interpretation: Sociology for interpreters of natural and cultural history (Rev. ed., pp. 233–244). Corvallis: Oregon State University Press.
27.
MahaffeyB. D. (1973). Curricular guidelines for environmental interpretive training programs.Journal of Environmental Education, 5 (1), 23–30.
28.
MahoneyM. J., & LyddonW. J. (1988). Recent developments in cognitive approaches to counseling and psychotherapy.Counseling Psychologist, 16, 190–234.
29.
MartinezD. A. (1988). Interpreting controversial historic sites: Insights and strategies applied at Custer Battlefield and the USS Arizona Memorial.Proceedings of the National Interpreters Workshop (pp. 144–154). Fort Collins, CO: National Association for Interpretation.
30.
MasbergB. A. (1996). Using ecotourists to assist in determining the content for interpretation.Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 14 (2), 37–52.
31.
McDonaldB. L., & SchreyerR. (1991). Spiritual benefits of leisure participation and leisure settings. In DriverB. L., BrownP., & PetersonG. (Eds.), Benefit of leisure (pp. 179–194). State College, PA: Venture.
32.
MeredithJ. E., & MullinsG. W. (1995). Interpretation and the affective learning domain.Legacy, 6 (4), 24–31.
33.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
34.
MoreT. A. (1983). The nonusers of an urban forest interpretive center.Journal of Interpretation, 8 (1), 1–9.
35.
National Park Service. (1991). National park education task force: A report and recommendations.Washington, DC: National Park Service.
36.
National Park Service. (1997). Module 101: Why we do interpretation—Meeting the NPS mission.Interpretive Development Program homepage [On-line]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/idp/interp/101/index.htm.
37.
National Park Service. (1998a). Korean War Veterans Memorial homepage [On-line]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/kwvm/.
38.
National Park Service. (1998b). Vietnam Veterans Memorial homepage [On-line]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/vive/.
39.
National Park Service. (2000a). Module 101: How interpretation works: The interpretive equation.Interpretive Development Program homepage [On-line]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/idp/interp/101/howitworks.htm.
40.
National Park Service. (2000b). Module 103: Prepare and present an effective interpretive talk.Interpretive Development Program homepage [On-line]. Available: http://www.nps.gov/idp/mterp/103/index.htm.
41.
NiebuhrG. (1994, November 11). More than a monument: The spiritual dimension of these hallowed walls.New York Times, A12.
42.
PhillipsD. C. (1997). How, why, what, when, and where: Perspectives on constructivism in psychology and education.Issues in Education, 3 (2), 151–195.
43.
RakowS.J., & LehtonenL. (1988). Environmental center educational programs: A national survey.Journal of Interpretation, 12 (2), R1–R4.
44.
RamboE. H. (1999). Symbolic interests and meaningful purposes: Conceiving rational choice as cultural theory.Rationality and Society, 11 (3), 317–342.
45.
RelphE. (1976). Place and placelessness.London: Pion Limited.
46.
RobertsE. (1996). Place and spirit in public land management. In DriverB. L., DustinD., BalticT., EisnerG., & PetersonG. (Eds.), Nature and the human spirit: Toward an expanded land management ethic (pp. 61–80). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
47.
RoggenbuckJ.W., WilliamsD. R., & BobmskiC. T. (1992). Public-private partnership to increase commercial tour guides’ effectiveness as nature interpreters.Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 10 (2), 41–50.
48.
SchneiderK.J. (1998). Toward a science of the heart: Romanticism and the revival of psychology.American Psychologist, 53, 277–289.
49.
SchroederH. (1990). The spiritual aspect of nature: A perspective from depth psychology. In StoepG. Vander (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1990 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium (pp. 25–30). (General Technical Report NE-145). Radnor, PA: USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station.
50.
ScruggsJ. (1994). Foreword. In ScruggsJ. (Ed.), Writings on the wall: Reflections on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.McLean, VA: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund.
51.
SextonT. L., & GriffinB. L. (Eds.). (1997). Constructivistic thinking in counseling practice, research, and training.New York: Teachers College Press.
52.
SilvermanL. H. (1995). Visitor meaning-making in museums for a new age.Curator, 38 (3), 161–170.
53.
SilvermanL. H. (1997). Personalizing the past: A review of literature with implications for historical interpretation.Journal of Interpretation Research, 2 (1), 1–12.
54.
SimonsonH. P. (1989). Beyond the frontier: Writers, western regionalism, and a sense of place.Fort Worth, TX: Texas Christian University Press.
55.
SueD.W., IveyA. E., & PedersenE. B. (1996). A theory of multicultural counseling and therapy.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
56.
TierneyW. G. (1993). Building communities of difference: Higher education in the twenty-fust century.Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
57.
TildenF. (1977). Interpreting our heritage (3rd ed.). Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
58.
TrotterR.T.Jr. (1992). Monster time and other ethnographic insights at Wupatki National Monument. In MachlisG. E., & FieldD. R. (Eds.), On interpretation: Sociology for interpreters of natural and cultural history (Rev. ed., pp. 129–149). Corvallis: Oregon State University Press.
59.
TuanY. (1974). Topophilia: A study of environmental perception, attitudes and values.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
60.
TuanY. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
61.
USDA Forest Service. (1990). Objectives and policies of the interpretive services program. (Publication No. FSM 2390.2). Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service.
62.
WagarJ. A. (1975). Effectiveness in interpretation. The Interpreter, 7(3), 6–11. Wagar, J. A. (1978). Why interpretation?: Meeting the challenge.Journal of Interpretation, 3 (1), 6–10.
63.
WallaceV. K., & WitterD. J. (1991). Urban nature centers: What do our constituents want and how can we give it to them?Legacy, 2 (2), 20–23.
64.
WassermanJ. R. (1998). To trace the shifting sands: Community, ritual, and the memorial landscape.Landscape Journal, 7 (1), 42–61.
WilliamsD. R., & StewartS. I. (1998). Sense of place: An elusive concept that is finding a home in ecosystem management.Journal of Forestry, 96 (5), 18–23.
67.
YanowD. (1998). Space stories: Studying museum buildings as organizational spaces while reflecting on interpretive methods and their narration.Journal of Management Inquiry, 7 (3), 215–239.
68.
ZinsserW. K. (1992). American places: A writers’ pilgrimage to 15 of this country's most visited and cherished sites.New York: Harpers Collins.
