Suttie Art Space Evaluation v1
Research type
Research Study
Full title
GHAT's Suttie Art Space Evaluation v1
IRAS ID
182529
Contact name
Basia McDougall
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Grampian Health Arts Trust,
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 1, 15/NS/0054
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 8 months, 8 days
Research summary
The Suttie Art Space is a new venture for Grampian Hospitals Trust (GHAT). The project has been designed evaluate this new hospital based art venue, specifically to meet the following objectives.
1. Explore the perceived value of art exhibited by GHAT - and associated programme of events organized for the new Suttie Art Space - to provide evidence of GHAT meeting its objectives.
2. Collate findings in a manner which is sensitive to both the context and audience, reflecting the high ethical standards set by the British Psychological Society, as well as any local requests, e.g.: as expressed by the NHS ethics committee.
3. Produce a report for each phase of the project, which captures the experiences of those exposed to GHAT artwork in a form which can be shared and distributed - as deemed appropriate by GHAT.
The researcher will conduct interviews. Underlying the methodology is a firm belief that evaluative tools and ‘evidence’ for this project is best served by a qualitative approach, one, which seeks respondents’ views, beliefs and opinions, rather than merely presenting statistics. The aim is therefore to collect, compare and present narratives of the art space use and perceptions of the art within the venue.
Interviews will be conducted with a self-selected sample of the full range of Suttie Art Space stakeholders: artists, GHAT linked individuals e.g.: visiting curators and GHAT art space users: hospital staff, patients and visitors.
The researcher is an independent chartered psychologist; the contract with GHAT is not linked to any university project.
REC name
North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 1
REC reference
15/NS/0054
Date of REC Opinion
22 Jun 2015
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion