The analysis of gender-age characteristics made it possible to conclude that socio-demographic structure of actual viewers – these socio-cultural product consumers - coincides with that of the assumed target audience (See table1).

As was anticipated, there exists dominance of female over male representatives (61,9% female compared to 38,1% males).

Age distribution feature demonstrates dominance of 18-29 age group ( 42,6%). One third of visitors belong to age group of 30 -59. Groups under 18 and 60+ are equal in percentage point (14% each). Average viewer age is 35,7.

Now let's consider educational features of our audience in comparison with regional state museums visitors' characteristics (See table 2).

Compared to educational structure of regional museum audience the exhibition attracted more visitors with Higher School diplomas (66,5% and 51,0% correspondingly). It can be explained by both this social group' preferences and the exhibition project promotion specifics.

Analyzing occupational structure of exposition visitors (See table 3), it should be noted that it, on a whole, correlates with analogous structure of regional museums public. A difference can be observed in a slightly greater quantity in groups of schoolchildren/students, workers, specialists. At that a group of jobless is much smaller.

The difference in industrial distribution is essential (see table 4). The majority of the exhibition visitors are engaged in industrial sphere (32,1%), every seventh viewer deals with trade and services , while an average museum visitor works at educational(16,9%) or cultural (8,6%)institutions.

The next characteristic is income per head (See table5).

"The Art of travel" exhibition viewers and state regional museum visitors differ greatly in this characteristic.

Average income per heard among the exhibition guests is 26,9 thousand rubles, a moda income (most frequently met) makes up 24,0 thousand rub. Median income (the one in the middle of ordered series) equals 25, 300 rub. Unfortunately, data on regional museum visitors in this respect are not available. However, the data obtained give right to state that they are considerably lower: both the mode and the median are within the range of 10-20 thousand rubles.

The income of people who love to travel and who visited the exhibition is comparable with an average income per head in the Sverdlovsk region (in 2014 it constitutes 28,2 thousand rub.), visitors of regional state museums are not so well off (that data of 2012).

Now let us move to some specific of this research characteristics. Visit frequency is shown in table 6.

"The art of travel" exhibition visitors documented a higher activeness in terms of visit frequency: thus, 74,8% of the respondents go to exhibitions and museum several times a year whereas the same behavior pattern is typical of 64,1% of this service users in the group of regional museums viewers.

Information of travel experience is significant for our analysis. The exhibition guests evaluate their travel experience as 8,6 years on average (see table 7).

One half of exhibition viewers have traveled for no more than 5 years. Every fourth visitor has a travel experience of more than 10 years. These findings testify to the exposition designers' assumption that the target project's audience is likely to be representatives of two groups: young people shaping attitude towards travel as a form of leisure activity and life style, and people of older generations with a considerable travel experience ready to actively plan new trips, to remember and be nostalgic about the past journeys.

Now we will look at several characteristics which show satisfaction level of the exhibition visitors. The duration of exposition viewing presented in table 8 is an objective indicator of the target audience interest in the project.

Average time spent on a relatively small (in terms of exposition space) exhibition is 1,5 hours. Every eighth visitor (13,3%) spent more than 2 hours. It indicates quite a high attractiveness of the project (see table 9). The high level of satisfaction (9,1 of 10-point scale) allows one to speak about project's "hitting" the target", its content and design elements responsiveness to the audience needs.

Further we'll deal with features that, in visitors' view, have made the exhibition successful (see table 10).

The positive emotions (average value of 4,9) induced by the exhibition to a greater extent are caused by the rupture of traditional museum stereotype when objects are perceived as distanced, "museumificated", off a visitor' physical or tactile contact:

«there is no object "deification". That is why suitcases, guidebooks and pieces stones from the highest mountains in the world seem to be your best friends. Yellow ropes are attached to guidebooks which are wrapped up as parcels in my childhood. Sitting in the suitcase-assembled armchair you see the first Yekaterinburg auto of the early XXs and want to climb it up, too…» [6].

Artifacts accessibility, no barrier between an object and a visitor, an opportunity to sense through touch arose a tempest of positive emotions and facilitated understanding of a new exposition format and a visitor behavior within museum space. In some sense, it is what a guest sees first entering the exposition ,and it is not only its participatory concept where interactivity is significant but not the only component.

Positive attitude is not explained by only another pattern of visitors behavior in the exposition museum space («you can touch the objects"; you even touch things and a penguin"; "every old item can be touched"; "free familiarization"; " tactility"; "access to artifacts, and the main thing is sensations you get") but the exhibition atmosphere itself (average value of 4,8 points).

The atmosphere of travel became a high-profile event [7] («the atmosphere overwhelms"; «atmosphere of travel is that of freedom [8]),

helped "travelers" to soak themselves in others spaces and worlds of the past and the present («the exhibition is fabulous. Interactive is unmatched. Relaxation, the feel of another world!»; «I feel as if I had lived there before»; «a type-writer is an opportunity to tap on my childhood and introduce children to it»).

A great deal of positive attitude is induced by interactivity, sharing and commenting on opportunity (average value 4,6). «very interesting interactive»; «provide comments»; «share thoughts, type»; «to transfer a dream from "Cold storage»; «Share opinion»; «interactivity, involvement in the project» were named as the most attractive features.

Stories and artifacts of Yekaterinburg travelers were highly-valued communicative and interactive elements (average 4,6). The visitors perceived their narratives as real ones, as they gave them the chance to experience the same sensations: «different views of travel»; «other people experience»; opportunity «to see travelers' things, trophies», «it's amazing to view travel albums». The advantage of the exhibition was that it managed to «collect interesting memories», which widened visitors' world outlook and individual abilities estimation («kaleidoscope of colors and events in view and at hand got wider»; «paid attention to wonders around»; «learnt a lot of absolutely new facts about Ural»).

Many visitors felt nostalgic of their own routes and trips, stories and artifacts animated their memories: «memories how we were in those places»; «as if you met old friends (cities and countries)»; "Indian mantra, the one I heard every morning in India».

Exhibits and stories of the past were similarly interesting (average value 4,6): «old exhibits, pictures, memories»; «saw an old auto. Could anything else be more interesting for a grease monkey?»; «tourism in historic perspective»; "stories about traveling in the past, how people, for example, took pillows along…»; «travel along the Ural ridge»; «"Reviews" about soviet tourists behavior and morale in capitalist countries».

Original design solutions for exposition space constructing were highly appreciated by viewers (average 4,6): «I like the design very much». «Design solutions, the feel of huge space in every exposition hall»; «designer ignited by travel».

Such design and conceptual exhibition elements as playing and participatory zones were one more source of visitors positive emotions (average 4,3): «found my dream in Cold storage and transferred it into another box»; «I liked to type, to swing in the armchair, to meditate with the cup very much!»; «want to buy a type writer»; «learnt to make toy boats, sat in a rocking chair»; «made toy planes».

One more factor, useful information for travel, defined visitors' positive attitude (average 4,3): «found interesting places to go in the Ural»; «enticing itineraries».

To further explore the "event -iveness" of the exhibition we should note that the exhibition itself became an event: «it is a mini-travel»; « Exhibition became an event »; « Everything is interesting and memorable!»; «the number of interesting exhibits and enthusiastic people stunned me»; «exposition is the event in itself – I had fun and felt "alive" in the places presented»; «this large-scale and inspiring exhibition is the event».

Visitors documented modern approach to exposition organization «new traditional theme, interesting, modern»; «didn't expect, new- trend exposition»; «originality»; «fresh idea». They were also pleased to learn that there is «a creative team of young people in our city who push culture and create beauty» and to meet «the authors of the exhibition».

The major outcome is fresh ideas, inspiration, eagerness to make new trips: «inspiration! Wish to travel!»; «found ideas to realize»; «the exhibition induces new frenzy and travel»; «Fan-is to catch flash! It happened to me!»; «thrive for travel became tangible, wish to make something special of my trip »; «I adore traveling, the exhibition for me is travel»; «ignited by travel»; «want to make something out of ordinary».

The most important thing for us is that the exhibition meets audience needs, has a motivating effect, coincides with everyday practical problems facing those who are going on a trip: «this exhibition is not only inspiring, it fits my life perfectly»; «decided on my next trip destination»; «Paris as a possible destination came in line with both of us, so we go to Paris».

Quantitative visitors' estimates for intended functional use of the exhibition are given in table 11.

Leisure component of the exhibition («to have a good time») is most important for 96,0% visitors: «we planned to spend 1 hour, but in fact it took us more than two. You can be there all day long without noticing the time».

Motivating effect is also well pronounced. The exhibition inspires to travel, to look for new routes (91,8%): «the main thing is that the exhibition ignites you. You can't wait to start a new journey and at that you are aware that it is quite realistic. And you also want to create something. The spirit is really creative».

Pragmatic value of the exhibition is also high. 90,5% respondents can find valuable information, tips, or buy useful souvenirs. «there are some very practical souvenirs: not the decanters brought 100 years ago from Paris but water proof wallets and some other useful things».

The exhibition creates conditions for self-reflection, self-analysis in terms of personal travel practices, the information obtained gives them opportunity to process and assess travel effects (87,8%). In addition, for 89,3% visitors a generalized effect is expressed by reflecting on the art of travel on a whole. «The exhibition calls for rethinking many things. Travel is a unique opportunity to learn something new, to have intense colorful emotions, meet new people and acquire pleasant memories. Sharing such impressions is the main goal of the exposition. I've heard a very wise phrase today «borders are only inside you, in your head».
Indeed, between man and his dream is he, himself. The stories presented provide a example and illustrate how simple it is to travel and that it is worth doing».

In visitors opinion, participatory concept greatly adds to the atmosphere of play, creative pursuit, self-actualization (87,0%).

One of the survey tasks was to identify to what extent the visitors could "read" semantics of the exhibition on the whole and of each section in particular [9].

The fact of the project being different is recognized by 94,5% visitors (see table12).

Its uniqueness is treated in wide terms: «the most unique exhibition»; «unusual theme»; «novel content delivery»; «unconventional design»; «non-typical organization, opportunity to touch everything»; «new direction, new format»; «modern, novel approach»; «unique because it is modernity - oriented»; «no idea, it is just unusual».

Reflections on the uniqueness are mainly associated with visitors' awareness of creativity underlying the exhibition organization, what exactly is realized: «Novel ideas»; «A lot of creativity, a new way to present content, one can conceive the depth and meaning»; «Creative, interactive, wildly twisting»; «Creative ideas. Special approach to both design and theoretical exposure of exhibits»; «brave and free solutions».

Visitors realize the projects concept of dialogic interaction, the concept of active visitors' participation. They point out «a lot of involvement, everything is accessible»; «you can not only see but be involved»; «A visitor can contribute, take part in traveling»; «you create the world of travel by yourself»; «it is "live" and mobile»; «participation of all, want to bring exhibits»; «to do something: to write, to play, to share, etc. to choose interesting halls, to comment»; «engage in exhibition creation»; «opportunity to add to and change displays».

Guest understand quite well that active dialogue realized in the form of every guest participation provides for «visitors' involvement into active cognition»; «viewers engagement in the exhibition atmosphere», creates «opportunity to became a part of what's going on through participation".

The exhibition innovation is seen as interactivity, which makes it possible to create the atmosphere of freedom, openness, informality, co-creation. They note: «atmosphere of co-creation»; «new ideas, openness, interaction with other quests»; «interactivity, view from different angles»; «interactivity, opportunity to take part, interest, vivacity»; «informality, interactivity»; «Modern. Enticing. Interactive»; «very agile, bright»; «never met such an atmosphere that conveys the thematic. It is indeed travel».

Visitors recognize the new format of their participation; understand that many stereotypes of museum behavior do not work, and that they have to react to this new situation in a different way. Openness of exposition space, their responsiveness and interaction, opportunities to touch exhibits generate favorable conditions for cognition, empathy, intellectual insight: «closeness and empathy»; «to hold in your hands, to touch is to tune to other people mood and their objects»; «hosts of opportunities to share your thoughts and dreams with those who care»; «makes you dream, try yourself, to communicate. You can touch everything, leave your trace. Super!»

Visitors also realize a deeper underlying idea of the exhibition concept, the one that is likely to have been implemented successfully – man-centered nature of the project: «for me it is traveling to myself. Interaction, emotional contact with the exhibition subject; «the exhibition is aimed at me»; «exhibits are not distanced from visitors»; «full immersion in an interesting and absorbing project let sense novelty of the world»; «Vitality. There are people, alive, healthy, confident...».

Guests feel: «visitor-oriented approach»; «contact with viewers»; «one can read care about the visitor, not a formal "tipped" event, that is why you just want to unfold a mat and lie among all these suitcases. In a word, you feel at home». It is a very significant indicator of the project effectiveness for its curators.

Viewers get it right that humanistic pathos and man-centered characters of the project were included in the very process of its creation and consist of «broad participation of markedly different people who are (as well as their experience) highly respected by the museum curators».

Visitors realize that serous efforts on the part of the project authors were required to achieve such complex effect. Viewers single out complexity and originality of the expositions design «non-linear exposition, having made a tour round you can see things you have not noticed earlier»; the use of play element in the space organization: «a form of game»; «you do what you like, touch the objects, it's like play a game. More interesting than a museum»; «it is not an exhibition it is a travel game!»

Some sophisticated visitors tend to analyze the specifics of exhibition dramaturgy in terms of exposition build up' logic, meaning translation, type of content/visitor communication:

The problem of temporality while putting together in a whole of it with the help of a certain viewers' route is also reflected upon:

The exhibition integrity as a top-to- bottom event is also clearly recognized:

Viewers contemplate on temporary aspect of the exhibition content, harmony in combining exhibits of the past and present: «Unique effect of exhibits retrospective»; «appropriate proportion of the past and modernity».

Visitors state the curators' efforts to reach different segments of target audience: «the exhibition provides opportunity for children participation and creativity»; «it develops children interest in traveling».

As for negative comments and criticism they were formulated and reported by expert community representatives.

To solve the research objective associated with each hall effectiveness, to identify the extent to which visitors could read semantics of each section we put two corresponding in content questions: one about the most liked section (see table13), the other indirectly indicated effectiveness of the section idea realization (see table14). The combination of these questions allowed us to evaluate the level of each section central idea implementation (see table15).

Sections "Another world" (40,0%) and "Memories" (30,3%) stirred the most interest. At the same time practically equal visitors estimates of all sections prove the fact that there were no evident "flops" (see table13).

The section «About the project» is of separate matter. Its specifics and peculiar goals were mentioned by all visitors and expert community representatives:

Just 6,6% of the respondents found it interesting.

What caused low interest? Was it Fatigue, too much information, lack of interest in how it had been made?

We tried to indirectly evaluate visitors' estimates of every hall idea, transparency of the concept underlying the project via a system of questions offered to respondents (see table14). These questions are directly tied up with the exhibition function of translating certain meanings. The success of this communication determines effectiveness of both the whole project and its separate elements.

The analysis of the respondents responses shows that the most valued opportunity is to reflect on travel art («reflect on ways to travel ad to open the world» - 1,18) и to feel "itchy feet" («to be in anticipation of travel» – 1,23). The rest of the exhibition potential enjoys similarly high assessment without principal distinctions.

A more vivid picture of correlation between sections, their ideas and the respondents estimates is shown in table 15.

It can be stated with certainty that communication intention underlying each section was read univocally and the curators' specific goal was achieved.

Next, we will consider interactive and participatory zones effectiveness. They are integral part of the exhibition and are emotionally and functionally charged. They should not be treated as a means, a tool of the exhibition idea realization.

Mass survey made it possible to evaluate both level of viewers activeness and basic forms of their participations. In general, different forms of involvement were assessed by 86,5% of the respondents (256 out of 296 people). Major participatory activities are shown in table 16.

Besides these activities with participation of each second or third visitor the respondents named other project activities.

• Different forms of work/game with items-exhibits in playing zones: «Made a toy boat»; «Completed azimuth task»; «Played a singing Tibet cup, looked for treasure, found dinosaurs' relics»; «swung in a rocking chair»; «perforated the ticket, voted»; «played the grand piano»; «sat on suitcases»; «touched everything possible»; «lifted suitcases»; «search for minerals in the sand»; «painted pictures»; «weighed suitcases»; «listened to singing nails»; «looked for treasure»; «put stamps», etc.
• Familiarization with sources, literature, writing tasks, comments: «wrote about my dream»; «wrote where I would like to go»; «looked through travel magazines»; «gave advice»; «looked through books»; «left a comment»; «wrote comments», etc..
• Reflections: «was inspired by wise quotations»; «reflected on going somewhere with a group»; «Participated in everything in my thoughts, was reflecting on what was on».
• Interpersonal communication: «Talked a lot»; «Communicated»; «Put questions during the excursion».
• Participation in the exhibition organization and operation: «was a volunteer»; «assisted during Museum Night».

Now, let us analyze estimates of the most interesting participatory activities (see table 17). We got responses from 54,7% of the respondents (162 out of 296).

Among additional participatory forms marked by visitors we will indicate the following ones:

• Communication activity (writing): «to write about my dreams»; «to write on Post it»; «to write without being afraid»; «my child liked to write everywhere».
• Excursion activity: «I liked to socialize during the excursion»; «group excursion».
• Photo opportunity: «to take pictures»; «photo, writing part»; «to take photos and be taken pictures of».
• Exhibits/objects interaction: «everything that I can touch»; «search for treasure in azimuth»; «search for minerals and mammoth spinal bone»; «to sort out artifacts»; «to make the cup sing»; «to play the grand piano»; «to make a toy boat, geo-gram, to type, a rocking chair», etc.

Comparing activities visitors participated in and those which they liked best we will see their correlation (see table 18). In other words, all the activities presented induced positive emotions and pleasure. There is a difference between what visitors did and what they liked best but, by large, all the forms were positively evaluated.

As participatory activities are not traditional attribute of a museum visiting and a stereotype of passive museum behavior is stable and deeply- rooted we had to identify barriers preventing it from changing at our exhibition.

On a whole, the half of the respondents (54,0%) stated that they had not taken part in this or that participatory zone [13].

The reasons are fixed in their self-estimates (table 19).

Thus, the main reason for visitors non-participations is failure to understand the task (39,4%). Taking into account the fact that for 3,1% respondents the goal of participation was unclear, and 6,9% reported that the form offered was not comfortable enough the problem of the "right" communication language becomes even more relevant. Evidently, thorough testing of participatory zone at the organizational stage is required when perception adequacy can be checked. This kind of work was conducted at the initial stages of the project but more efforts should be made in order to achieve higher efficiency.

Problems in understanding what to do in this or that situation is undoubtedly connected with respondents' readiness for this form of museum visiting. 37,5% documented that they were not ready to take part in interactive activities.

Every eighth respondent (13,1%) stated lack of participatory motivation.

There exist significant gender distinctions in respondents' reluctance to participate in interactive activities (see table 20). Men are mostly complain of incomprehensive technology (59,5%) and the ultimate goal of their use (4,3%) while women speak of their not being ready for this kind of participation (52,2%). In addition, compared to men they are more vulnerable in terms of comfort conditions offered by certain zones (11,4% in comparison to 1,4% of men).

A certain dependency is seen in terms of respondents' age group (see table 21). Children under 18 (57,7%) and the group of 60+ (51,5%) did not understand clearly how to use interactive presented. The age group of 30-59 (65,5%) turned to be the most unprepared of all. Practically every fifth respondent of 18-29 age group did not express any interest in questions or tasks of interactive zones.

It is necessary to note the lack of interrelations between level of education and reasons for interactive zones non-use. Yet, there is a pronounced dependence between respondents visit frequency (the degree of visitors' "competence") and their motives for non participation. While "competent" visitors complain more of discomfort on participatory zones, "inexperienced" ones refer to activity vague meaning and way to do it.

Effectiveness of communication between project curators and visitors can be expressed by their readiness to maintain contacts. The project context provides such opportunities (see table 22). The majority of the respondents (88,8%) are prepared to invite their friends to the exhibition, which means that through including their close circle into this content they will deal in this thematic again.

This willingness to invite friends depends on respondents' experience: more experienced visitors are more likely to invite friends (94% visitors of more than 5 year travel experience) than the group of newcomers to travel (77,7% with experience less than 5 years) [14].

More inclined to invite friends to the exhibition are respondents of 18 - 30 age group (95,5%) compared to other age groups representatives (up to 80,0%) [15].

78,7% of the respondents do not exclude the possibility to visit the exposition again, which, on the one hand, speaks about their interest in the subject. On the other hand, it can imply latent potential of the exposition and of visitors revisit and participation. At that their goal can be various: some need more time to think over the content, other may prefer a leisure component. Some visitors will like to delve in the exhibition atmosphere facilitating their insight. 65,0% of the respondents are prepared to use interactive catalogue (mobile application), the exhibition site. The very fact that more than half of the respondents are eager to learn more about the content speaks a lot about exposition effect.

More than half of the respondents express their readiness to communicate through objects contributing (60,2%), participating in virtual contests (56,9%). Consequently, the exhibition interactivity is relevant.

To sum up, we can state the success of the project thanks to:

• An inspiring idea that stirred public interest and response;
• Well - conceived general concept which was read, perceived and accepted by audience;
• The projects elements that were adequate to audience needs: sections/halls; participatory zones, playing zones, etc.
• Attempts to join the process of participatory culture formation with the focus on museums visitors: to give them a chance to master new forms of communication, go beyond the scope of a visitor social role, interact with other visitors and the project creative team, co –opt in creation and modification of the exhibition project.