See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260284007

Emotion and Environment: the Forgotten Dimension

Chapter · January 2006

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.1057.7601

CITATIONS READS

10 514

1 author:

Mahtab Akhavan Farshchi

University of West London
46 PUBLICATIONS   74 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vernacular architecture in Iran View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mahtab Akhavan Farshchi on 17 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Emotional Content of the Physical Space
Mahtab Akhavan Farshchi
Research Fellow at the Advanced Construction Technology, Department of Construction
Management and Engineering, University of Reading, Reading, UK.
Norman Fisher
Professor of Project Management and the Director of the Advanced Construction Technology,
Department of Construction Management and Engineering, University of Reading, Reading, UK.

1. ABSTRACT
Traditionally, architectural design has been a process of translating the often-conflicting spatial,
physical and social needs of building promoter(s), distant and the immediate user(s) into feasible
design solutions. Spatial needs are resolved by the creation of architectural forms, which in turn allow
the fulfilment of individual, social and psychological needs in the form of a building. Individuals and
social activities within a building are manifest in terms of functions with relevant degrees of
performance for the building as a whole or in its parts. The knowledge about the possible future use
of a building, and therefore the knowledge of the proposed activities within it, is an essential part of
the task for any architectural creation.

In order to gain some added value from the application of advanced technology in capturing the
design knowledge related to the users' needs, we have proposed a preliminary model. It is argued
that the existing architectural paradigm has offered inadequate means for supporting the project
knowledge and information systems. We propose a model which not only challenges the current
paradigm but also encourages a multidisciplinary approach to increase users input into the early
design decisions by relying on the fields of environmental and social psychology, and aesthetics.
Using a facet approach, the proposed model will capture and give priority to the user's need, as it
enables constructing a theoretical model of information hierarchies for the extraction of design
knowledge for large public spaces such as airport terminals. Thus, the research is sensitive to identify
any significant differences in behaviour of the user groups concerned.

This paper briefly outlines some of the preliminary results of an ongoing research project sponsored
by a number of industrial partners and funding bodies at the Department of Construction
Management and Engineering at the University of Reading.

2. INTRODUCTION
The architecture community is believed to have been departing from the ‘modern’ paradigm and
slowly moving to a ‘post modern’ paradigm for some time now. Grabow (1983, p2) argues that:

‘The breakdown of the paradigm occurs when external anomalies introduce contradictions
within its order. In case of science, phenomena may appear (or be invented) which cannot be
accounted for or explained by the normal rules - just as the earth’s motion contradicted
Ptolemaic astronomy, or relativity contradicted Euclidean geometry. In the case of
architecture, changes in the external environment may appear which prevent the normal rules
from satisfying its own standards.’

The modern architecture was born in the early days of the Twentieth Century. With rapid
industrialisation after the Second World War there was an even greater demand on urbanisation. This
swift social change has now created contradictions within the paradigm. The modern era is arguably
blurring due to its dysfunctionality in terms of fulfilling the social and technical needs of the post-
industrial society. It is postulated that the post-industrial architecture is likely to emerge as a
consequence of radical progress in the fields of information technology and science, when the
existing rules and values are no longer satisfactory. It is once again the contradiction between the
technological development, social needs and values that can cause a shift away from the existing
paradigm in architecture.

1
For almost all of the post World War period, architectural design and its production methods have
remained somewhat different in relation to other industrial production methods. The idea of mass
production (Fordism) - so appealing to the manufacturing industries - has so far failed to find a
prominent place in architectural design or its production methods. References have been repeatedly
made to the peculiarity of the construction industry and the historical separation of the design and
construction functions. With the rapid developments of information technology, this historical
separation is now much reduced, even though the social relations of production have remained
somewhat reluctant to change. Nonetheless, there are aspects of the construction industry - that
even with the present state of technological development - are very peculiar to the industry alone.
Ball (1988) highlighted that buildings are mostly one-off products with very specific site-based
conditions. Further, he discussed the significance of land and rental values, as he emphasised the
significance of exchange and investment values in the construction industry.

Having life expectancies far greater than other manufactured/industrially produced goods, buildings
on the whole are known to have greater socio-economic and environmental impact. Their production
has historically relied on many different agents, separated by socio-cultural, legal and educational
systems. The once clear boundaries of the design and construction processes are currently being
shaken, not only by the rapid technological changes alone, but there are some steps towards
integration by offering a single point of responsibility by design and build routes.

There is no barrier in the application of the theoretical advances in the fields of product modelling and
computer programming to the design and production of buildings. The development of computer
technology in architectural design has been much slower than manufacturing industries; nonetheless,
the advancement of the artificial intelligence can play a significant role in architecture and
construction. For the first time in the history of architecture, it has become possible to combine
effectively and largely, the design and construction knowledge through using knowledge-based
engineering systems. Understanding the ways in which knowledge in the past has been accumulated
and used by the industry is the first step towards the application of computer technology in
architecture and construction.

Abdul Aziz (1991) research showed that design knowledge is usually gained through experience of
individual firms on different projects and not shared by different sectors of the construction industry.
It is also noticeable that construction research is not adequately linked to research in other fields such
as social sciences, thus causing chronic problems of data and information quality. Even when data is
collected rigorously, the information collected is more concerned with the creation of value for the
paying clients as opposed to the building users.

As supporters of a rethink of the architectural systems, we propose a new approach to formulating

design parameters by capturing building users needs and applying them in the early stages of the
design to aid its conceptualisation. Building upon the existing knowledge in environmental and social
psychology, and using a facet approach to theory, here we outline a preliminary model of design
information and knowledge for large public spaces.

2.1 Architectural Design

The inadequacy of existing methods of design began to be realised in the second half of this century.
Debates were mainly around the insufficient quality of design. Design methods were therefore
proposed as the means to improve quality by responding to the rapidly changing nature of the design
tasks (Mitchell, 1992). The main source of debate emerged from the engineering discipline and the
first encouraging results came about rather unplanned. Christopher Jones (1970) one of the first
design theorists was an industrial designer in the 1950s, who according to Mitchell was ‘frustrated
with the superficiality of industrial design’. His studies of ergonomics led him to propose new design
methods to improve design by responding to the users’ requirements. Jones’s observations
demonstrated that:

‘The existing methods [had] left engineers with no possibility of incorporating rationally arrived
at data early on their design process when it was most needed.’

2
He then produced some prescriptive measures to guide designers in their design effort. Among this
generation of design theorists there are a number of significant figureheads; Christopher Alexander
(1969), for example, was more concerned with providing a theoretical account of design and so
offered a generative theory of architecture. Alexander was particularly interested in a theory of
design which generated ‘good’ environments. His pattern language is still stimulating and is respected
by the new generation of design theorists. The complexity, goal seeking, and the ill-structured nature
of the design problem have been discussed by many authors since the 1960s. In particular, an
account of the differences between design and scientific processes was offered by Rittel and Webber
(1973) which was signified by the notion of ‘wicked problems’. What followed were attempts to
replicate a scientific approach into the design process. In general there were three identifiable
approaches. These are what Dybkjaer (1992) calls prescriptive, descriptive or philosophical
approaches to design. As design methods came out of its infancy there were attempts to understand
the design process by careful observation in its own natural environment using research methods
such as protocols and direct observation (Akin, 1986).

It is obvious that design theories were initially more influenced by engineering than the social
sciences. The systematic approach of Jones identified three main stages; i.e., Analysis, Synthesis
and Evaluation has appealed to some designers, but has been criticised for its prescriptive nature by
others (Drake, 1979). In contrast, Christopher Alexander (1979), developed his theory of design
methods by suggesting that 'everything within architecture can be described by patterns of which
there exists a limited and well-defined set'. Design activity for Alexander was a process of definition
making of its Context, Problem, and Solution. Hillier, Musgrave and O'Sullivan (1972) proposed a
philosophical approach to design, which challenged the conventional thinking in architectural design:
'We need to try to think out completely new and better methodologies'. Hillier, et al believed that
under any design situation, the architects had no alternative but to pre-structure their design problems
in order to solve them. For them conjecture was 'a sort of catalyst' which comes of 'pre-existing
cognitive capability, knowledge of the instrumental sets, solution types and informal codes, and
occasionally from right outside'.

At the same historical moment, buildings came to be the focus of attention in a new discipline. An
interest initially emerged from a need to manage people in large organisations in order to improve
productivity. There was also some demand from psychologists to offer explanations for the possible
impact of buildings on the behaviour of psychiatric patients. The result was the birth of a new branch
in psychology, namely environmental psychology, which has in the past forty years provided a body
of knowledge for building professionals (Bell, et al, 1996). Canter (1983) has extended the application
of environmental psychology in the evaluation of buildings using a facet approach. This approach has
produced an effective conceptual framework for understanding the human behaviour in their
environments. In recent years the facet approach has been more widely used by environmental
psychologists (Groat, 1985).

2.2 The research framework

The architectural design research community in the 1990s has inherited a body of knowledge and
experience in the fields of environmental psychology, design and computer technology. The theories
of human spatial behaviour combined with design theories can help designers to produce more user-
friendly buildings. In this paper we explore some of the underlying theories in the above fields with
the aim to exhibit briefly our framework for a new thinking in the development of conceptual design.
Here, we provide a preliminary framework for our interpretation of the design information at two
levels, corresponding to the conceptual and the detailed design components. Further, we examine
the relevance of the theories of human spatial behaviour and particularly the role of emotions and
affective appraisal. Finally, we demonstrate our methods for data collection and structuring. The
end-of- research results are scheduled for publication next year.

2.3 Information Theory of Design

People live and work in man-made structures, i.e., buildings. These can either facilitate or restrict
human actions. Despite extensive progress in the fields of environmental psychology, geography,
economics, sociology and planning, building design has not yet enjoyed much benefit from the
above.

3
 Buildings have generally been criticised for their incompatibility with their surroundings,
unsatisfactory artistic qualities, alienating the people who use or live in or around them, or simply
failing to function adequately. Many have blamed this on architectural determinism of the design
profession, but unable to suggest any feasible alternative solution to eliminate these shortcomings.

In this research, the conventional approach to formulating the design problems/goals is challenged by
providing a down-up account of the design needs. We therefore propose a systematic approach to
compiling design briefs, which we call the information theory of design. The model proposed here is
under construction and therefore details will be left for an end of project report.

The model under construction proposes a two-level hierarchy of information (Diagram 1). In the first
stage of our theory development, we have made direct observations, in-depth interviews and have
enjoyed the accumulated knowledge of industrial partners. In this model we hypothesise that the
interface between the design and its users happen at two levels, which we call macro and micro
levels of information.

Diagram 1. Hierarchy of Design Information

Macro level information system

Purposes
• Flows and movements within the building
• Site, orientation, topography and access (both vertically and horizontally)
• Space Syntax (layouts in terms of patterns of connections between spaces)
• Structural constraints

Micro level information system

Functions and Performance levels:
• Spatial requirements; dimensions, details and proportions
• Internal environmental qualities/ambient factors; noise, air, lighting, temperature, electrical
services, controls, security, and views
• Textures, materials, colours, and furnishings
• Structural details
• Overall performance levels of the different parts and the building

Current design theorists, Gero et al (1996) have aimed to develop detailed accounts of design by
providing a breakdown of the parameters in terms of their functions, behaviour and structures.
Although this approach has provided a language by which the design tasks can be rationalised and
computerised, these can be criticised for their disregard of the emotional content of design.

One aspect of human experience of buildings can be explained in terms of the success or failure of
the building experience to satisfy the individual/group purposes or expectations. This experience, we
argue, is time dependent. By this we mean that the proposed experience can be enhanced or
deterred by the time spent in a building. This is more clearly evident in the case of public spaces
where the experience is of a dynamic nature. The analogy proposed here is what we call the
'motorway' and the 'countryside' driving experiences. The short-term memory in humans has a limited
capacity and in the case of the 'motorway drive' the human brain can only register a vision of the
road, which is limited to lines, signs, connections and movements. This limits the number of details,
which can be observed by the driver. While in a 'countryside drive', on the other hand, a leisurely
experience can provide a more detailed account of events as well as recollections associated with
those events.

3. Environmental Research
The human spatial habits have been discussed by a number of environmental psychologists since the
1960s.The early days of environmental research were heavily influenced by a Positivist world of
atomistic facts, and most research was conducted through a hypothesis-testing procedure that
insisted on reliable, and publicly verifiable results (Golledge, 1987). Golledge argues that:

4
 'The epistemological base of positivism was often wanting in research that accepted cognition
as a significant factor mediating the dialectical relationship between man and environment'.

There is now a tendency to consider a much wider range of influences both on personal and social
levels to form our views of the environment around us. This is well elaborated by Golledge in the
following:

'Information from "a priori given world" is mediated by sets of values, beliefs and meanings
that have both idiosyncratic and general significance and, that heavily influenced the
probability that a bit of information emanating from an element or thing is received, stored, and
potentially used by people’.

The current understanding of the human environment relationship regards:

'Interpretation, experience, and even knowledge as a function of social, cultural values and
constraints, memory, affect, emotion, fears, beliefs, prejudices, misconceptions, mental
capabilities, habits, expectations and other idiosyncratic values along with all the institutional,
economic, and physical factors that not only characterise the public (objective) environment
but are an essential part of the flow of information from it.' (ibid. p134).

It is argued, for example, that a house is not the 'same' house when perceived by different people. To
allow for individual differences, Golledge asserts the interactionalist is an approach which provides an
effective method which allows a merger of aspects of phenomenology and positivism, literature and
science, human feelings, emotions, and objective measurement to a degree that is not apparent in
other epistemologies.

Since the early days of environmental psychology, the concepts of personal space and territoriality
generated a great deal of interest. Robert Sommer's (1969). Hall (1966) proposed a 'proximic
framework', which is regarded as a milestone in the development of the way people make active use
and manipulate space. In particular, he identified four distance zones, which reflected the four
principal categories of relationships (intimate, personal, social and public) and the types of activities
and spaces corresponding to them. As more research has focused on the environmental cognition, it
is now widely believed that humans interaction with their environments is an organised activity. The
concept of plan originally developed in the 1960s refer to 'any organised pattern of action about which
an individual thinks; it may include alternatives to a specific action that is undertaken and must be
considered as part of the cognitive component of decision making' (Golledge, 1987). For the first
time Miller, et al (1960) developed the concept of the plan to explain the intended sequence of acts
leading to a goal:

'A plan is hierarchically organised in the sense that each act in the sequence can be thought
of as itself composed of a sequence of sub-actions with a goal, […] In the first step, a person,
P, perceives a problem and plans how to do something about it. P plans a sequence of
behaviours intended to accomplish a goal. P then chooses an appropriate place and travel
there for execution of the plan. Finally, P arrives and carries out the plan -or not, as
circumstances allow'.

Kaplan’s (1983) suggestion of a ‘plan’ refered to any organised pattern of action about which an
individual thinks’; and Russell and Snodgrass (1987) showed that the sequence of 'plan-travel-
execute' can constitute a unit of varied size. For example, this can refer to a brief episode at home
reading a travel brochure, or it can refer to migration to another country. Canter (1983) has also
emphasised repeatedly the purposefulness of the human activity. The expected value from this
course of actions as many have argued depends on the probabilities of the various outcomes of those
actions and the value of those outcomes.

3.1 Environment Meaning

In environmental psychology much attention has been paid to the meaning that people attribute to
their environments. Osgood (1975) developed a three-dimensional model involving concepts such as
evaluation, activity and potency.

5
These dimensions of meaning have been confirmed repeatedly by evidence gathered using semantic
differential methods. Berlyne et al (1974) also confirmed these dimensions in their research in
aesthetic appreciation. Mehrabian and Russell (1974) found similar dimensions, which they called
pleasure, arousal and dominance. However, Canter (1969) found out that Osgood three-dimensions
of evaluation, potency and activity are not so relevant to architecture. He further asserted that:

'The basic dimensions of environmental meaning are not likely to be equivalent to the
dimensions of semantic meaning identified by Osgood and his associates'.

The empirical studies have identified other factors. For example, Canter (1969) observed seven
factors of environmental meaning: character, coherence, friendliness, roughness, flexibility, fashion,
and safety. Hersberger (1970) found five factors: pleasantness, organisation, potency novelty-
excitement and spaciousness. Vielhauer (1965) developed a set of 66 bipolar adjectival descriptors
relevant to architecture, which after further analysis generated five factors: aesthetic appeal, physical
organisation, size, temperature-ventilation, and lighting (see Appendix B). Russell et al (1981) have
demonstrated that the discrepancy between Osgood’s theory and empirical studies of environmental
meaning have been simply caused by measuring different affective and cognitive components of
meaning.

Russell and Snodgrass (1987) extensively studied the affective components of meanings and
emotions. They have referred to emotions as a ‘heterogeneous class of different phenomena’. The
difficulty as they have pointed out is that emotions can embrace both prototypical episodes such as
falling in love, or they can refer to vague feelings of mood, attitudes, preferences, or just about
anything that is not coldly rational. Zajonc (1980) has defined emotions which are ‘bodily feelings that
reveal preferences, and Clore and Parrott (1991) have refered to emotions as a means to conveying
information to individuals about the nature of the their psychological situation. However vague the
concept of emotions, there is growing interest in the benefits gained from the stimulation of positive
emotions in people. In the study of organisational emotions, Locke (1996) has demonstrated that
displays of positive emotions to consumers has resulted in ‘encore gains’ for organisations. Other
research has further highlighted that the quality of services affect customers’ emotions (Locke, 1996).
In architectural design, management of emotions have been vastly neglected by the traditional
architectural design methods, and in this research we have aimed to investigate the nature of
emotions relevant to public space design. Diagram 2. shows some of the concepts which are
currently being examined using semi-structure interviews of building users.

Diagram 2. Emotional Content of Space

Environmental qualities Spaces Activities

Aesthetics Bathroom Acceding

Cleanliness Classroom Cleaning
Complexity Corridor Descending
Friendliness Dinning Room Eating
Incongruity Entrance Hall Listening
Legibility Information Point Moving
Ornate Lift/Elevator Playing
Potency Meeting Room Queuing
Privacy Music Room Resting
Size Office Rushing
Spaciousness Playing Room Sitting
Surprisingness Queuing space Talking
………… Smokers Room Waiting
…… Waiting Room Walking

3.2 Emotions and Affective Appraisal

In this section we examine the nature of emotions in more depth. Russell and Snodgrass have
identified four types of emotions, which they call emotional dispositions, moods, affective appraisals
and emotional episodes. These refer to long and short term emotions in general.

6
 However, the two emotional descriptions, which we have found appropriate to the present research
are those of mood and affective appraisal.

Russell and Snodgrass (1987) have provided a comprehensive discussion of emotions, which relates
to activity in space:

'The different steps thus highlight different aspects of emotion: planning requires affective
appraisal of the events planned'.

Emotional dispositions, as they have argued 'relates to long-term emotions and a tendency to do or
think or feel particular things when the right circumstances occur'. Feeling for our parents is said to be
an emotional disposition. Emotional disposition is argued to be 'a disposition because it exists even
during the times when we are not thinking or feeling anything about our parents, but it is manifested
on certain occasions'. By mood they refer to 'the core emotion-tinged feeling of a person’s subjective
state at any given moment'. In their account moods refer to psychological states such as calm, upset,
depressed, excited, unhappy, or neutral. By this definition a person is always in a mood. Moods are
usually measured in self-report formats. Further, pleasure and arousal are taken as the key
dimensions of mood. Affective appraisals refers to 'our judgements of things as pleasant, attractive,
valuable, likeable, preferable, repulsive and so on'. It is in this respect that these can be distinguished
from moods. Affective appraisal is always directed towards something - the appraisal always refers to
a quality of the object appraised. It is the object that appears pleasant or disgusting. It could also
occur with no inner emotional feelings. It can be distinguished from mood in as much as the
appraiser may evaluate a subject while experiencing a certain mood, which has no relation to the
appraisal event. Finally, emotional episodes, are 'emotional reaction to something, with the reaction
typically involving co-ordinated and distinctive physiological, behavioural and mental changes like
falling in love with someone, suffering a grief at death, getting angry at someone and being
frightened by a bear in the woods'. Emotional episodes have common characteristics with both
affective appraisals and mood. Like affective appraisal, emotional episodes are about ‘something’
and like moods they refer to a core subjective feeling. Emotional episodes are prototypical
examples of what is usually meant by an emotion.

4. Research Method
In pursuit of the development of a theory of design information, we have so far demonstrated that the
architectural design can benefit from broadening its scope by careful consideration of studies in other
fields such as environmental psychology, particularly, the study of emotions and environmental
meanings. In Diagram 3., we outline our interpretation of what is meant by the macro and micro level
information systems. The interface between strategic design and the detailed design forms is what is
commonly known as the user experience of the building. The concepts of macro and micro refer to
the overall experience and individual events respectively. The degree to which an individual's
experience moves along a macro-micro continuum is hypothesised to be dependent on the length of
time spent in the space, purpose and experience of the user, as it is on the subjective appraisal of the
space by that individual. This research has set to explore the above relationships by mapping the
behavioural patterns of the building users against design knowledge compiled by client/user
organisations. It is believed that such an approach would enable the conceptualisation phase of the
architectural creation, while reducing the gap between the silent users whose needs are not so well
understood by the paying client.

The facet approach proposed by Canter (1983) has provided a valuable framework for identifying the
interrelationship between design information and the resultant psychological impact on the building
users. Canter has proposed literature review as the starting point in his facet approach to theory
development. In addition, our research has vastly benefited from the clients' experience of the
buildings in operation. In order to identify categories and concepts grounded in the users' personal
constructs we have proposed multiple sorting procedures.

7
Diagram 3. Micro and Macro Design Information Interaction

Macro Level Micro Level

Building

Intents Functions
Purposes The Performances
Forms Interface Behaviour
between
forms and
functions

The following facets (see Appendix A.) presented here demonstrate a few examples of the important
categories, which have been derived from our preliminary investigations. The method used here is
based on what Canter (1983) has suggested for the study of housing satisfaction. The model is
responsive to physical, physiological, psychological, social and cultural differences of the users, as it
is sensitive to the nature of their experiences and past experiences. The model refutes a top-to-
bottom approach in design by allowing the true beneficiaries of a space influencing its design. The
above model is applied to each of the identified factors in order to determine the nature of experience
and those aspects of cognitive and emotive processes, which lead to a higher degree of satisfaction
from a place.

5. Conclusions
During the early phases of design, architects/designers seek from their promoters information relating
to the design's overall needs. Statement of needs may be in the form of the clients' design brief
documents, specifications or any other supporting documents. Within the current practice, eliciting
knowledge, information and design data is an art mostly to be mastered by the practical experience
of both architects/designers and their client organisations. Therefore, one can argue that the more
experienced clients who are also the buildings’ main user/operator may over time form a better view
of the physical and socio-psychological needs of their building users than the less experienced ones.
However, the quality of the data collected on the needs of the building users is much dependent on
the methods and the underlying theories of data collection as they are on the accuracy of the data
collected. In the absence of a strong theoretical framework, data collection can resolve in an ad hoc
attempt, which would naturally be very unsystematic, and unrepresentative to the real needs of the
building users. On the other hand, theoretically strong research on the users' habits and their
environmental behaviour can help accumulate building design knowledge and thus reduce costs of
learning by errors.

The research outlined above is an ongoing effort part of a two-year Link/IDAC project at the
Advanced Construction Technology, University of Reading. As a step towards integration of design
and construction activities this project has set itself the task of combining the dynamism of an
industrial approach with the underpinning of a theoretical framework with a view to proposing a new
thinking for managing the design information. The research is in the first year of its two-year life, and
the research team is presently undertaking fieldwork. The pilot study results are due for publication
shortly. It is also hoped that the detailed account of the fieldwork and the model discussed briefly in
this paper would be available for presentation in September.

6. Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all our industrial partners and funding bodies who have supported us
wholeheartedly. Further, we are very grateful for the valuable advice, contribution and support of Dr.
Marylin Williams, Rose Smith, Richard Lorch, Prof. Tom Mitchell, Prof. Roy Davis and Prof. David
Canter.

8
6.1

Appendix A.

Table 1. A Facet Approach to the Evaluation of Airport Design

Facet One
ROLE

The extent to which [1. Short-haul passenger ] (an airport user) states that
[2. Long-haul passenger ]
[3. Other airport visitors ]

LEVEL = L REFERENT =R
[1. The airport itself ] [1.Social contact ]
[2. The location ] is satisfactory for [2.Space ]
[3. The neighbourhood ] [3.Services ]

FOCUS = F
[1. Overall ] [1. Not at all ]
[2. In general ] meets her/his objectives [2.Somewhat negatively ]
3. In particular ] [3.In between ]
[4.Somewhat positively ]
[5. Very much ]

Facet Two.
ROLE

The extent to which [1. Business traveller ] (an airport user) states that
[2. Holiday maker ]
[3. Other airport visitors ]

LEVEL = L REFERENT =R
[1. The Route used by the passenger ] [1. Aesthetic Appeal ]
[2.The overall design of the building ] is satisfactory for [2. Personal Space ]
[3. The specific aspects of design ] [3. Movement within building ]
[4. Services ]

FOCUS = F
[1. Overall ] [1. Not at all ]
[2. In general ] meets her/his objectives [2.Somewhat negatively ]
[3. In particular ] [3.In between ]
[4.somewhat positively ]
[5. Very much ]

9
 6.2

Appendix B.

Early Environmental Research, Source Zube & Craik

Vielhauer- Canter Craik Hersberger Collins

Kasmar,
1970 1968 1968 1972 1969
Aesthetics Impressive Dynamic Exciting Expensive
Unique Different Unique Unique
Interesting Interesting Interesting Interesting
Friendliness Beautiful Soft Civilised Soft Fun
Attractive Friendly Cheerful Friendly Happy
Appealing Welcoming Joyful Comfortable Joyful
Organisation Organised Tidy Ordered Equipped
Efficient Coherent Controlled Co-ordinated
Orderly Clear Clear Complete
Potency Rough Rugged
Coarse Massive
Dark Permanent
Space Roomy Spaciousness Spacious Liveable
Large Changeable Large Lived in
Wide Flexible Loose Curtained

Ornate Bright Conservativ Generous Textured

Colourful e Rich Bright colours
Gay Colourful Lavish Flashy
Bizarre
Neat Clean Dirty Cluttered
Tidy Empty Confined
Neat Broad Roomy
Size Large Big Large Big
Huge Huge Formal Large
Broad Proud Roomy

10
 6.3

Bibliography
• Abdul Aziz, A. R. (1991). Global Strategies of Construction Firms, PhD Thesis, Reading
University
• Akin, . (1986). Psychology of Architectural Design, Pion Ltd., London
• Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Forms, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
• Alexander, C. (1979). The Timeless Way of Building, Oxford University Press, New York
• Alexander, C.(1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, construction. Oxford University
Press, New York
• Ball, M. (1988). Rebuilding Construction: Economic Change in the British Construction Industry.
Routledge, London
• Bell, P. A.; Fisher, J. D.; Baum, A.; and Greene, T. C. (1996). Environmental Psychology (4th
Edition) Harcourt Brace College Publishers, USA
• Berlyne, D. E. (Ed.) (1974). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps Towards an
Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation. New York, Halsted Press
• Canter, D. (1969). ‘An Intergroup Comparison of Connotative dimensions in Architecture’.
Environment and Behaviour, 1, pp37-48
• Canter, D. (1983). ‘The Purposive Evaluation of Places: A Facet Approach’, Environment and
Behaviour, 15, No. 6, November
• Canter, D. (199 ). ‘The Facets of Places, Advances in Environment’ The Integration of Theory,
Research, Methods and Utilisation. (Eds.) Gary Moore and Robert W. Marauns. Behaviour and
Design, 4
• Canter, D.; Brown, J.; and Groat, L. (1985). ‘A Multiple Sorting Procedure for Studying
Conceptual Systems’. The Research Interview, Academic Press Inc, London
• Drake, J. (1979). ‘The Primary Generator and the Design Process’. In N. Cross, J. Naughton and
D. Walker (1981). ‘Design Method and Scientific Method’. Design Studies, 2, No.4, pp195-201
• Dybkjaer, L. (1992). Computer-Aided Floor Plan Sketching, A Study of Knowledge Representation
in Architectural Design, PhD Thesis, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
• Garbow, S. (1983). Christopher Alexander: The Search for a New Paradigm in Architecture. Oriel
Press, Stocksfield, Boston, Henley, London
• Gero, J. (1996). (Ed.) Advances in Formal Design Methods for CAD, University of Sydney,
Chapman and Hall, London
• Golledge, R. G. (1987). 'Environmental Cognition', in D. Stokoles & I. Altman (Eds.) Handbook of
Environmental Psychology, New York: Wiley.1, pp 131-175
• Groat, L. (1985). Psychological Aspects of Contextual Compatibility in Architecture: A Study of
Environmental Meaning, PhD Thesis, University of Surrey, UK
• Hall, E. T. (1963). ‘A system for the Notation of Proxemic Behaviour’. American Anthropologist,
65, pp1003-1026
• Hersberger, R. G. (1970). ‘A Study of Meaning and Architecture’, In H. Sanoff and S. Cohn (Eds.)
EDRA, 1. Stroudsburg, P. A. Doweden, Hutchinson & Ross.
• Hillier, B.; Musgrave, J. and O’Sullivan, P. (1972).’Knowledge in Design’. In environmental
design: research and Practice (Ed.) W.J. Mitchell (Proceedings of the EDRA3/AP8 Conference)
University of California, Los Angeles
• Jones, C. (1970). Design Methods, John Wiley, New York
• Kaplan, S. (1973). ‘Cognitive Maps in Perception and Thought’. In R. Downs and D. Stea (Eds.),
Image and Environment: Cognition Mappings and Spatial Behaviour. Chicago, Aldine
• Kaplan, S. (1983). ‘A model of Human/Environment Compatibility’. Environment and Behaviour,
15, pp311-332
• Locke, K. (1996). ‘A Funny Thing Happened! The Management of Consumer Emotions in Service
Encounters’, Organisation Science, Jan/Feb, 7, No 1, pp 40-59
• Mehrabian, A.; and Russell, J. (1974). ‘A Verbal Measure of Information Rate for Studies in
Environmental Psychology’. Environment and Behaviour, 6, pp233-252
• Miller, G. A.; Galanter, E. and Pribram, K. H. (1960). ‘Plans and the Structure of Behaviour’, In R.
G. Golledge (1987). Golledge, R. G. (1987). 'Environmental Cognition', in D. Stokoles & I. Altman
(Eds.) Handbook of Environmental Psychology, New York: Wiley.1, pp 131-175

11
 • Mitchell, T. (1992). Prefaces to the Second Edition, 1992, C. Thomas Mitchell. In John Chris
Jones Design Methods, 2nd edition and additional texts.
• Nowlis, V.; and Nowlis, H. H. (1956). The Description and Analysis of Mood. Annals of the New
York academy of sciences, 65, pp345-355.
• Osgood, C.; Suci, G.; and Tannenbaum, P. (1957) In L. Groat (1985), Psychological Aspects of
Contextual Compatibility in Architecture: A Study of Environmental Meaning, PhD Thesis,
University of Surrey, UK
• Piaget, J.; and Indler, B. (1969). The Psychology of the Child, Basic Books, New York
• Rittel, H. W. J.; and Webber, M. M. (1984). ‘Planning Problems are Wicked Problems’, In General
Theory of Design Methodology (Ed.) Cross. Wiley, Chichester
• Russell, J. and Mehrabian, (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press
• Russell, J.; and Snodgrass, J. (1987). ‘Emotion and the Environment’. In D Stokols; and I.
Altman, (Eds.) Handbook of Environmental Psychology, 1, New York
• Russell, J.; and Ward, L.M. (1982). ‘Environmental Psychology Annual Review of Psychology’,
33. Pp259-288
• Russell, J.; Ward, L. M.; and Pratt, G. (1981). ‘Affective Quality Attributed to Environments: A
Factor Analytic Study’. Environment and Behaviour, Sage Publication, 13, No. 3, pp259-288
• Sommer, R. (1969) Personal Space: ‘The Behavioural Basis of Design’, In Aiello, J. R. (1987).
'Human Spatial Behaviour', in Handbook of Environmental Psychology, 1, pp389-504
• Vielhauer, J. A. (1965). The Development of a Semantic Scale for the Description of the Physical
Environment
• Zajonc, R. B. (1980). ‘Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need no Inferences’. American
Psychologist, 39, pp 117-123

12

View publication stats