,..

. ·,.

9
FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUMAN
BEHAVIOR_.

''.

The work of environm~ntal designers is very much ings and actions are limite(!. by the affordanc~~ of
influenced by · tht;ir concepts of human nature. the natural and built environments, the culturaf en-
These have varied during history. At one time peo- vironmef!t, and the intrapsychic states of the people
ple an! perceived as bei~g free-willed, at another as concerned.
.controlled by their environments. The latter view The explanation of these processes of behavior
was central to the thinking of the Modernists in ar- is inevitably guided by an overall concept or sc_hema.
chitecture and remains so in much architectural the- That given here has been called the ..environmen-
ory today. During one period ·people are believed tal perception and behavior approach" (Patricios
to be z:ational, at another irrational (Neisser 1977). 1975). It is a ·model that focuses on individuals and
This difference is reflected in the differences be- ·groups of individuals. This can be contrasted with
tween first- and second-generation models of the models that deal with aggregates of people as indi-
design process. Anthropalogical, sociological, and viduals. The approach used here deals with the fac-
psychological research has reduced some of the
mysteriousness of li'uman behavior. but much re-
mains unknown. Our present understanding does,
however, darify much about. the person-environ- Affordances of the Environment
ment in-terface and thus about environmental de-
stgn. . . ..
. The environment is potentially rich in afford-
Perception - - J..~Cog.nitjo.nland.AIIect ---~,~~~'
arices for human experiences and behavior. The
basic processes involved in the in~er.actiqn. between
people and their environment are' shown in figure Perceptions of
9-1. Information about the environment is obtair .d .. Emotional Response the Results of
through perceptual processes that are guided by 1 . . ,·. Behavior
schemata motivated by needs. These sch~mata are t .. ·I
partially innate and partially learned. They form
the Jin_kage between perception anq cognition. They
SeT....
guide not only the perceptual processes but also
emotional responses (affect) and actions (spatial be- MotivationsiNeed;o
Source: Gibson ( 1966)
havior), which in turn affect the schemata as the
outcomes of behavior are discerned. Human feel- 9-1. The Fundamental Processes of Human Behavior.
 tors underlying 'IS~~,~~klr at the scale'JPfrull~angs, late to the concerns of environmental design.
urban complexes, and open spaces rather than at a Maslow suggests that there is a hierarchy of
regional scale. needs from the strongest to the weakest, with the
Within the "environmental perception and cog- stronger taking precedence over the. weaker. His
nition approach," there are different theories of hierarchy from strongest to weakest is as follows:
perception, cognition, and spatial behavior., These physiological needs, such as hunger and thirst; safety
theories, alrhough based on research, are often needs, such as security and protection from physical
highly speculative and untested. It is important for harm; belonging and love needs, such as membership
the designer to understand them so that their im- in. a group and the receiving of affection; esteem
plications for the concerns of environmental design needs, those desires of an individual to be held in
can be comprehended. In presenting these theoret- high value by himself or herself and others; actuali-
ical issues, stress will be placed on what designers zation needs, representing the desire to fulfill one's
need to know, and on what we do and do not know capacities; and cognitive and aesthetic needs, such as
, in ~,rder to clarify positive environmental design the thirst for knowledge and the desire for beauty
theory. The discussion will proceed from motivation for its own sake.
to fJerception to cognition and affect to spatial behavior This classification provides a framework for
to the subject of individual differences in behavior. thinking about the concerns of environmental de-
sign and for the concerns of the designer. The built
environment provides for human physiological
needs, such as shelter; for safety needs, physical and
MOTIVATION
psychological security; for belonging and esteem
Motivation is the guiding force behind behav- needs, through environmental symbolism as well as
ior. Behavior is directed toward the satisfaction of through specific sets of activities; fo'r actualization
needs. Therefore it is important for environmental needs, through the freedom of choice; for cognitive
design theory to be based on some concept of needs, through access to opportunities for develop-
human needs. A number of such models exist (such ment; and for aesthetic needs, through formal
as H. Murray 1938, Maslow 1943, 1954, Erikson beauty. Much that contributes to the meeting of
1950, Fromm 1950, Whiting and Child 1953, A. these needs, however, has very little to do with the
Leighton 1959). They all attempt to explain "inter- built environment.
nal forccs"-physiological and psychological, con- Some needs are physiologically based, some are
I scious and unconscious-and types of needs from sociologically or psychologically based, and some
I the most basic to the loftiest. Two of the models are a mixture. The more basic needs are physiolog-
especially have been used by environmental design- ically based; the need to belong may have a physio-
ers in thinking about what the built environment logical component but is socially and culturally
should afford people: Alexander Leightor>'s scale of biased, whereas the need for self-actualization and
rssentiaL striving sentiments ( 1959), and Abraham Mas- cognitive and aesthetic needs are largely psycholog-
low's hierarch_y of human needs ( 1943, 1954). ical (Moleski 1978). The degree to which each need
Leighton's model has been found by certain has to be fulfilled varies from person to person,
writers to be a "convenient handle" for understand- depending on the individual's philosophy of life,
ing the nature of the built environment with respect personality, culture, and habituation level-what
to humans (Alexander 1969, Perin 1970). Leighton they are used to. Not everybody seeks a large mea-
identifies the following needs: (I) physical security, sure of bodily comfort; some people stress aesthetic
!:!) sexual satisfaction, (3) the expression of hostility, needs over physiological ones. Some are prepared
(-1) the expression of love, (5) the securing of love, to give their lives for what they believe. People do,
(!i) the receiving of recognition, (7) the expression however, look at the environment partly in terms of
11r spontaneity, (8) orientation in terms of one's their needs; what they discern is largely based on
place iu society and the places of others, (9) the their needs and on what they have learned to per-
securing and maintenance of membership in a def- ceive.
inite group, and (10) belonging to a moral order.
Some of these needs have to do with what the envi-
ronment affords at an instrumental level (for ex-

I ample, security, the expression of spontaneity), and

others at a symbolic level (for example, recognition,
membership). The list is, however, cumbersome
and. is not ordered in an explicit fashion. Maslow's
PERCEPTION
Perception is the process of obtaining informa-
tion from and <,1bout one's surroundings. It is active
and purposeful. It is where cognition and reality
lllodel, though similar to Leighton's, is easier to re- meet (Neisser 1977). There have been several major

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR 83

 attempts 10 describe and explain why we perceive cause they ·have influenced and will continue to
what we do. They have influenced environmental influence our thinking about the nature of environ-
design theory very much, particularly by the.ir ef~ mental design at all scales.
fons to develop aesthetic philosophies. Designers
have not always realized how conjectural these the-
ories of perception are. The result has been that
they have· drawn very strong conclusions about the
The Gestalt Theory of Perception
purposes of design based on very inadequate evi- The Bauhaus formulation of basic design was
dence. considered to be factual because it drew so heavily
There are two basic sets of theories of percep- on, and/or was so heavily corroborated by, Gestalt
tion. One focuses on the reception of sensory expe- theory. Artists such as Kandinsky (Overy 1969) and
~Tience and the other on the senses as active and Kepes (1944) must have been attracted by Gestalt
'~interrelated systems. The first set attempts to ex- theory's emphasis on pattern perception. The spec-
·'plain how sense data, the supposed units of percep- ulative nature of much of Gestalt theory was, how- ,
tion, get put together in the brain.· Empiricism ever, not clearly recognized. To understand Gestalt
(Titchncr 1910, Helmholtz 1925, Carr 1935) sug- theory, its attraction for artists and architects, and
gests by association. Transactionalism (Ames 1960, It- what it still affords us in creating positive environ-
telson and Cantrel 1954), · which influenced the mental design theory, one must understand its con-
writings on environmental design of people such as cepts of fonn, isom01·phism, and field forces.
Walter Gropius (1947), Lewis Mumford (1952), and Form is fundamental. It is that which stands
Clifford Moller (1968), stresses the role of experi- apart as a closed and structured element in the vi-
ence. Nativist and Rationalist theories (see Cassirer sual world (Katz 1950). "The solid figure appears as
1954, Piaget 1955, Chomsky 1957) stress the role of something apart, behind which the ground seems to
innate ideas and the making of rational inferences extend without interruption like a homogeneous
from sensations. Christian Norberg-Schutz's dis- plane" (Kohler 1929). Gestalt psychologists com-
course on design (1964) is very much influenced by piled a list of factors that influence the perception
this theoretical approach to perception. Gestalt the- of form. Seven of these are of importance to envi-
ory argues that the basis for the integration is the ronmental design theory because they tell us much
spontaneous organization of sensory inputs to the about how units in the environment are perceived.
l:>rain (Kohler 1929, Koff'ka 1935, Wertheimer They are the "laws" of proximity, similarity, closure,
1938, Ellis 1939), whereas information-processing the- good continuance, closedness, area, and symmetry.
ories suggest that there are computerlike processes Proximity is the simplest condition of organi-
in the brain. Gestalt theory has influenced design zation (Hochberg 1964). According to Gestalt the-
theory (sec Kepes 1944, Ushenko 1953, de Saus- ory, objects that are close together tend to be
marez 1964, Isaac 1971, Arnheim 1977) more than grouped together visually, the relative closeness of-
any other perception theory, whereas inform:ttion- fering the least resistance to the interconnection of
processing theories are the basis for the writings on sensory units. This law is illustrated in figure 9~2a.
aesthetics of people such as Abraham Moles (1966). The rows and columns are seen with equal ease in
In contrast to these theories is the ecological ap- (i), but in (ii) the pattern is perceived as a set of rows.
fJroach of James Gibson (1966, 1979) and Eleanor Proximity can yield to other factors of organi-
Gibson (1969), who suggest that perception is infor- zation. Figure 9-2b illustrates the law of similarity.
mation based. This should not be confused with the If elements have similar qualities-size, texture,
information-processing cybernetic models of per- color, and so forth-they tend to be perceived as
ception. The Gibsons acknowl.::dge the reality of single units, as in (i) rather than in (ii). In figure
sensory experience but regarJ it as a by-product 9-2c a conflicting situation is shown. Here it is pos-
rather than the "building blocks of perception." Ul- sible to impose an organization based on similar-
rich Neisser (1977) added the· concept of schema as a ity or proximity. Artists describe this state as one
"connecting link between perception and the' higher ·of ten"ton. ·· ·
mental processes" to· the b~ic the·ory. 1 ne law of closure states that optical units tend
While Gestalt theory has most inftue~ced· the to be shaped into dosed wholes (Kohler 1929). In
ideas of environmental designers during the cou'rse .. figure '9-2d two such cases are illustrated. The pat- · .
of this century, it has been seriously challenged as tern in diagram (i) tends to be seen as a completed
an explanation of how the world is perceived by circle ·and (ii) .as a triangle. The openings in the
transactionalist · and ecological theories in recent figures seem insignificant or extremely important,
times. It is important to understand these three in- depending on one's focus. .
terpretations of the processes of perception, be- The faw of good con-tinuance states that people

U6 POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

 ....

• J,+,;,.f''iJ • $);,;it<
• ••• •
• • • •
• • • • • •• • •
(i) • • • •
• •• • • •
c. A Conflict between Lnws of Proximity and Similarity

• •• •• • •
• •••• ••
(ii)
• •••• ••
a. Law oi Proximity
(i)

•
I
I I •
• I• A
•I I • •
• I•
I • I•
I I •
•
•• •
i I•
{i)

b. Law of Similarity
(ii)
•I •• • (ii)L

d. Law of Closure
9-2. The Gestalt Laws of Visual Organization.

tend to percei';'e continuous elements as single units. closed area the more it t.ends to be seen as a figure.
In figure 9-2c we perceive (i) as two lines crossing The law of symmetry states that the more symmet-
and not as two L's. We perceive (ii) as a. sine wave rical a closed area the more it tends to be seen as a
on a castellated b~ckground, although the law of figure. The law of dosednl.!ss suggests that areas
closed ness suggests that we should see it as a set of with closed contours tend to be seen as units more
closed forms. We see (iii) ·as a two-dimensional rep- generally than those without them. Thus in 9-2f (i)
resentation of a surface extending behind two mh- the shape with a dosed contour tends to be seen as
ers. a unit; we tend to see the frame in (ii) and the win-
The other laws of organization are not so fun- dow in (iii), while io 9-2g the shaded· area appears
damental. The law of area states that the smaller a to be seen as a col~mn on a white background.

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HC.\IA.\' BEH.-\ \'/OR 87

-----------------------------------------------------------',
 (i) (il)

(iii)

e. Law of Good Continuance

(i)

I. (ii)

9-2, continued.

88 POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

 The theory would seem to explain why in actual ex-
perience the dynamic or expressive aspects are the
most powerful and _immediate qualities of the per-
cept.
This is a controversial observation, but it is implicit
and often explicit in much Cubist art and in modern
architectural ideology-normative theory.
The concept of isomorphism has been severely
challenged in recent times. R. L. Gregory ( 1966)
r notes:
l
There is no independent evidence for such brain .
processes and no independent way of discovering
their properties. If there is no w 1 of discovering
their properties then they are highly suspect. ·

g. Soun:c: Adaplcd from Hochll<'rg (1969)

There is much experimental evidence that supports
this contention (such as Lashley, Chow, and
9-2, coulimml. Semmes 1951 ). The introspective analyses of design
theorists have led also to a doubt that it exists
(Colquhoun 1967). Recent theories of perception
All of these laws are explained in terms of iso- suggest it is unnecessary (Gibson 1966, 1979). Find-
morphism, an hypothesized parallelism between the ings can be explained in terms of learned associa-
form of underlying neurological processes and the tions of patterns with feelings. .
form of the perceptual experience (KOhler 1929). The legacy of Gestalt theory is a major one both
Rudolf Arnheim ( 1965) notes: in psychology (Gibson 1971) and in environmental
design. Its empirical observations of the ways in
The forces which are experienced when looking at which we order the environment still offer much
visual objects can be considered the psychological for environmental design where formal aesthetic is-
equivalent of physiological forces active in the brain sues of unity often arise. It forms the basis from
center of vision. Although these processes occur which the ecological approach to perception is de-
physiologically in the brain, they are properties of rived (Gihson 1950). At the same time many ques-
the perceived objects themselves. tions about the processes of perception have been
. ~ore thoroughly addressed by more recent theo-
All these forces are said to occur in some field or nes.
environment. Field forces, as in mathematics, are said
to have an area of application, a direction, and a
magnitude. The state of the field is the result of all The Transactional Theory of Perception
the forces acting there (Koffka 1935). All these Transactional theory emphasizes the role of ex-
forces are governed by the principle of Pragnanz .. perience in perception and focuses on the dynamic
According· to this principle, perceptions take the relationship between person and environment. Per-
most stable form under the circumstances. · ception is considered to be a transaction in which the
In summary, Gestalt theory suggests that all environment, the observer, and the perception are
our perceptions are organized into figures-this mutually dependent on each other. William Ittelson
hook is a figure with the surroundings· as ground. ( 1960) defines the process as follows:
In addition, patterns of lines, planes, and objects
appear to hav~ certain "dynamic" qualities-they Perception is that part Qf the living process b}' which
appear to move, or to be heavy or light,, happy or each of us, from his own particular point of view,
sad. This is explained by the isomorphism between creates for himself the world in which ... he tries to
perceptual experience and human neurological gain his satisfaction.
processes. This is the basis for the Gestalt theory of
expression in art and architecture (Arnheim 1949, The intellectual underpinnings for this position are
1968, 1977, Levi 1974). According to Gestalt theory in transactional philosophy (Dewey and Bentley
these are not subjective associations with visual pat- 1949), the psychology of Adelbert Ames (1960), and
terns. They precede the perception of pattern. the sociology of George Mead (1903). Transactional
.-\rnheim (1968) writes: theory makes a number of assumptions about the

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUMAN BEH.-\\'/OR !W

uu 1. Si Ll&J&ht!Z t .X b iJi#JLt! e;p !ZQt.£4Ai:

 (i) (ii)

(iii)

e. Law of Good Continuance

(i)

I. (ii)

9-2, continued.

88 POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

processes of perception, some of which are unitJUC 1·ecognize thi_s. It reminds us that looking at t~
toit and some widely held: world as an -environment is different than looking
at it aS' an;'Object although we can attend it in that
• Perception is multimodal way. There are, however, areas of perceptual re-
• Perception is an active not a passive process search that can enrich environm(!ntal design theory
• Perception cannot be explained by sepa~ating that have not been addressed by either Gestalt the-
beha\'ior into the perceiver and the perceived ory or transactionalism. A coexisting and at. least
• Perception cannot be explained in terms of partially, contradictory theory of perception-the
conditioned responses to stimuli ecological approach-deals with some of them.
• The person-environment relationship is a
dynamic one
• The image of the environment that an ob- The Ecological Theory of Perception
server ~as depends .on past experiences as
well as on present motives and attitudes · The ecological ~pproach to perception i~ a rad-
• Past experiences are projected onto the pres- ical one·(see Cutting 1982). It contradicts the Gestalt
ent situation in relationship to one's needs concept of isomorphism and the transactional inter-
• Perception is governed by expectancies and pretation of the role of experience in perception.
predispositions. Instead of considering the senses as channels of sen-
sation, i.t regards the serises as perceptual systems
The result is that the information a person obtains (Gibson 1966). These are listed in the accompany-
from the environment has a probabilistic nature ing table.
which is validated through action (Ittelson 1960). While the recognition that perception is multi-
The information obtained from the environ- modal is universal (though often neglected by envi-
ment has symbolic properties that give it meaning, ronmental designers), the hypothesis that the
ambient qualities that evoke emotional responses, structure of light, sound waves, and other sources
and motivational messages that stimulate needs. An of perception can convey information about the
individual also ·assigns value and aesthetic proper- world directly without the mind having to recon-
ties to it. Because humans need to experience the struct "meaningless sense data" is controversial. In
environment as a. pattern of meaningful relation- 'terms of visual perception, the Gibsons note that as
ships, past experiences form the basis for under- long as the environment is illuminated, the sheaf of
standing the new. light rays that converge at a station point is struc-
People describe their perceptions either expe- tured by the faces and facets of the world. When a
rientially or structurally, according to studies within person moves, this structure is transformed. The
the transactional approach (Ittelson et al. 1976). Ex- Gibsons argue that there is information in this struc-
periential descriptions consist of moods, feelings, ture and in its transformation which is directly per-
and self-reports. Structural descriptions involve re- ceivable. It does not matter what the level of
ports of what is actually perceived in terms of the illumination is except that at low levels the finer
physical or social structure of the world. Environ- details of the structure are lost.
mental designers think of the world in structural People explore the environment to perceive the
terms to a greater degree than other people do. finer details by moving their eyes, heads, and
Dc,mald AppJeyard, an architect/planner, takes bodies. With experience, a. person is able to identify
what is c;sscntially a transactionalist view of percep- the finer and finer details of the world and broader
tion-although his ideas are .more directly related and broader relationships (Gibson and . Gibson
to tho~.: of Jerome Bruner (1966.) than to those of 1955). With experience, a per~.on learns to pay at-
Ittelsc-n (Appleyard, 1973). He organizes percep- tention to details of the wo·.ld that were not at-
tual information into three cat~gories:.operational­ tended to, before. Any normative movement in
that needed by people to attain their goals; respon- environmental design brings people's attention to
. sive-the distinctive characteristics that intrude into some variables rather than others.
actions; and inferential-that which forms the basis · According to this model,: .the world consists of
for coding systems for recognizing elemenis,of the surfaces :varying from longitudinal. to horizontal
world. · . (see figure 9-3). The· texture· of the horizontal inten-
The important contribution of transactional sifi~s with distance from the observer. The ability to
theory to environmental design. theory is the recog- recognize this fundamental cue for depth percep-
nition that experience. shapes what people pay at- tionseerns to be innate (E. Gibson and Walk 1960)
tention to in the environment and what is important and not learned through transactions with the en-.
to them. Any positive theory of aesthetics has to vironment. Architects have, from time to time, pur-

90 POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

 I
..J

Mode of Receptive Anatomy of Activity of Stimuli External lnfonnation

Name Attention Units the Organ the Organ Available Obtained
Basic General Mechano- Vestibular organs Body equilib- Forces of Direction of gravity,
orienting orien- receptors rium gravity and being pushed
system tation acceleration
Auditory Listening Mcchano- Cochlear organs with Orienting to Vibration in the Nature and location
system receptors middle ear and au- sounds air of vibrator}' events
"'·:c·-
ride

Haptic Touching Mechano- Skin (including at- Exploration of Deformations Contact with the
system receptors tachments and many kincis of tissues, earth, mechanical
and possi-· 'openings), joi~lts configuration encounters, object
bly ther- (including liga- of joints, shapes, material
morecep- ments), muscles stretching of states-solidity or
tors (including tendons) muscle fibers viscosity

Smelling Chemo- Nasal cavity (nose) Sniffing Composition of Nature of volatile

receptors the medium sources
Taste-smell
system Tasting Chemo- and Oral cavity (mouth) Savoring Composition of Nutritive and bio-
mechano- ingested ob- chemical values
receptors jects
Visual Looking Photo- Ocular mechanism Accommodation, Variables of Everything that can
system receptors (eyes, with intrinsic pupillary structure in be specified by the
and extrinsic eye adjustment, ambient light variables of optical
muscles, as related fixation, structure (informa-

_} to the vestibular or- _ convergence,

gans, the head, and exploration
the whole body)
tion about objects,
animals, motions,
events, and places) .

i \-
_,I poscfully manipulated these texture gradients to scape architect Lawrence Halprin reflects a careful
create illusions of depth. This was particularly prev~ consideration of this concept in design (Halprin
alent during the Renaissance. The permanent back- 1955). The psychological analysis of the role of
stage of Palladia's Teatro Qlimpico in Vicenza is an movement is one of the Gibsons' major contribu-
example of this. He attained an illusion of great tions to perception theory (seej. Gibson 1950, 1966,
depth in a limited space. 1979).
Of particular importance in percdving the . Another major contribution to both psycholog-
structure of the environment, both artificial and ical and environmental design theory has already
natural, is the recognition that some surfaces of the been introduced. This is the conc.:ept of affordal!ce.
1\'orld hide others (see figure 9-4). Even when one is The ability to perceive some of the affordances of
standing on a flat plain, the horizon "cuts off" the the environment seems to be innate or a function of
1\'0rld. The actual part that is hidden changes as the the physiological maturation of people. Others are
point of observation changes (except when one is in learned through experience or by having one's at-
a totally enclosed windowless room when everything tention brought to them. Gibson (1979) notes:
beyond is hidden).- When a person moves through
the environment, one vista after another is seen. The human observer learns to detect the value or
meaning of things, perceiving their distinctive fea-
This occurs in moving from room to room in a
tures, putting them into categories and subcatego-
building, when reaching the brow of a hill or the ries, noticing thdr similarities and differences and
corner of a street. Rex Martienssen (195,6) analyzes even studying them for their own sake apart from
Greek architecture in these terms, and Philip Thiel learning what to do with them.
(!961), Gordon Cullen (1962) and Edmund Bacon
( 1~74) provide many examples of this phenomenon To·detect meaning, an obsc:-rver does not have to
at the urban scale and stress its importance in the attend to ev_ery variable contai~ed in the !Jptic array.
aesthetic experience. Much of the work of the land- Attention is thus selective. People attend to what

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUM,<\.\' BEHA \"lOR '•l

 Gradient of Optical Texture Lack of Gradient of Optical
on a Horizontal Surface Texture on a Vertical Surface
Suurce: Gibson (1950)
9-Z. The Structure of the Optic Array from Front and Longitudio.al Surfaces.

r-
•I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a.- - - _______.
:--.-·---~
I
.. -- .
----~
· ·. Suurce:
!
Gibson ( 1979)

9:4· The Occlusion of Surfaces iu the Optic Array•

. ,.::

they know about and what. they are motivated to do? Ulrich Neissei- ( 1977) believes that the cognitive
recognize. This depends on their prior experiences. structures crucial for perception are anticipatory
The linkages of the processes of perception to schematA. People <.an only perceive what they know
cognition are unclear in this formulation of percep- how to find. The search process is guided by sche-
tion theory. What goes on in the observer's head? mata, some of which are innate and some learned.
What guides perception? How do we see what we A newborn baby turns toward a sound; it takes

91 POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

 .\tf;~$7;
(~ "" ~:~"-~~1i •· . ~.•••
:· ..~·-......
.{ -;
much learning to discern the differences among world. The answers to the questions that an envi-
wines, perhaps even more to understand the dif. ronmental designer would ask are thus speculati\'e.
ferent aesthetic philosophies in ·architecture. A How do people look at the environment? How arc
schema directs exploration; experience modifies the environmental meanings and their importances
schema. This involves l<:arning, a basic cognitive learned? How are likes and dislikes developed? Why
process. are some places better remembered than others?
These are all questions involving the basic cognitive
processes of learning and remembering.
Conclusions on Perception
The coexistence of contradictory theories of Learning and Memory
perception shows the conjectural nature of our un-
.f.I~IJ1an behavior is highly plastic. So m~ch so
derstanding of the perceptual processes. There are,
that sometimes urban de~.gners and architects,
howe.er, a number of matters on which there is
among others, seem to have forgotten that there are
agreement. Perception is rnultirnodal; movement
limits to human adaptability. People do have, and
plays a major part in environmental perception; we
show, a large capacity to adapt their activities to the
learn to differentiate finer details and broader
affordahces of new built environments, to adapt the
classes of environmental phenomena with experi-
built environment to. their needs, and to learn new
ence; the Gestalt "laws" of visual organization may
aesthetic values. The processes central to this adap-
not be the basis of perception, but they may well be
tive ability are learning, remembering, and gener-
ways in which we order the environment; the Ges-
' alizing. · .
talt concepts of "field forces" and "isomorphism"
According to behaviorists (for example, Skin-
and thus the architectural concepts of the universal·
ner 1938, 1953), learning takes place when an indi-
ity of "expressiveness" of lines and planes are open
to serious question, and the way in which we look at vidual associates a new response to a given stimulus,
resulting in a permanent change in behavior. This
the environment depends on our purposes and ex-
occurs when the event following the response is a
perience. Above all, the assumption that perception
positive one such as the reception of parental ap-
is largely or completely determined by the charac-
teristics of external stimuli is a dubious one. These proval. Punishment, on the other hand, would help
to extinguish the response. Other psychologists be-
factors all need to be recognized in the development
lieve that people learn for subjective satisfaction as
of positive theories of the person-environment in-
well.
terface and positive theories of aesthetics.
What has been learned may not be reflected i,n
overt behavior (Manis 1964). Thus, the behaviorist
principle of reinforcement seems to be primarily
concerned with performance, not with learning.
COGNITION AND AFFECT What we learn, however, does seem to involve some
Cognitive psychology deals with the acquisition, . knowledge of the outcomes of behavior and some
organization, and storage of knowledge. It. focuses sort of- reinforcement, either internal or external.
on issues of thinking, learning, remembering, feel- This applies ~o environmental attitudes as well as to
r ing, and mental development. Affect deals '~ith emo- activity patterns. These attitudes also affect fut.ure
l tion and is concerned with likes and dislikes. It behavior. Soine things are forgotten, however,
l involves an understanding of ·values and attitude- while others endure in memory.
I li,mwtion. Au understanding· ol' the processes of
cognition and affect can make a major contribution
Remembering and forgetting arc serious prac-
tical concerns in almost every sphere of human
to the. understanding of environmental aesthetics eQdeavor. The way we use buildings and cities de-
and. the choices people make in the use of the envi- pends partially on how well their structures are re-
ronment. . membered from past ·visits (Lynch 1960, Appleyard
Since World War I, the study of cognition has 1969, Passini 1984). People tend to forget things
I been dominated by the psychoanalytical and behav- over time, but time, itself, does not cause forgetting.
i
iorist schools of psychology. The former focuses on Some things are easier to remember than others.

t the subconscious mind, while the latter focuses on

the impact of reinforcement patterns on learning.
The rate at which we forget things depends on their
importance to us, how well categorized or organized

d
11
' .
!\·fore recently information-processing models of
cognition have become. promine.nt. None of them
fully accounts for 'tow people act and interact in the.·
they are (the Gestalt laws of organization apply here
. for the built environment), and how deviant they
are from the norm. Landmarks tend to be visual
l-
.\•
FUNDAAJENTAL PROCESSES OF HUAIAN BEHAVIOR <1:~

.
 \.

phenomena that arc deviant from their su,:round- designers t() ,J.wkl q:rt~1in values. Often these values
ings (Lynch 19GO). deviate. from thos.e the person held prior to the ed-
ucation. This cl!<mge involves the development of
new scl:temata for .expJoring and dealing with the
Categorization and Generalization wodd . .

Studies (such as Carmichael, Hogan, and Wal-

ter 1932) have clearly shown that the way in which
Schemata···
we categorize and label things can either aid or dis-
tort memory. This is particularly true if there is Schemata. prov~de us with algorithms for per-
some ambiguity in the original item. For instance, _ceiving, le'arning; and behav.ing. We do not know
we develop categories of environmental desigriers · what a ~cherri~"is like ~n bioiogical terms. We assume
(architects, landscape architects, urbari designer.s) its ele,istence t~ ·_explain much about learning and
and subcategories (Modernists, Post~Modea:nists) behavior: The conjectural nature of a schema is
based on certain commonalities in their work..A de- clear from Ulrich Neisser's definition:
signer may be classified on one dimeniiion of his or
A schema. :. is internal to the perceiver, modifiable
her work but this may be a misrepresentation of the by experience, and somehow specific to what is per-
whole body of that designer's work. Future percep- ceived. The schema accepts information ... and is
tions of that work are then biased by the classifica- changed by this information, it directs movement
tion. and exploratory activities that make information
The ability to learn how things are related in available, by which it is further modified. (Neisser
categories and how to use categories is central to 1977)
human existence. It depends on the cognitive pro-
cesses of generalization. Without the ability to gen- Schemata can be considered to act like templates for
eralize from past experience, people would not be action. Extensive schemata have lesser ones buried
able to furiction as they do. Sometimes premature . in:them. This explains how we can act, make plans
and erroneous generalizations lead to errors in be- about where we are going and what we are doing,
havior. and appreciate the world around us all at the same
There are two basic types of generalization: time. If the. schemata are compatible they reinforce
stimulu:; generaliZlllion in whkh the s;:;me responses each other; if not, one rules. The schemata we have
are given .to a variety of objects or environments at any. given moment offer possibilities for devel-
or behaviors, and response generalization in which dif- oping along certain lines, but the precise nature of
ferent responses are given to the same situation. th~ development is determined by interactions with
People respond warmly to many different environ- the environment. People's whole experience influ-
ments-natural scenes or buildings or room lay- ences what they have learned and what they have
outs. This is an example of stimulus generalization. forgotten and the meanings that elements in the
At the same time, people learn to respond in differ- environment have for them. Thus, any theory of
ent ways to the same affordances of the environ- aesthetics has to recognize the relativity of environ-
ment. The .response may be due to contextual mental quality.
variables, the mood of the person or the person The images that people have of the environ-
having different motivations at different times~ :En- ment around them are a type of schema. These im-
vironmental design theory must recognize that ages can be iconic images (cognitive maps), as
human bchavior-ovcrl or cmolional-cannot be discussed by Kevin Lynch in The Image of tlla City
explained simply in terms of the phenomenal en- ( 1960), or a· .sociational images (more properly, sym·
vironment, although many design assumptions, bolic mear.ings), as discussed by Anselm Strauss in
including the naive belief in architectural determin- Images ofTh~ American City (1961).
.ism, arc based on this view. How people respond to
;patterns of the en· ronment depends on how they
. Meaning
J1ave categorized the environment and its elements,
.:f>n the associations they have built up over time, and The subject of meaning is a fundamental one
on the reinforcements they have received. in aesthetic theory. The confused state of the design
Much of our behavior is culture-bound .. It de- literature on the subject reflects the confused state
pends on how we have been socialized to like and of the psychological literature. There are many lev-
dislike patterns of the environment and the suc- els of meaning and many theoretical approaches to
cesses that we have had in the past in dealing with the topic. Empiricist theories state that meaning has
them. Environmental design education socializes to be supplied to events after the perceiver has reg-

9-l POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

....:\
,. ;~J·ft~·i, ~fr~tr, ..
istered their sttuhure: Transaclionatis'J believe that first is the presentational meaning. which involves
meaning is given as a perception takes place and the perception of shape and form (roughly akin io
past experience interrupts perception to give a new Gibson's first level); the second is referential mean-
.meaning. lntrospt·ctive analysis suggests that mean- ing (akin to Gibson's sixth level); the·. third is the
ings arc given first. Gestall theorists believe that ex· affective meaning; the fourth is the evaluative
pressivc meanings, at one level, are a function of meaning-whether something is good or bad
the geometric character of the environment. Psy- (somewhat akin to Gibson's fourth level); the fifth
choanalysts postulate an unconscious component of level is prescriptive meaning. The difference be~
the mind in which memories are deposited to be tween the concept of affordance and the concept of
awakened by the psyche. Freud postulated an indi- prescriptive meaning is that the latter .i~plies a de-
vidual unconscious to which jung added a collective gree of coercion to behave in a partimlar way be-
unconscious in which timeless "nodes of energy," cause of the structure of the environment; the
called archetypes, evoke images, ideas, and behav- affordance of the environment' ~efers to the behav-
iors. Symbols, including the symbolic meaning~ of ioral possibilities of the structure of that environ-
the designed environment, provide the medium ment.
whereby archetypes are manifested. The most basic The built environment, thus, can be perceived
of archetypes is the "self," the inner heart of our tO COmmunicate 1a variety Of meanings, from itS Util-
being, our soul, our uniqueness. One's home is a ity to its syQlbolism. The symbolism of the built
symbol of the self, for instance (Cooper 1974). The environment is a ·major concern of environmen-
ecological af>proach to perception assumes that all the tal designers for 'it is a major factor in people's
potential uses and, presumably, meanings of an ob- liking or disliking their surroundings. The study
ject are directly visually perceivable in the optic of symbolism has been approached in a number of
array and/or the structure of nonvisual information ways by different fields. It is a major concern of
! obtainable by the other perceptual systems. One just linguists, for example, de Saussure (1915), whose
-1. has to know-to have learned, in most cases-what work has recently very much influenced the think-
to look for. Certainly, the perception of meaning ing of architects, in particular many of the Post-
depends on some schema or other. ' Modernists (Broadbent 1975, Jencks 1977). Within
A number of classifications of types of meaning psychology there are a number of approaches, I!l·
exist. Gibson (1950) differentiated polemically eluding the Gestalt, psychoanalytical, and behavior·
among six levels of meaning: first, the primitive ist, each of which has its adherents in the· design
concrete; second, use meanings; third, the mean- professions. · · ,. ·
ings of instruments and machines; fourth, the val~e There is much conjecturing on why and how
and emotional meaning of things; fifth, the level of these symbolic meanings are developed. The ·rote' of
signs; sixth, the level of symbols. Architect Robert learning and thus of cultural differences is particu-
Hershberger (1974) has a different listing based on larly important in dealing with symbolic meanings
a mediational theory of cognition akin to that of Ul- and the development of likes or dislikes of artifacts
rich Neisser. This is shown diagramatically in figure and patterns of the world. Any artifact or environ-
9-5. The development of meaning in this view is a ment carries a number of meanings simultaneously.
two-step process. They are not independent. One level of meaning-
i-Iershberger identifies five levels of meaning, the value of things or the affective meaning of
some of which correspond to Gibson's levels. The things-is central to aesthetic theory.·
. ''

Architectural Meaning

Stimulus Behavioral
Representational ---:~.... Response
Object Response

(rectangular (image of door) . (feeling of welcome) (open and pass through)

door) (idea of passing thrc.ugh) (judgment of beauty)·
(decision to use}

Source: Hcnhbcrl(cr (i!li·l)

9-5. Hershberger's Mediational Theory of Environmental r,lean.ing.

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUlHAN BEHAVIOR 9;)

l·:uwlioual HIHI AITt~t·ti\·t~ 1\lc~aniug!i dcvclup nud ;u·c 111aiuwiucd.
The simplest model is that of balance lheory
Empirical and experimental research suggests
(Heider 1946). If one person has a positive attitude
that there are three ·primary emotional responses:
(likes. promotes, seeks) toward another person or
pleasure, arousal, and dominance (Mehrabian and
set of ideas (the referent), then the first person's
Russell 1974). Pleasure has to do with feelings
attitude would be positive also toward an inanimate
of liking and disliking; arousal has to do with the
thing ~hat is related positively to the referent. Oth-
interest-evoking qualities of the environment; dom-
erwise the system would not be in balance. This in·
inance has to do with the individual's fe~lings of
dicates the importance of attitudes· toward the
freedom of action. The concern here is with the referent in understanding people's attitudes ~oward
interestingness and pleasurableness of environ- the symbolic meanings of the built environment.
n'lents-thcir affective meanings. Figure 9-6 portrays the relationship between a per-
· Different. theories of perception and cognition son and his or her attitudes toward a referent and
11ave different postulations about how likes and dis- an environmental pattern. Figure 9-6a, b, and c
likes develop. According to Gestalt theory, a liJdng show consistent relationships, while 9-6d shows an
for patterns of the environment would occur be- inconsistent 1·elationship. The basic thesis is that we
cause of a resonance between the :neurological pro- attempt to eliminate incongruent relationships. The
cesses and environmental forJf;~: Psychoanalytical strength with which we hold attitudes indicates
theories would explain preference in terms of the which attitude is likely to change to eliminate the
values of the associations between for~s and· mem-
incongruity (Osgood and Tannebaum 1955), al-
ories in the individual unconscious and/or collective
though sometimes we isolate attitudes that are in-
unconscious. Behaviorist theories would · ~xplain
consistent with each other and refuse to recognize
them in terms or the socialization process and the
the discrepancy (Rosenberg and Abelson 1960). For
patterns of the environment that people have been
instance, a person may admire a particular set of
positively reinforced to like. Basic to an understand-
design principles but not admire a design according
ing of what people find "delightful" in the environ- to those principles. This is an inconsistent relation-
ment is, however, an understanding of the attitudes ship. The person may deny the inconsistency or
they possess and how these develop.
strive for consistency by changing his or her attitude
An attitude results [rom combining a belief about
toward the principles or the design.
something with a value pre~ise a~out it. There are
several defin:th.u.:: of Lelief. Most social psycholo·
gists consider a belid" to be. an assertion abo\lt an.
associative characteristic rather than a defining Conclusions on the Processes of Cognition
characteristic of a thing. Thus~· p9inted arches may
be a defining characteristic of Gothic buildings;
and Affect
"such windows go well in ecclesiastical architecture" It is difficult to separate the processes of per-
is an associative characteristic. Many such beliefs are ception and cognition; both are guided by sche-
verbalized in writings on architecture and interior mata. We know much about the processes and how
design, but others can only be inferred from what a they are linked, but our understanding is by no
designer designs. means fully developed; there are alternative, largely
Values are related to motivations ·ror they de- untested, theories that explain them. As a result,
fine the attradive a.nd rt;pulsive elenients of the designers' theories about human responses to the
world. Patterns' of the'built environmen.t thai people built environment have to be recognized as conjec-
find pleasing have a positive value for them; any- tural. There are some very important insights about
thing that is ~lis<laincd h~s a nc?ative, ~alu~: V~lues the person-environment relationship that have
represent a l111kage UCt.WCCil a pcrSOI~ S·,~OLIVU~IOIJS, been yielded by the lhcorics and models of the be·
emotional feelings, and ~ehavior: Attit:udes, toward havioral sciences. Learning is offundamental im-
specific environments a11d environmental ·patterns portance because humans; are highly adaptive
arisr :rom the attribution of a vaiue to belief.a creatures who develop new',, oowledge, new 'values,
People strive for cognitive· consistency ~q the new symbols, and ne\v activity patterns: Social pres-
attitudes they hold about themselves· and th·d~~ocial a
·iutes and cultural norms exert stabilizing·force-on
and physical environments (Fes~riger 19b7,.:Brehm th·e patterns of behavior and attiru'des· that form the
and Cohen 1962). A number of mOdels o( cognitive ·basis· for an environmental· designer's ·work: This is
consistency help environmental designers under- a
not static framework, however~ It evolves over
stand the vagaries of aesthetic analysis: They. en- time. The work of environmental desigriets reflects
hance understanding of how likes and dislikes these changes and contributes to them. · ·

1)(, POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

[, J
I

~ 2~''''~~~
on different aspects of behavior and offer different
explanations for it. There have l>ccn tw() scales of

~
research in these endeavors (Patricios 1975). The
first deals with aggregates of people and the loca-
tion of activities at a metropolitan and regional
...... scale. An understanding of the distribution of activ-
Person Symbol
ities and the reasons for this distribution is of con-
a. cern to city and regional planners. Architects,
landscape architects, and urban designers are mor:e
concerned with understanding behavior at a micro- .
Referent scale-from rooms to neighborhoods. and other

/~
districts of cities.

Micromodcls of Spatial Behavior

Person Symbol
The environmental perception and behavioral
b.
approach to the study of human behavior suggests
that an individual's behavior is a function of his or
her motivations, the affordances of the environ-
ment, and the images of the world outside direct

L~
perception and the meanings those images have for
the individual. Within this approach to the study of
human behavior and the built environment there
are a number of different theoretical orientations.
Person Symbol An ethological approach suggests that some of
the behaviors we regard. as characteristically human
c. are the same as those of .other animals. These be-
haviors are said to be innate although they may be
molded by culture. This is the explanation for te~­
Referent
ritorial behavior (see Hall J966). A number 'of peo-
ple (for i~stance, Newman 1972, 1973, Creenbie

L~
Person Symbol
- · 1976) have developed these into design principles.
The behaviorist tradition stands in strong contrast to
this, with its emphasis on the learning of patterns of
behavior as the result of reinforcement patterns. ·
In recent years there have been a great many
studies on the built environment, its furnishings,
d.
and spatial behavior which do not seem to have a
9-6. Balance Theory.
clear theoretical orientation. They seem to be influ-
enced by ethological and behaviorist as well as by
psychoanalytic theories. These include much of the
work of Edward T. Hall ( 1966) and Robert Sommer
SPATIAL BEHAVIOR ( 1969, l974a), which has strong ethological over-
How and why people use the layout of the en- tones but is much more eclectic theoretically. Often
vironment in the way they do as they go about their subsumed under the rubric of proxemic theory, their
activities is of central concern to environmental de- studies of how people relate to each other spatially
si;\n 'henry bcc;msc of the linkages between. this in each other's presence and how people control
spatial bdtavior and normative theories of func· space through territorial behavior have influcuccd
tionalism in architecture and the other design fields. the thinking of designers about the layout of rooms,
The overt spatial behavior of people is something buildings, building complexes, and neighborhoods.
that is directly observable, thus at a descriptive level Most environmental design theorists have
it is not subject to the controversies that accompany taken a pragmatic view of the desr.ription of spatial
attempts to describe and explain the processes of behavior. Two concepts have become embedded in
perception a.nd cognition. Economists; sociologists, environmental design theory. One, the concept of
anthropolo!-{ist~. and ethologists do, however, t~cus activity systems (Chapin 1965), is concerned primarily

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUMAN BEH:\ \"lOR 97

L•_
i
\\'ilh the organization or the sequences of activities social subsy~~e.m; gqa). <!llainmcnt is that of the per-
taking place in building:;, neighborhoods, and cities; sonality.s~bsystem; anc! adaptation is that of the or-
the other, the concept of behavior settings (Barker ganismic subsystem.
1968, Bechtel 1977, Wicker 1979), is concerned . At different times in history the functional re-
with the relationship between the built environment la~ionship of an individual. to. society varies. There
-the milieu-and the standing, or recurrent, pat- are specific patterns which, nevertheless, seem to be
tern of behavior that takes place \Vi thin it. invariant. .Parsons identifies a number of these. He
The concept of behavior setting was developed draws on cybernetic theory to suggest that those sub-
by a group of behavioral scientists who call them- systems that are high in information and low in en-
selv~s "ecological psychologists" because they are ergy are the onc;s.rhat CC!ntrol ti:Iose that are high in
concerned with human behav.ior in the everyday en- energy and low in information. Culture is at the top
vironment. Their approach to the.study of behavior of the con_trol hierarchy. followed by social group,
is similar to that of those who are developing the personality, and or;ganismic subsystems. The sub-
ecological theory of perception, with one important systems that are low in the hierarchy of control are
exception. Ecological psychologists b~lieve ,that the those that place greater limitations on behavior.
physical environment exerts a d~gree of coercion Thus, our physiological c.baracter is more control-
over the behavior of individuals.· In this they ,were ling than the otht;rs and so Qn.
inl-lucnced, as noted earlier, by the assertion pf'Kurt According to this model, culture-the shared
Lewin ( 1936) that the physical environment pos- system. of beliefs, values, symbols, and styles that
sesses an "invitational quality." Gibson (1979) does characterizes a group of people-controls much
not believe that the physical environment •. itself, is human behavi_or. Each culture is unique because it .
coercive in this way. It affords some behaviors and has its own peculiar history. A culture evolves over
not others. It depends on a person's predispositions. time as a people develop approaches to dealing with
whether or not an affordancc or set of affordances the problems of survival and growth in a particular
is or is not used. terrestrial setting. The built environment always ex-
ists within a culture and is part of it. Every genera-
tion deals with a social and built environment
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN BEHAVIOR
shaped by earlier generations.
Peoph: are socialized differently, growing up as People are largely unaware 'of the constraints
they do in different geographical <!-nd social envi- imposed on them by their own cultures in their
ronments. Th.ey differ also in their motivations. everyday behavior. The impact of a culture on an
They look at the environment and·use it differendy. individual is mediated by norms-"the patterns of
There is some regularity in these differences. How commonly held expectations" (Bates 1956). An im-
best can they be classified? · portant consequence of the socialization process for
Functional theory in sociology-not to be con- individuals is. that they develop the ability to intuit
fused with functional theory in environmental de- the attitudes and behaviors of others and the mean-
sign-provides an approach that has attracted a ings ofthe environment within their own culture.
number of analysts of the built environment and The clesign professions, as a whole, however, are
human behavior (such as Michelson 1970, Cranz constat:ttly sJealing with different cultures and sub-
197 4, Moleski 1978, Sohal 1978). The theory is cultures, and the intuition of an individual designer
most comprehensively exemplified by the work of alone cannot provide the basic knowledge required
Talcott Parsons (1937, l959, 1966). It focuses on for designing habitats congruent with people's lives
systems-'-cultural, social, personality, organismic and values.
(or physiological), and environmental---as the t.asis Environmental de~igners, like other profes-
for examining social behavior. It has att;acted the sionals, are members of two q.tltures embedded in
attention of designers because it has a more general each other. Ea~l1 has .its ~wn sociflljza~ion process.
application to the development of environmental One is ~he. br:oader society· and .tl:i~ .oth.er. ~.s the
design theDry. · professic;wal cultl:re. "Yhic~ has its ow,n.qorms o~,be­
Each of four subsystems-cultural, social, person- havior, values, and ~xpectations. Th!!se.rro.(e~sj<;iral
ality, and urganismic-has a primary function in norms and pe.er-grpup pressures _t<;> cp!1for~ .<!-r~,~x­
terms of maintaining the internal-external .relation- tremely coercive in environmental design and if! ar-
ships and the mean-ends purposes of a social sys- chitecture in particular (Montgomery; 1.~_66), The
tem. The purpose of the cultural subsystem is to result is that the prof~ssio11s have been e~tremely
maintain specific action patterns and to manage in- slow in changing, even when faced with major re-
ternal and external tensions for the whole system of pudiations of their beliefs, This behavior is true of
action. Integration is the primary purpose of the most professions (Larson 1979).

')a POSITIVE ARCHITECTURAL THEORY

 {.

All the subsystems of human action identifi~d Should people be challenged by their environments
by Parsons occur within a geographic and a built. or should the environment be· made as. comfortable
environment that has little influence on what people · as possible physically and psychologically? The an-
actually do but has the major influence on what th~y swer depends on one's world view.
can do. The limitations of the terrestrial environ-
mental system must be met before people can func-
tion at all. As Maslow would also suggest, most basic UNDERSTANDING HUMAN BEHAVIOR FOR
is the role of the built environment as shelter. ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN .
All individuals have organismic and persomility. To understand the role of the built environ-
trait<~ that make them unique, but they.also operate . ment in people's lives. one has to understal}d the
within social and cultural as well as terrestrial con- nature of human behavior. This is the research con-
texts. The nature of the built environment to an cern of behavioral scientists. They have developed
individual or a group is very much governed by.~h~ only· a partial understanding of human behavior,
impact of these subsystems on th-.; processes of per- however. While there may be general agreement on
ception, cognition and affect, and spatial behavi~r. the basic processes, there is considerable disagree-
Thus they provide us wil:h a useful classification sys- ment on how the processes work. Some of these
tem for considering individual and group differ- theoretical disagreements have little to do with en-
ences in the use and appreciation of the built vironmental desigrl theory, but others are central.
environment. This system helps us ask serious ques- Different ideas about the nature of interior design,
tions about how people might use the environment architecture; landscape architecture, and urban de-
and the aesthetic experiences they might have. It sign are based on different concepts of human na-.
helps us, too, to take a stand on what activities ture and purposes. If designers do not recognize
should be afforded and what aesthetic experiences the conjectural nature of their own theories they are
should be the goals of design. fooling themselves. Knowledge of the basic princi-
ples and controversies in descriptions and explana-
tions of human behavior helps us clarify our
Individual and Group Competem:e understanding of the relationship between environ-
ment and behavior. This, in turn, helps the architect
The behavior of a person or a group is depen- · consider how the environment affords people of
dent on its competence in dealing with the world. differe.nt backgrounds different aesthetic experi-
Environmental competence is a term coined by Powell ences and activity patterns. As shall be argued
Lawton (1977) to aid in understanding the environ- throughout, it also enables us to understand what
~ental needs of various segments of the elderly . . we can predict with confidence and when we are
population, but ·it has general applicability. Every- really going out on a limb.
body has some level of competence in dealing with
the social and the built environment. Competence is a
term that covers a broad set of attributes ·:such as ADDITIONAL READINGS
physical or mental health, intellectual capacity and
Gibson, James J. An Ecological Approacl& to Visual Perceptilm.
ego strength" (Lawton 1977). Many of the qualities Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979.
that contribute to a person's ability to deal with the Hochberg, Julian. Perception. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
world are difficult to measure. While it is relatively Prentice-Hall, 1964.
easy to understand the concept when dealing with · Ittefson, Wil,iam, Karen Franck, and Timothy O'Hanlon.
physical capabilities such as motor aLilitics, it is · 'The Nature of E~vironmental Experience." In Sey-
much more difficult to comprehend what'it actually mourWatner et al., eds., Experiencing the Enviro11ment.
means when dealing with cultures and cultural be- New Xork: Plenum, 1979, pp. 187-206.
havior. It is also more controversial. The key point lttelson, William, Harold Proshansky, Leanne Rivlin, and
is that the greater the competence of an individual, Gary W,~nk.el. "The Search for Environmental The-
the greater the behavioral freedom. that person.' has ory." In An Introduction to Environmental Psychology.
and the less his or her behavior is constrained.hy New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974, pp.
61-79.
the social and physical environments. '.ln enviton- Neisser, Ulrich. Cognition and Reality. San Francisco: Free-
mental design, the question of what competence man, 1977.
level should be taken into consideration is' a key ·Parsons, Talcott. Societies. Englewood Cliffs. N.J.:
issue, as 5hall be explained fully later·in this book. Prentice-Hall, 1966.

FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES OF HUM:\.\: JJEH.\\'JOR tJt)

-------------·\