Professional Documents
Culture Documents
by Judith Heerwagen
J.H. Heerwagen & Associates, Inc.
Last updated: 05-23-2008
INTRODUCTION
What would a building space look and feel like if it were designed to promote psychological and social well-being?
How would it affect the senses, the emotions, and the mind? How would it affect behavioral patterns and sense of
community?
For insights, it is useful to look not at buildings, but at zoos. Zoo design has gone through a radical transformation in
the past several decades. Cages have been replaced by natural habitats and geographic clustering of animals. In
some places, the animals are free-ranging and the visitors are enclosed in buses or trains moving through the habitat.
Animals now exist in mixed species exhibits more like their natural landscapes. And, as in nature, the animals have
much greater control over their behavior. They can be on view if they want, or out of sight. They forage, play, rest,
mate, and act like normal animals.
New zoo design has replaced animals in cages with naturalistic habitats and mixed species displays.
What brought about this transformation in philosophy and design? A key factor was concern over the animals'
psychological and social well-being. Zoos could keep animals alive, but they couldn't make them flourish. Caged
animals often exhibit neurotic behaviorspacing, repetitive motions, aggression, and withdrawal. In one famous
example, an animal psychologist was hired by the Central Park Zoo to study a polar bear that spent the day swimming
in endless figure 8s in its small pool. This was not normal polar bear behavior and the zoo was concerned about it.
After several days of observation, the animal psychologist offered a diagnosis. The bear was bored. To compensate
for this unfortunate situation, the zoo added amenities and toys to the bear's enclosure to encourage exploration and
play.
Are there lessons from the zoo that we can apply to building design? The answer is clearly "yes." Key lessons,
DESCRIPTION
A. Beyond Survival: Design for Well-Being
Biologist Stephen Boyden (1971) defines the optimum healthy environment as "the conditions which tend to promote
or permit an animal optimal physiological, mental, and social performance in its natural or 'evolutionary' environment."
Boyden's discussion of well-being raises two main concerns: (1) there is a mismatch between humans' evolutionary
environment and current industrialized settings, and (2) this mismatch is detrimental to human well-being because
current environments do not support the full range of evolved survival and well-being needs. Whether it is the
increasing presence of environmental toxins or the lack of community and social support in many settings, the places
where people live and work now are radically different from those which supported human societies for most
of Homo sapiens existence. Boyden argues that environments need to fully satisfy both "survival needs" and "wellbeing needs."
Survival needs deal with aspects of the environment that directly affect human health, such as clean air and water,
lack of pathogens or toxins, and opportunity for rest and sleep. Well-being needs, on the other hand, are associated
with fulfillment, quality of life, and psychological health. Whereas failure to satisfy survival needs may lead to serious
illness or death, failure to meet the well-being needs can lead to psychosocial maladjustment and stress-related
illnesses. Environmental psychologists have also considered other needs such as comfort maintenance and sense of
equity, which are important in today's building environments. Taken as a whole, the research by Boyden and others
identifies well being needs that should be addressed in building design:
Social engagement
African savannah, the presumed site of human evolution. Although humans now live in many different habitats, Orians
argues that our species long history as mobile hunters and gatherers on the African savannahs should have left its
mark on our psyche. If the "savannah hypothesis" is true, we would expect to find that humans intrinsically like and
find pleasurable environments that contain key features of the savannah that were most likely to have aided our
ancestors' survival and well-being. These features include:
A high diversity of plant (especially flowers) and animal life for food and resources.
Clustered trees with spreading canopies for refuge and protection.
Open grassland that provides easy movement and clear views to the distance.
Topographic changes for strategic surveillance to aid long-distance movements and to provide
early warning of approaching hazards.
Scattered bodies of water for food, drinking, bathing, and pleasure.
A "big sky" with a wide, bright field of view to aid visual access in all directions.
Multiple view corridors and distances.
Cross-cultural research on landscape preferences shows the strong appeal of landforms and spatial features that are
similar to the savannah. The design of built settings also shows manipulation of space and artifacts that are
consistent with savannah features, especially in retailand hospitality settings. Light, dcor, sounds, food, flowers,
smells, visual corridorsall are used to enhance emotional experience, not as an end in itself, but rather to increase
purchasing behaviors and retain customer loyalty.
Key components of preference patterns are described in more detail below.
Prospect and Refuge
According to geographer Jay Appleton, people prefer to be in places where they have good visual access to the
surrounding environment (high prospect), while also feeling protected and safe (high refuge). Conversely, negative
reactions are common when visual access is denied or when the sense of refuge is absent and one feels "on view" to
others. The sense of refuge can be created by canopy-like features as well as by vertical enclosure. Prospect includes
both internal and external views through windows or view corridors. Interior view corridors are greatly enhanced by
interesting elements at the end of the corridorsuch as a window, a piece of art, or just light on the wall.
Architectural historian Grant Hildebrand, in Origins of Architectural Pleasure, argues that the manipulation of
prospect and refuge and the integration of nature and naturalistic features is a hallmark of many buildings of enduring
appeal. Although Hildebrand did not gather any empirical data, others have, including a study by Suzanne Scott of
interior environments. She found that built spaces with nature, moderate degrees of complexity, and a sense of refuge
coupled with high prospect were more preferred than spaces lacking these characteristics. People especially liked
spaces with vertical and horizontal expansiveness that were subdivided into smaller zones. Scott suggests that zoned
spaces provide users with the potential to survey the surroundings, but still enjoy partial concealment. Many of the
preferred settings also had soft, rounded forms and irregular layouts. Institutional spaces with minimum dcor and
embellishments were especially disliked, as were vast empty spaces.
The sense of prospect and refuge can be created in many ways, in both outdoor and interior spaces that offer
protection at the back and overhead, coupled with views into adjoining spaces.
The Hearth
Although Boyden distinguishes between survival and well-being needs, they often overlap. For example, people
clearly need food for survival and health. However, food often serves as the basis for bonding and relationship
development. The ritual of sitting around a hearth telling stories of the day's events and planning for tomorrow may be
an ancient carryover from Homo sapiens hunting and gathering days. According to anthropologist Melvin Konner,
the sense of safety and intimacy associated with the campfire may have been a factor in the evolution of intellectual
development as well as social bonds. Today's hearth is the family kitchen at home, and the community places, such
as cafes and coffee bars, where people increasingly congregate to eat, talk, read, and work.
People increasingly mingle and work in coffee shops and attractive outdoor areas.
had lower stress scores and were more satisfied with their jobs. In addition to the psychological and emotional
benefits, connection to nature also provides mini mental breaks that may aid the ability to concentrate according to
research by Stephen Kaplan. Terry Hartig and colleagues report similar results in a field experiment. People in their
study who went for a walk in a predominantly natural setting performed better on several tasks requiring concentration
than those who walked in a predominantly built setting or who quietly read a magazine indoors. In the absence of
windows or other direct contact with nature, workers frequently decorate their walls with nature dcor as was found in
a study by Judith Heerwagen and Gordon Orians.
Studies of outdoor landscapes are providing evidence that the effects of nature on human health and well-being
extend beyond emotional and cognitive functioning to social behavior and crime reduction. For instance, Francis Kuo
and colleagues have found that outdoor nature buffers aggression in urban high-rise settings and enhances ability to
deal with demanding circumstances. The presence of trees in urban areas also increases community sociability by
providing comfortable places for residents to talk with one another and develop friendships that promote mutual
support.
Window views that provide contact with outdoor nature reduce stress and improve psychological functioning. In the
absence of windows, workers frequently decorate their workstations with nature dcor.
Access to indoor sunlight is also associated with perceived cheerfulness of the environment as well as higher levels of
positive affect and job satisfaction for the occupants. There is evidence also that daylight and indoor sun may be
beneficial to building occupants who experience Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) which leads to lowered energy
and moods in winter months (Heerwagen, 1990). The condition is treated by bright light therapywhich may be
provided through windows as well as light boxes or dawn simulators currently used in homes.
Daylight and indoor sun patches create visual stimulation and may also improve psychological functioning of
building occupants, as long as sun is not excessive or an impediment to work.
Window views can take advantage of the changing seasonal colors of vegetation and diurnal variation in light to
provide sensory pleasure. In the absence of windows, sensory change can be provided by light. Photo 12 (right)
shows an underground space with fiber optic light that changes color over the course of the day.
Natural Comfort
Comfort preferences are apparent in this picture that shows some people bundled up in hats and sweatshirts and
others in shorts and tee shirts while waiting at a stop light.
A biological perspective also contributes important insights into comfort maintenance. Because people differ from one
another in many ways (genetics, cultures, lifestyles) their ambient preferences vary. Furthermore, a given person
varies over time depending upon his or her state of health, activities, clothing levels, and so forth (these are intraindividual differences.) For most of human history, people have actively adjusted the environment as well as their
behaviors to achieve comfort. Yet buildings continue to be designed with a "one size fits all" approach. Very few
buildings or workstations enable occupants to control lighting, temperature, ventilation rates, or noise conditions.
Although the technology is largely available to do this, the personal comfort systems have not sold well in the market
place, even though research by Walter Kroner and colleagues at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute shows that personal
control leads to significant increases in comfort and work performance. See also WBDG ProductivePromote
Health and Well-Being, ProductiveProvide Comfortable Environments, ProductiveDesign for the
Changing Workplace, and SustainableEnhance Indoor Environmental Quality.
Given our affinity for nature, are there general properties of living things that might serve as valuable design guides?
Although there is less research evidence on this topic, it is reasonable to look for general characteristics of living
organisms and life-like processes that could form the basis for the design of whole buildings, spaces, layouts,
artifacts, and landscapes.
Characteristics of living organisms and life-like processes include:
cumulus clouds. In contrast, movement patterns indicative of danger show erratic movement and
sudden change, such as changes in light and wind associated with storms, or birds fleeing from a
hawk.
Organized Complexity: All living organisms and life-like processes display complex design or
adaptive complexity that may not be apparent at first glance, but which is discovered through
exploration. The desire to know more about a space or object with increased exploration is considered
by many to be at the heart of learning: the more you know, the more you want to know and the deeper
the mystery becomes. In contrast to living forms and spaces, most built objects and spaces are readily
knowable at first glance, and thus do not motivate learning and exploration. Although complexity is a
desirable feature, spaces and objects that are too complex are difficult to comprehend. The key may
be the combination of ordering and complexity that allows comprehension at higher levels first and
then at lower levels with successive exploration. In Origins of Architectural Pleasure, architect Grant
Hildebrand provides extensive commentary on this topic.
Fractal Patterning: Fractal growth processes and probabilistic events determine the forms
and patterns of living organisms, systems, and natural processes. This gives rise to patterns that have
a basic similarity at different levels of scale, but are not exact replicates. Some refer to this as
"rhyming"similarity coupled with difference. In contrast, many human designed patterns are exact
repeats of the same form, perhaps in different colors or sizes. Peter Stevens, inPatterns in Nature,
provides a masterful overview of the archetypal patterns and themes that underlie the immense
variety of natural forms. Architect Carl Bovill discusses the application of fractal geometry to design
composition in his book Fractal Geometry in Architecture and Design. Similar ideas are suggested by a
group of biologists and mathematicians who are discovering connections between the brain and
environmental experience based on fractal patterns (Mikiten et al, 2000).
Organic Shapes: Nature is not rectilinear. The shapes of natural objects are determined by
fractal growth patterns, as noted above, and by the limitations imposed by the conditions of life on
earth, especially sunlight and gravity. Although there is not a great deal of research on this topic, there
is some indication that people respond positively to organic shapes and curvilinear spaces in buildings,
landscapes, and artifacts.
Emotions and Shapes: The connection between emotions and shapes may be wired into our
brains. Research by Betty Edwards, an art professor, has found a high level of structural similarity in
drawings by people who are asked to visually represent emotions, such as anger, joy, peacefulness,
and depression. As described in an article by Brian Davey (1993), anger was represented by dark,
sharp edged forms. Joy was characterized by light, curving, circular forms. Peacefulness was conveyed
by horizontal lines and depression by dark formless drawings.
Multi Sensory: Nature is sensory rich and conveys information to all human sensory systems,
including sight, sound, touch, taste, and odor. Life-supporting processes such as fire, water, and sun
also are experienced in multisensory ways also. Although the vast majority of research in
environmental aesthetics focuses on the visual environment, there is growing interest in understanding
how design appeals to multiple senses. Both Kansei engineering and emotion centered design are
grounded in links between sensory perception and emotional responses to artifacts and to specific
features of products.
See also WBDG Form, Materials, and Style.
D. Conclusion
Buildings affect our psyche as well as our bodies. They can be inspiring and supportive of daily activities, or they can
deplete the spirits and undermine the best intentions of the designer. It is not by chance that such results occur.
Positively experienced, psychologically healthy buildings have a host of features that distinguish them from less
enjoyable buildings. Buildings with high psychosocial value are designed around basic human needs, ancient
preferences, and connections to the patterns of nature and the mind.
BACK TO TOP
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
WBDG
Building / Space Types
Educational Facilities, Federal Courthouse, Health Care Facilities, Land Port of Entry, Libraries,Office
Building, Research Facilities
Design Objectives
Accessible, Aesthetics, Functional / Operational, Historic Preservation, Productive, ProductiveDesign
for the Changing Workplace, ProductivePromote Health and Well-Being, ProductiveProvide
Comfortable Environments, Secure / Safe, SustainableEnhance Indoor Environmental Quality
Products and Systems
Federal Green Construction Guide for Specifiers:
12 10 00 (12100) Artwork
Project Management
Building Commissioning
Tools
Building Life-Cycle Cost (BLCC)
Publications
Submission Requirements:
Each Dissertation Topic (just one page abstract) comprising the following listed
below:
1. Name of the Dissertation Topic.
Eg: Day Lighting Design for Learning Spaces ( Topic related to Building Science)
2. Aim of the Research.
i.e. to study the principles of day lighting, types of day lighting, different methods
to achieve it in planning and architectural design.
3. Objective of the Research.
i.e. to study the concepts of day lighting with reference to learning spaces,
explore the possibilities of day lighting design for a learning spaces.
4. Scope and Limitation of the Research.
i.e. research will be done only as a detailed literature review or it will be
supported by experimental methods or by simulation with softwares etc.
5. Outcome of the research
i.e. rough outline of the outcome or result of the research.
Please submit the ONE PAGE ABSTRACT of the DISSERTATION TOPIC on 02 MAY 2016
by 10.30 am as per the specification below: