From Space Syntax to Space Semantics: A Behaviorally and Perceptually Oriented Methodology for the Efficient Description of the Geometry and Topology of Environments

Human spatial behavior and experience cannot be investigated independently from the shape and configuration of environments. Therefore, comparative studies in architectural psychology and spatial cognition would clearly benefit from operationalizations of space that provide a common denominator for capturing its behavioral and psychologically relevant properties. This paper presents theoretical and methodological issues arising from the practical application of isovist-based graphs for the analysis of architectural spaces. Based on recent studies exploring the influence of spatial form and structure on behavior and experience in virtual environments, the following topics are discussed: (1) the derivation and empirical verification of meaningful descriptor variables on the basis of classic qualitative theories of environmental psychology relating behavior and experience to spatial properties; (2) methods to select reference points for the analysis of architectural spaces at a local level; furthermore, based on two experiments exploring the phenomenal conception of the spatial structure of architectural environments, formalized strategies for (3) the selection of reference points at a global level, and for (4), their integration into a sparse yet plausible comprehensive graph structure, are proposed. Taken together, a well formalized and psychologically oriented methodology for the efficient description of spatial properties of environments at the architectural scale level is outlined. This method appears useful for a wide range of applications, ranging from abstract architectural analysis over behavioral experiments to studies on mental representations in cognitive science.

[1]  D. Berlyne,et al.  Aesthetics and Psychobiology , 1975 .

[2]  J. Gibson.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[3]  Bill Hillier,et al.  Space is the machine , 1996 .

[4]  Max Jacobson,et al.  A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction , 1981 .

[5]  G Franz,et al.  veLib Reference Manual: Library Version 1.2.0 , 2005 .

[6]  B. Hillier,et al.  The Social Logic of Space , 1984 .

[7]  A. Turner,et al.  From Isovists to Visibility Graphs: A Methodology for the Analysis of Architectural Space , 2001 .

[8]  S. Kaplan.  Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition , 1987 .

[9]  Michael O'Neill.  Effects of familiarity and plan complexity on wayfinding in simulated buildings , 1992 .

[10]  Jay Appleton,et al.  Prospects and Refuges Re-Visited , 1984, Landscape Journal.

[11]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Predicting experiential qualities of architecture by its spatial properties , 2005 .

[12]  Michael Leyton,et al.  A generative theory of shape , 2004, Proceedings Shape Modeling Applications, 2004..

[13]  Richard O. Duda,et al.  Pattern classification and scene analysis , 1974, A Wiley-Interscience publication.

[14]  Kevin Lynch,et al.  The Image of the City , 1960 .

[15]  J. Russell,et al.  An approach to environmental psychology , 1974 .

[16]  J. Nasar.  Environmental aesthetics: Perception and evaluation of residential street scenes , 1988 .

[17]  Gerhard Kaminski.  Umweltpsychologie: Perspektiven, Probleme, Praxis , 1976 .

[18]  J. Russell.  Environmental aesthetics: Affective appraisals of environments , 1988 .

[19]  Mahbub Rashid,et al.  On the Description of Shape and Spatial Configuration inside Buildings: Convex Partitions and Their Local Properties , 1997 .

[20]  Stephen Kaplan,et al.  Perception and landscape: Conceptions and misconceptions. , 1979 .

[21]  M. Arbib,et al.  Motivational Learning of Spatial Behavior , 1977 .

[22]  John Zacharias.  PATH CHOICE AND VISUAL STIMULI: SIGNS OF HUMAN ACTIVITY AND ARCHITECTURE , 2001 .

[23]  H. Blum.  Biological shape and visual science (part I) , 1973 .

[24]  J. O’Keefe,et al.  Geometric determinants of the place fields of hippocampal neurons , 1996, Nature.

[25]  G. Allen,et al.  Developmental issues in cognitive mapping: the selection and utilization of environmental landmarks. , 1979, Child development.

[26]  Jan Malte Wiener,et al.  Isovists as a Means to Predict Spatial Experience and Behavior , 2004, Spatial Cognition.

[27]  Wilson O. Readinger.  Representing and partitioning visual space: applying isovist field theory to human perception , 2010 .

[28]  Oscar Newman,et al.  Creating defensible space , 1996 .

[29]  Ralf Weber,et al.  On the aesthetics of architecture : a psychological approach to the structure and the order of perceived architectural space , 1995 .

[30]  F. Attneave.  Some informational aspects of visual perception. , 1954, Psychological review.

[31]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .

[32]  Stephani K. A. Robson.  A Review of Psychological and Cultural Effects on Seating Behavior and Their Application to Foodservice Settings , 2002 .

[33]  M. Benedikt,et al.  To Take Hold of Space: Isovists and Isovist Fields , 1979 .

[34]  R. Byrne,et al.  Memory for Urban Geography , 1979 .

[35]  Hanspeter A. Mallot,et al.  'Fine-to-Coarse' Route Planning and Navigation in Regionalized Environments , 2003, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[36]  Hanspeter A. Mallot,et al.  Graph-based models of space in architecture and cognitive science: a comparative analysis , 2005 .

[37]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Contour-based object identification and segmentation: Stimuli, norms and data, and software tools , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[38]  S. Friedmann,et al.  Visual needs in urban environments and physical planning , 1988 .

[39]  David Kortenkamp,et al.  Prototypes, Location, and Associative Networks (PLAN): Towards a Unified Theory of Cognitive Mapping , 1995, Cogn. Sci..

[40]  Hanspeter A. Mallot,et al.  Integration of Metric Place Relations in a Landmark Graph , 2002, ICANN.

[41]  Hanspeter A. Mallot,et al.  Use and interaction of navigation strategies in regionalized environments , 2004 .

[42]  Gabriele Janzen.  Organisation räumlichen Wissens , 2000 .

[43]  A. Stamps.  Entropy, Visual Diversity, and Preference , 2002, The Journal of general psychology.

[44]  Hanspeter A Mallot,et al.  Route Navigating without Place Recognition: What is Recognised in Recognition-Triggered Responses? , 2000, Perception.

[45]  Arthur E. Stamps,et al.  Psychology and the Aesthetics of the Built Environment , 2000 .

[46]  J. O’Keefe,et al.  Modeling place fields in terms of the cortical inputs to the hippocampus , 2000, Hippocampus.

[47]  Alasdair Turner,et al.  Making isovists syntactic: isovist integration analysis , 1999 .

[48]  Benjamin Kuipers,et al.  Modeling Spatial Knowledge , 1978, IJCAI.

[49]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Two strategies for learning a route in a driving simulator. , 1997 .

[50]  Daniel R. Montello,et al.  Scale and Multiple Psychologies of Space , 1993, COSIT.

[51]  E. Reed.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1989 .

[52]  David Leiser,et al.  The Traveller , 1989 .

[53]  Jürgen Joedicke.  Raum und Form in der Architektur : über den behutsamen Umgang mit der Vergangenheit = Sapce and form in architecture : a circumspect approach to the past , 1985 .

[54]  Michael Batty,et al.  Exploring Isovist Fields: Space and Shape in Architectural and Urban Morphology , 2001 .

[55]  Benjamin Kuipers,et al.  Towards Autonomous Topological Place Detection Using the Extended Voronoi Graph , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[56]  Arthur E Stamps,et al.  Isovists, Enclosure, and Permeability Theory , 2005 .