Meaning in post-modern architecture: An examination using the multiple sorting task

Abstract The relevance of the multiple sorting task as a research tactic for the empirical study of environmental meaning is illustrated in the context of a specific study of Modern and Post-Modern architecture. The assumption of architectural critics that Post-Modern buildings are more meaningful to the general public than Modern buildings forms the basis for the research hypotheses of this study. Twenty-four buildings, ranging from Modern to Post-Modern are evaluated by 20 architects and 20 accountants whose responses are structured through a multiple sorting task. The sorting data are interpreted in terms of regional analyses of multi-dimensional scaling structures, following the general principles of Facet Theory. These results suggest that (1) architects and accountants do employ different sets of criteria (different codes, in effect) for evaluating buildings, and yet (2) Post-Modern buildings (despite their architects' intentions of relating their designs to a popular code) are not perceived by the accountants as distinct from Modern buildings. The particular strengths of the multiple sorting task as a research tactic for this and other studies of environmental meaning are discussed and summarized.

[1]  M. Bloombaum.  The conditions underlying race riots as portrayed by multidimensional scalogram analysis: a reanalysis of Leiberson and Silverman's data. , 1968, American sociological review.

[2]  S. Engel.  Thought and Language , 1964 .

[3]  Moonja P. Kim,et al.  The Method of Sorting as a Data-Gathering Procedure in Multivariate Research. , 1975, Multivariate behavioral research.

[4]  J. V. Kasmar.  The Development of a Usable Lexicon of Environmental Descriptors , 1970 .

[5]  Vimolsiddhi Horayangkura.  Semantic Dimensional Structures , 1978 .

[6]  Lawrence M. Ward,et al.  Cognitive Set and the Perception of Place , 1981 .

[7]  J. Lansing,et al.  Evaluation of Neighborhood Quality , 1969 .

[8]  Hartmut Espe.  Differences in the perception of national socialist and classicist architecture , 1981 .

[9]  Kenneth H. Craik,et al.  THE COMPREHENSION OF THE EVERYDAY PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT , 1968 .

[10]  David V. Canter,et al.  The potential of facet theory for applied social psychology , 1983 .

[11]  Charles Jencks,et al.  The language of post-modern architecture , 1977 .

[12]  L M Ward,et al.  Multidimensional Scaling Of The Molar Physical Environment. , 1977, Multivariate behavioral research.

[13]  J. Wohlwill.  Environmental Aesthetics: The Environment as a Source of Affect , 1976 .

[14]  Irwin Altman,et al.  Human behavior and environment : advances in theory and research , 1976 .

[15]  Lawrence M. Ward,et al.  The psychological representation of molar physical environments , 1981 .

[16]  J. Bruner,et al.  A study of thinking , 1956 .

[17]  Louis Guttman,et al.  The Guttman-Lingoes nonmetric program series , 1973 .

[18]  Anke Oostendorp,et al.  Dimensions in the perception of architecture:I. Identification and interpretation of dimensions of similarity , 1978 .

[19]  Earl A. Alluisi,et al.  Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics , 1975 .

[20]  Charles Mauron,et al.  Aesthetics and Psychology , 1970 .

[21]  C. Osgood,et al.  The Measurement of Meaning , 1958 .

[22]  Martin Krampen,et al.  Meaning in the urban environment , 1979 .