POE 2.0: exploring the potential of social media for capturing unsolicited post-occupancy evaluations

This article presents a scoping study in which unsolicited user feedback of the Seattle Public Library was gathered from selected social media and user-review websites to determine the viability of utilizing social media as a novel and unconventional approach to post-occupancy evaluation (POE). Fourteen social media/review websites were surveyed and all available review-data were extracted. This resulted in a rich dataset of almost 500 reviews, which were subjected to further analyses of temporal and geographical patterns, numerical ratings and the semantic content of the reviews. The study's results suggest building users are quite willing to share, without solicitation, their experiences. The results showed: a high proportion of local reviewers (40%); highly regular, temporal patterns of posting, suggesting a sustained interest in reviewing over a period of seven years; numerical ratings suggesting that comments were not dominated by highly opinionated, extreme reviewers but represented a broad range of views; geographical differences in the semantic content of the reviews. The article suggests that highly valuable information is currently available from peer-to-peer networks and that this forms a new class of POE-data which are radically different from current POE paradigms. It concludes that these data might be most valuable through augmenting, and not supplanting, traditional POE.

[1]  Laura A. Carlson,et al.  Getting Lost in Buildings , 2010 .

[2]  Robert B. Bechtel The paradigm of environmental psychology. , 1996 .

[3]  Daniel Stokols,et al.  The paradox of environmental psychology , 1995 .

[4]  Adrian Leaman,et al.  Assessing building performance in use 1: the Probe process , 2001 .

[5]  任继东 A Moment in , 2003 .

[6]  Vishal Gupta,et al.  Recent Developments in Text Clustering Techniques , 2012 .

[7]  Christoph Hölscher,et al.  Web search behavior of Internet experts and newbies , 2000, Comput. Networks.

[8]  Wolfgang F. E. Preiser,et al.  Post‐occupancy evaluation: how to make buildings work better , 1995 .

[9]  Kim Dovey,et al.  Becoming Places: Urbanism / Architecture / Identity / Power , 2009 .

[10]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  An introduction to latent semantic analysis , 1998 .

[11]  Juliet M. Corbin,et al.  Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory , 2008 .

[12]  Adrian Leaman,et al.  Assessing building performance in use 4: the Probe occupant surveys and their implications , 2001 .

[13]  Patrick F. Reidy An Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis , 2009 .

[14]  Pamela Jordan Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques , 1994 .

[15]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data , 2007 .

[16]  C. Zimring,et al.  Post-Occupancy Evaluation , 1980 .

[17]  A. Bryant Re-grounding Grounded Theory , 2002 .

[18]  David R. Roskos-Ewoldsen,et al.  It's About Time: The Need for a Journal Devoted to Communication Research Methodologies , 2007 .

[19]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[20]  Neil Allan,et al.  Low-energy dwellings: the contribution of behaviours to actual performance , 2010 .

[21]  A. Kaplan,et al.  Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media , 2010 .

[22]  Ian Cooper Teachers’ Assessments of Primary School Buildings: the role of the physical environment in education , 1985 .

[23]  Albena Yaneva,et al.  Made by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture: An Ethnography of Design , 2009 .