EVALUATIVE PERCEPTION CRITERIA FOR URBAN ENVIRONMENT OBJECTS WITH RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS OF VLADIVOSTOK AS AN EXAMPLE

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Aim: To analyze the evaluative perception criteria for urban objects, in particular, residential buildings. Methods: The sample consisted of 100 residents of Vladivostok, divided into three groups: «students», «adults» and «seniors». Photos of the most common residential buildings in Vladivostok city were used as stimuli. Respondents were asked to rank them according to the degree of preference. Then the data were processed using a multidimensional scaling of individual preferences. Results. Two evaluative perception criteria suitable to the entire sample were identified: first - perceived comfort/novelty and the second - buildings originality and individuality. Intergroup differences were found according to the criterion «comfort/novelty»: students were more inclined to the comfort/novelty pole than the other groups, and they preferred new high-rise buildings located at this pole to a greater extent. This allowed us to assume that they had a special semantic content of images of such objects. According to the criterion of «individuality», the preferences of all groups of respondents consistently tend to houses perceived as non-trivial (these were new high-rise and historical buildings). At the same time, most buildings were perceived, on the contrary, as ordinary, devoid of originality, which reveals a mismatch between the preferred and the actual. The identified criteria are interpreted as two points of view in the perception of urban environment objects. The first one is associated with the tendency of mental projection inside the object, the second emphasizes the visual, external qualities of objects. Conclusion: Application of the photo ranking technique with subsequent multidimensional scaling method allowed us to identify the evaluative perception criteria for residential buildings. The results obtained can have value in the context of improving urban environment.

About the authors

O. A. Kaptsevich

Far Eastern Federal University

Email: kaptcevich.oa@dvfu.ru
кандидат психологических наук, старший преподаватель департамента психологии и образования

References

  1. Воробьева И. В. Психология городской среды. Екатеринбург: Изд-во Рос. гос. проф.-пед. ун-та, 2012. 244 с
  2. Дерябо С. Д., Ясвин В. А. Методологические проблемы становления и развития экологической психологии // Психологический журнал. 1996. Т. 17, № 6. С. 4-18
  3. Лисициан М. В., Пашковский В. Л., Петунина З. В. и др. Архитектурное проектирование жилых зданий / под ред. Лисициана М. В., Пронина Е. С.. М., 2006. 488 с
  4. Литвина С. А., Богомаз С. А., Галай И. А., Айзман Р. И. Отобенности личностно-обусловленного восприятия вузовской молодежью среды города (на материале исследований в Иркутске, Томске и Куйбышеве) // Психология в экономике и управлении. 2014. № 1. С. 106-111
  5. Милграм С. Эксперимент в социальной психологии. СПб.: Питер, 2000. 336 с
  6. Мкртчян Н., Карачурина Л. Миграция в России: потоки и центры притяжения // Демоскоп Weekly. 2014. № 595-596. С. 1-17
  7. Наследов А. Д. SPSS 19: профессиональный статистический анализ данных. СПб.: Питер, 201 1. 400 с
  8. Пироцкая А. В., Карпов А. Е. Восприятие жителями функционального зонирования в городах // Вестник Новосибирского государственного университета. Серия: Социально-экономические науки. 2014. Т. 14, вып. 1. С. 170-179
  9. Психология: словарь / под общ. ред. А. В. Петровского, М. Г. Ярошевского. 2-е изд., испр. и доп. М.: Политиздат, 1990. 494 с
  10. Рубинштейн С. Л. Основы общей психологии: в 2 т. Т. 1. М.: Педагогика, 1989. 488 с
  11. Рубинштейн С. Л. Бытие и сознание. Человек и мир. СПб.: Питер, 2003. 512 с
  12. Смолова Л. В. Психология взаимодействия с окружающей средой // Экология человека. 2007. № 6. С. 30-33
  13. Чернявская О. С. Нижний Новгород глазами нижегородцев: внутренний образ города // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. Серия: Социальные науки. 2013. № 1 (29). С. 69-76
  14. Штейнбах X. Э., Еленский В. И. Психология жизненного пространства. СПб.: Речь, 2004. 239 с
  15. Agusti D. P, Rutllant J., Fortea J. L. Differences in the perception of urban space via mental maps and Heart Rate Variation (HRV). Applied Geography. 2019,112, p. 102084.
  16. Berman M., Jonides J., Kaplan S. The Cognitive Benefits of Interacting With Nature. Psychological Science. 2009, 19 (12), pp. 1207-12.
  17. Fathullah A., Willis K. S. Engaging the Senses: The Potential of Emotional Data for Participation in Urban Planning. Urban Sci. 2018, 2, p. 98.
  18. Franek M., Sefara D., Petruzalek J., Cabal J., Myska K. Differences in eye movements while viewing images with various levels of restorativeness. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2018, 57, pp. 10-16.
  19. Galindo M. P, Hidalgo M. C. Aesthetic preferences and the attribution of meaning: Environmental categorization processes in the evaluation of urban scenes. International Journal of Psychology. 2005, 40 (1), pp. 19-27.
  20. Gjerde M. Visual Aesthetic Perception and Judgement of Urban Streetscapes. Paper for Building a Better World: CIB World Congress, 2010, pp. 12-22.
  21. Gregoletto D., Reis A. High-rise buildings in the perception of the users of the urban space. Cadernos do PROARQ. 2012, pp. 89-110.
  22. Hartig T., Evans G. W., Jamner L. D., Davis D. S., Garling T. Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2003, 23 (2), pp. 109-123.
  23. Hout M. C., Papesh M. H., Goldinger S. D. Multidimensional scaling. Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science. 2013, 4 (1), pp. 93-103.
  24. Lindal P J. Hartig T. Architectural variation, building height, and the restorative quality of Urban residential streetscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2013, 33, pp. 26-36.
  25. Nasar J. L. The Evaluative Image of the City. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1990, 56 (1), pp. 41-53.
  26. Stamps A. E. Psychology and the Aesthetics of the Built Environment. Kluwer Academic, Massachusetts, 2000, 327 p.
  27. Ulrich R. S. View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science. 1984, 224 (4647), pp. 420421.
  28. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Urbanization Prospects, 2018. Available at: https://population.un.org/wup/Download/ (accessed: 13.12.2020).
  29. Wang R., Liu Y., Lu Y., Zhang J., Liu P., Yao Y., & Grekousis G. Perceptions of built environment and health outcomes for older Chinese in Beijing: A big data approach with street view images and deep learning technique. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 2019, 78, p. 101386.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2021 Kaptsevich O.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
 


Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).