Affecting Factors on the Formation of Sense of Location in Public Minds

Subject Areas : architecture

Voria Asasi ¹ , Iraj Etessam ² , Azadeh Shahcheraghi ³

1 - Ph.D., Department of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 - Professor, Department of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 - Assistant Professor of Architecture, Department of Architecture, College of Art & Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2016-05-28 Accepted : 2017-06-07 Published : 2023-04-21

Keywords: Meanings, Persistence, Sense of location, Quality, Perception,

Abstract :

During the present century, the term location with its extensive range of meanings has been presented in almost all architectural spaces. Building of location has incarnated implications and beliefs of human beings and has a deep relationship with their existence. For a location to remain in the public minds, it must attract a vast majority of addresses and create a sense of attachment to itself. Sense of attachment is a sense of space that individuals feel themselves as a part of it and where they find their desires and transactions. Thus, space in this sense of location turns into a context for individuals’ social memories and meanings. One of the problems considered in today’s cities is the low quality of citizens’ life. This lack of quality results from inattention to location and its meaning; A location which relates humans with other layers of their existence and these layers help humans recognize their environment that leads to a general feeling to space in the addresses. This general feeling which is created after perception and judgment of a particular environment in person is called sense of location which is an important factor in creating coordination between the individual and the particular environment, better use of the environment, user’s satisfaction and finally a sense of attachment to environment and a continuous presence in it.Sense of attachment is a strong connection and a significant factor among people and location. This connection is positive and leads to an expanded deep relationship and individual’s interaction with the environment which can be more extended by the passage of time. In fact, sense of attachment is a human sublime feeling by which the individual and the environment interact with each other. This feeling finally leads to create individual, environmental and social deep connections. Based on ideas of existentialism, sense of attachment is a preliminary and essential need of humans which they try to satisfy. Different degrees of this feeling in architectural spaces has been accompanied by different feelings and reactions including different classifications in architectural spaces such as sacrifice for location, interest in location and commitment to location. As a result, creating a sense of attachment in architectural spaces leads to transforming them into meaningful locations for individuals and developing environmental-human connections and changing the space to a meaningful and lasting environment which will lead to the formation of a permanent location in the memories of human beings as well as their continuous presence. In this study which aims to retrieve  and introduce the role of each element and component forming the sense of location and attachment to it, experts’ opinions and judgments were considered based on reviewing texts and related documents on this subject. And by presenting analytical diagrams, roles of these factors in the formation of sense of location and attachment were analyzed. Finally, a permanent location model including the main parameters and factors as well as qualities affecting the formation of   a lasting sense of location in the minds of the public was presented.

References:

1. ابل، کریس. (1387). معماری و هویت. (فرح حبیب، مترجم) تهران: دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات. (نشر اثر اصلی 1997).


2. برودبنت، جفری. (1389). با برادبنت، درباره معماری، (نیلوفر رضوی، هدیه نوربخش و کیوان جورابچی، مترجمان) تهران: دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.


3. پرتوی، پروین. (1387). پدیدارشناسی مکان، انتشارات فرهنگستان هنر.


4. جوان فروزنده، علی. (1388). تبیین فضاهای باز مجتمع های مسکونی در ایجاد حس تعلق. رساله دکتری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم تحقیقات، تهران.


5. جوان فروزنده، علی؛ و مطلبی، قاسم. (1390). مفهوم حس تعلق به مکان و عوامل تشکیل دهنده آن. هویت شهر، 5(8)، 27-37.


6. حبیب، فرح. (1385). کندوکاوی در معنای شکل شهر. هنرهای زیبا، 25، 5-14.


7. دهخدا، علی اکبر. (1373). لغت نامه دهخدا، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.


8. رلف، ادوارد. (1389). مکان و بی مکانی. (محمرضا نقصان محمدی، کاظم مندگاری و زهید متکی، مترجمان). تهران: آرمانشهر (نشر اثر اصلی 1976).


9. سلیمانی، محمد رضا؛ اعتصام، ایرج؛ و حبیب، فرح. (1395). بازشناسی مفهوم و اصول هویت در معماری. هویت شهر، 10(25)، 15-26.


10. شاهچراغی، آزاده؛ و بندرآباد، علیرضا. (1394). محاط در محیط: کاربرد روانشناسی محیط در معماری و شهرسازی، تهران: انتشارات سازمان جهاد دانشگاهی تهران.


11. شولتز، دوان .(1377). نظریه های شخصیت، ترجمه سید محمدی، تهران، (نشر اثر اصلی 1976).


12. شولتز، کریستیان نوربرگ. (1387). معماری، حضور، زبان و مکان، (علیرضا احمدیان: مترجم)، تهران:نیلوفر. (نشر اثر اصلی 2000).


13. فن مایس، پی یر. (1384). عناصر معماری از صورت تا مکان.(فرزین فر دانش، مترجم)، تهران:دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.


14. کاشی، حسین؛ و بنیادی، ناصر. (1392). تبیین مدل هویت مکان- حس مکان و بررسی عناصر و ابعاد مختلف آن. هنرهای زیبا، 18(3)، 43-52.


15. کلالی، پریسا؛ و مدیری، اتوسا. (1391). تبیین نقش مولفه معنا در فرایند شکل‌گیری حس مکان. هنرهای زیبا، 17(2)، 43-51.


16. گلکار، کورش. (1390). آفرینش مکان پایدار، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.


17. لنگ، جان. (1390). آفرینش نظریه معماری (نقش علوم رفتاری در طراحی محیط)، (علیرضا عینی فر: مترجم)، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، چاپ دوم. (نشر اثر اصلی 1987).


18. لینچ، کوین. (1390). تئوری شکل خوب شهر، (حسین بحرینی: مترجم)، تهران:انتشارات دانشگاه تهران. (نشر اثر اصلی 1959).


19. ماتلاک، جان. (1379). آشنایی با طراحی محیط و منظر، (حوزه معاونت خدمات شهری سازمان پارکها و فضای سبز شهر تهران: مترجم)، تهران. (نشر اثر اصلی 2000).


20. میرمقتدایی، مهتا. (1383). معیارهای شناخت و ارزیابی هویت کالبدی شهرها. هنرهای زیبا، 19، 17-26.


21. نقره‌کار، عبدالحمید. (1387). درآمدی بر هویت اسلامی در معماری و شهرسازی، انتشارات مسکن و شهرسازی، تهران.


22. نقی‌زاده، محمد؛ و امین‌زاده، بهناز. (1381). آرمان شهر اسلام: شهر عدالت. صفه، 12(35)، 21-31.


23. Carmona, M., Health, T., OC, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2007). Public Place, Urban Spaces. Oxford: Architectural press.


24. Casey, E. S. (1998). The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. Berkely: university of California Press.


25. Coleman, J. (1987) .Opportunities for Innovation in Urban Design Education. Australian Planners, 25(4), 28-31.


26. ibson, J. (1950). The Perception of the Visual World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.


27. Jacobs, A., & Appleyard, D. (1987). Toward an urban design manifesto. Japa, 53(1), 112-120.


28. Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. London: Jonathan Cape.


29. Lewicka, M. (2008). Place Attachment, Place Identity, and Place Memory, Restoring the Forgotten City Past. Environmental Psychology, 28, 209-231.


30. Mayhew, S. (2009). Dictionary of Geography. Oxford: University Press.


31. Montgomery, J. (1998). The Image of the City. Cambridge: MIT Press.


32. Pretty, G. H., Chipuer, H. M., & Bramston, P. (2003). Sense of Place Amongst Adolescents and Adults in Two Rural Australian Towns: the Discriminating Features of Place Attachment, Sense of Community and Place Dependence in Relation to Place Identity. Environmental Psychology, 23, 273-287.


33. Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K., & Kamion, J. R. (1983). Place-Identity: Physical World Socialization of the Self. Environmental psychology, 3, 57-83.


34. Punter, J., & Carmona, M. (1997). The Design Dimension of Planning: Theory, Content and best Practice for Design Policies. London: e & FN Spon.


35. Punter, J. (1991). Participation in the design of urban space. Land Space Design, 200, 24-27.


36. Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.


37. Seamon, D. (2000). Phenomenology, Place, Environment and Architecture: A Review of the Literature. Phenomenology online, Retrieved May 28, 2015 from https://researchgate.net.


38. Shamai, S. (1991). Sense of Place: An Empirical Measurement. Geofonum, 22 (3), 347-538.


39. Southworth, M. (1989). Theory and Practice of Contemporary Urban Design. Town Planning Review, 60 (4), 369-402.


40. Stefanovic, I. L. (1998). Phenomenological Encounters with place: Cavata to Square one. Enviromental psychology, 18, 31-99.


41. Tuan, Yi. Fu. (1974). Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception Attitudes and Values. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.


42. Turner, P., & Turner, S. (2006). Place, Sense of Place, and virtual Environments. Social Informatics Research Group, 15(2), 209-212.


43. Zimmerman, M. (1983). Toward a Heideygerian Ethos for Radical Environmentalism. Enviromental Ethics, 5, 99-131.