Analysis of inner peace in virtual reality experience based on the phenomenology of embodied perception of space (case study: design of a residential complex in Kish Island)

Subject Areas : architecture

Mina Hasani ¹ , Jamaleddin Soheili ^{2 *} , Ali Akbari ³ , Hamid Nejat ⁴

1 - Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Architecture, Kish International Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kish Island, Iran.
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin,
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Yadegar-e-Imam Khomeini (RAH) Shahre Rey Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
4 - Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran.

Received: 2023-07-12 Accepted : 2024-01-08 Published : 2024-11-30

Keywords: Analysis of inner peace in virtual reality experience based on the phenomenology of embodied perception of space (case study: design of a residential complex in Kish Island),

Abstract :

Bringing living space design closer to space quality standards is one of the most important architectural issues. Considering the high volume of housing construction, the desirability of residential spaces is important and necessary. Testing the quality of the space based on its perceptual pseudo-experience during design and before construction is one of the mechanisms to achieve the desired architecture, which is possible for architects today with the help of virtual reality technology. With this aim, in the theoretical framework of the phenomenology of perception, in a quantitative way and with the test of the semantic differentiation scale, first eight components of the feeling of inner peace, including pleasure, interestingness, beauty, normality, calmness, wideness, openness and enjoyment of daylight, were counted. In this experimental perception test, 24 participants (12 women/12 men) rated 24 virtual rooms in eight experimental groups. The participants were randomly selected from people who intended to pre-purchase an apartment unit in Kish Island. The interior of the apartment under construction was renovated for them. For each visualized scene, space evaluation was done through a 45-second exploration interval. The resulting data were evaluated using the semantic difference scale technique. Also, the correlation of the variables was checked through the non-linear quadratic regression test. The findings from the analysis of the components of the perception of inner peace in the virtual reality experience, which in this study are the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the space, the attractiveness of the space, the beauty or ugliness of the space, normality or abnormality, calmness, the perceptual breadth of the space, openness to the outside and the enjoyment of daylight and It was sunlight, it indicates the meaningful relationships between them in a way that is in line with the real experience of the space and as if the people felt themselves present in the space. Also, the correlation diagram between the variables, especially in the case of the three characteristics of pleasantness, attractiveness and beauty, confirms this. In this study, the correlation between the living space characteristics of a residential unit and the experimental qualities attributed to them was studied quantitatively to measure the virtual experience of the perception of inner peace. The interaction of eight components with independent physical factors (floor materials, surface of openings, location, geometry and height of windows along with fixed height of space and fixed view outside) of a component-based description showed to be very effective for describing the variance observed in the ratings. The high level of correlation is particularly notable for the emotional and aesthetic rating categories, which cannot be trivially attributed to only one scene feature. Representation of designed scenes provides evidence for the importance of perceptual features in the experience of space in virtual reality. The current research has been carried out in the direction of generalizing and valuing spatial components in the design of a residential complex in the cultural/climatic context of Kish Island in Iran, so that a more successful design can be offered to users from this practical study.

References:

1. آرنت، هانا (۱۴۰۲). حیات ذهن. (مسعود علیا، مترجم) چاپ هفتم، تهران: نشر ققنوس. http://opac.nlai.ir/opac-prod/bibliographic/9404250
2. اکبری، علی (۱۳۹۷). فهم روایتگری معماری مبتنی بر نسبت دیالکتیک فضا زمان با بدن، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های انسان‌شناسی ایران، ۸ (۲): ۹۷- ۷۵. 10.22059/IJAR.2019.71599
3. اکبری، علی؛ و فلامکی، محمدمنصور (۱۳۹۵). بررسی جایگاه ادراکات حسی و احساس در پدیده‌شناسی فضای ساخته‌شده، پژوهش‌های انسان‌شناسی ایران، ۶ (۱): ۲۱- ۷. 10.22059/IJAR.2016.60807
4. اکبری، علی؛ نیرومند شیشوان، مرضیه (139۸). جایگاه تجربه زیسته از منظر فلسفه بدن در فرایند طراحی و خلق مکان، پژوهش‌های فلسفی، ۱۳ (۲۶): ۵۲- ۲۵. 10.22034/JPIUT.2019.8023
5. سجادی زاویه، سید علی؛ و نیلی، رعنا. (1401). ارزیابی نظام اتصال انسان و طبیعت در سیستم واقعیت مجازی باهدف ارائه و بازتاب مدلی در کالبد معماری. معماری و شهرسازی ایران ۱۳ (۱): ۱۹۹-۱۸۱. https://doi.org/10.30475/isau.2022.230954.1415
6. سرمد، زهره؛ بازرگان، عباس؛ و حجازی، الهه (۱۴۰۲). روش‌های تحقیق در علوم رفتاری، چاپ چهل و هشتم، تهران: نشر آگه. http://opac.nlai.ir/opac-prod/bibliographic/555496
7. شکری‌نیا عمرانی، الهام؛ و رستمی، راحله. (1401). تاثیرتکنولوژی واقعیت مجازی (VR) بر نتایج پذیرش بام سبز در ساختمان‌های مسکونی (مطالعه موردی: قائمشهر). معماری و شهرسازی ایران ۱۳ (۱): 3۳۸-3۲۷. https://doi.org/10.30475/isau.2022.229172.1408
8. طاهر طلوع‌دل، محمدصادق؛ ضرغامی، اسماعیل؛ کمالی تبریزی، سینا؛ و حیدری پور، امید. (1398). بررسی قابلیت ادراک محیط در سیستم واقعیت مجازی بر اساس مؤلفه‌های ادراک بصری. نشریه علمی اندیشه معماری، 3(5): 106-124. 10.30479/AT.2019.10665.1194
9. طلایی، سمیه؛ اکبری، علی؛ و حمزه‌نژاد، مهدی (۱۳۹۹). تحلیل پدیدار شناختی مکان قدسی در شهر ایرانی-اسلامی مبتنی بر انحا حضور عناصر چهارگانه در فضا (نمونه موردی: آرامگاه شاه نعمت‌الله ولی در شهر ماهان)، مطالعات شهر ایرانی-اسلامی ۱۱ (۴۲): ۵۴-۴۳. http://iic.ihss.ac.ir/Article/13559/FullText
10. کاپلستون، فردریک چارلز (۱۳۹۶). تاریخ فلسفه، جلد ۹: از م‍ن‌ دوب‍ی‍ران‌ ت‍ا س‍ارت‍ر.(ع‍ب‍دال‍ح‍س‍ی‍ن‌ آذرن‍گ‌، م‍ح‍م‍ود ی‍وس‍ف‌ ث‍ان‍ی‌، مترجمان). تهران: انتشارات علمی فرهنگی. http://opac.nlai.ir/opac-prod/bibliographic/1719193
11. متیوز، اریک (۱۳۹۹). درآمدی بر اندیشه‌های مرلوپونتی. (رمضان برخورداری، مترجم). تهران: گام نو. http://opac.nlai.ir/opac-prod/bibliographic/7511792
12. مهدلیکوا، اوا (۱۳۹۴). در جست‌وجوی تجربیات جدید بدن به‌واسطه فضا: نسبت میان سوژه و فضا، (ترجمه مهرداد پارسا). اطلاعات حکمت و فلسفه، ۱۰ (۱۱۳): ۴۱-۳۸. https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/1276616
13. Abdelhameed, W. A. (2013). Virtual reality use in architectural design studios: A case of studying structure and construction. Procedia Computer Science, 25, 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.11.027
14. Abu Alatta, R., & Freewan, A. (2017). Investigating the effect of employing immersive virtual environment on enhancing spatial perception within design process. Archnet-IJARArchnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 11(2), 219–238. https://www.archnet.org/publications/12019
15. Acre, F., & Wyckmans, A. (2014). Spatial quality determinants for residential building renovation: A methodological approach to the development of spatial quality assessment. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/2093761X.2014.923793
16. Angulo, A. (2013). On the design of architectural spatial experiences using immersive simulation. 11th EAEA Envisioning Architecture: Design, Evaluation, Communication Conference, Track 2, 151-158. https://www.labsimurb.polimi.it/11EAEA/T02/EAEA11-2013_T02_PAPER_004.html
17. Azarby, S., & Rice, A. (2023). Spatial Perception Imperatives in Virtual Environments: Understanding the Impacts of View Usage Patterns on Spatial Design Decisions in Virtual Reality Systems. Buildings, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13010160
18. Ball, J., Capanni, N., & Watt, S. (2007). Virtual Reality for Mutual Understanding in Landscape Planning. Social Sciences, 1(11), 661–671. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1084222
19. Bishop, I. D., Wherrett, J. A. R., & Miller, D. R. (2001). Assessment of path choices on a country walk using a virtual environment. Landscape and Urban Planning, 52(4), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00118-3
20. Bohil, C. J., Alicea, B., & Biocca, F. A. (2011). Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12(12), 752–762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3122
21. Botella, C., Garcia-Palacios, A., Baños, R. M., & Quero, S. (2009). Cybertherapy: Advantages, limitations, and ethical issues. PsychNology Journal, 7(1), 77–100. https://dblp.org/rec/journals/psychnology/BotellaGBQ09
22. Camporesi, C., Kallmann, M., & Han, J. J. (2013). VR solutions for improving physical therapy. Proceedings - IEEE Virtual Reality. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2013.6549371
23. Ceylan, S. (2020). Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, 54–63. https://doi.org/10.5220/0009346800540063
24. Darwish, M., Kamel, S., & Assem, A. (2023). A Theoretical Model of Using Extended Reality in Architecture Design Education. Engineering Research Journal - Faculty of Engineering (Shoubra), 52(1), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.21608/erjsh.2022.168677.1099
25. Diemer, J., Alpers, G. W., Peperkorn, H. M., Shiban, Y., & Mühlberger, A. (2015). The impact of perception and presence on emotional reactions: A review of research in virtual reality. Frontiers in Psychology (Vol. 6, Issue JAN, pp. 1–9). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00026
26. du Toit, J. (2020). Introduction – Phenomenology and virtuality. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 20(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/20797222.2021.1896236
27. Eloy, S., Andrade, M., Dias, L., & Dias, M. S. (2023). The impact of sound in people’s behaviour in outdoor settings: A study using virtual reality and eye-tracking. Applied Ergonomics, 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103957
28. Franz, G., Von Der Heyde, M., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2005). An empirical approach to the experience of architectural space in virtual reality-exploring relations between features and affective appraisals of rectangular indoor spaces. Automation in Construction, 14 (2 SPEC. ISS.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2004.07.009
29. Gill, L., Lange, E., Morgan, E., & Romano, D. (2013). An analysis of usage of different types of visualisation media within a collaborative planning workshop environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 40(4), 742–754. https://doi.org/10.1068/b38049
30. Häkkilä, J., Colley, A., Väyrynen, J., & Yliharju, A.-J. (2018). Introducing Virtual Reality Technologies to Design Education. Seminar.Net, 14(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7577/seminar.2584
31. Hansen, A., & MacHin, D. (2013). Researching visual environmental communication. Environmental Communication (Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 151–168). https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2013.785441
32. Horváthová, D., Voštinár, P., & Mitter, M. (2020). Extended Reality in Education. DIVAI 2020, 13th International Scientific Conference on Distance Learning in Applied Informatics, 327–337. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344547701_Extended_Reality_in_Education
33. Jackson, R. L., & Fagan, E. (2000). Collaboration and learning within immersive virtual reality. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments. https://doi.org/10.1145/351006.351018
34. Juliantino, C., Nathania, M. P., Hendarti, R., Darmadi, H., & Suryawinata, B. A. (2023). The development of virtual healing environment in VR platform. Procedia Computer Science, 216, 310–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.12.141
35. Luo, L., & Zhang, W. (2017). Phenomenological Reflection on Architectural VR Technology. https://doi.org/10.3390/is4si-2017-04061
36. Merleau-Ponty, M. (2013). Phenomenology of Perception (D. Landes, T. Carman, & C. Lefort (eds). Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203720714
37. Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1995). Augmented reality: a class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies, 2351. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.197321
38. Paar, P. (2006). Landscape visualizations: Applications and requirements of 3D visualization software for environmental planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 30(6), 815–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2005.07.002
39. Perez-Gomez, A. (2002). Phenomenology and Virtual Space. Alternative Tactics for Architectural Practice. OASE, 58, 35–58. https://www.oasejournal.nl/en/Issues/58/PhenomenologyAndVirtualSpace#035
40. Portman, M. E., Natapov, A., & Fisher-Gewirtzman, D. (2015). To go where no man has gone before: Virtual reality in architecture, landscape architecture and environmental planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 54, 376–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2015.05.001
41. Prabawa, M. S. (2022). DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE AS A MEANS OF NATURE-BASED THERAPY FOR DISABILITY COMMUNITIES. Journal of Architectural Research and Education, 4(2), 133–140. https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/JARE/article/view/51736
42. Reffat, R. M. (2006). Computing in architectural design: Reflections and an approach to new generations of CAAD. Electronic Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 11. 655-668 https://www.itcon.org/paper/2006/45
43. Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials. Sage Publication. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/visual-methodologies/book277282
44. Schnabel, M. A., & Kvan, T. (2003). Spatial Understanding in Immersive Virtual Environments. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 1(4), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1260/147807703773633455
45. Schubert, T., Friedmann, F., & Regenbrecht, H. (2001). The experience of presence: Factor analytic insights. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 10(3), 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474601300343603
46. Schuemie, M. J., Van der Straaten, P., Krijn, M., & Van der Mast, C. A. P. G. (2001). Research on presence in virtual reality: A survey. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 4 (2): pp. 183–201. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493101300117884
47. Seichter, H. (2007). Augmented Reality and Tangible Interfaces in Collaborative Urban Design. Computer-Aided Architectural Design Futures (CAADFutures) 2007: 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6528-6_1
48. Seth, A. K., Suzuki, K., & Critchley, H. D. (2012). An interoceptive predictive coding model of conscious presence. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(JAN). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00395
49. Sheridan, T. B. (1999). Descartes, Heidegger, Gibson, and God: Toward an eclectic ontology of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 8 (5): 551–559. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474699566468
50. Ware, C. (2020). Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-02395-1
51. Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(3), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474698565686
52. Zhu, C., Jin, S., Zhang, J., & Zhang, H. (2023). Construction of residential quality assessment system using factor analysis method based on residents’ satisfaction survey: case study of Beijing, China. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2023.2204918