ارزیابی احساس جمعی در مجتمع های مسکونی (مطالعه موردی: مجموعه مسکونی سعیدیه همدان)

محورهای موضوعی : معماری

راضیه اسفندیاری صدق ¹ ( کارشناس ارشد معماری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد همدان، دانشکده هنر و معماری،همدان، ایران. )
مهرداد کریمی مشاور ² ( استادیار گروه معماری، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، دانشکده هنر و معماری، گروه معماری، همدان، ایران. )
گلرخ دانشگر مقدم ³ ( استادیار گروه معماری، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، دانشکده هنر و معماری، گروه معماری، همدان، ایران. )

تاریخ دریافت : 1393/05/18 تاریخ پذیرش : 1394/07/08 تاریخ انتشار : 1395/09/01

کلید واژه: معماری جمعی, احساس جمعی, روان شناسی محیط,

چکیده مقاله :

معماری جمعی به عنوان رویکردی نوین در معماری، با سه رویکرد سیاسی، جامعه شناسانه و روان شناسانه مطرح شده است.در معماری جمعی، رویکرد روان شناسانه به عنوان تنها رویکرد مرتبط با طراحی جمعی، دارای شاخص مهمی به نام احساسجمعی است. تحولات جامعه مدرن امروزی نظیر کوچکتر شدن خانواده ها سبب ساز کاهش احساس جمعی و عدم تمایل افرادبرای حضور در فضاهای عمومی مجموعه های مسکونی گشته است، موضوعی که با ایجاد انگیزش به کمک طراحی، برایحضور و مشارکت مردم در فضاهای عمومی و بهره گیری از تسهیلات و کیفیت این فضاها می تواند فزونی یابد. در این پژوهشبا استفاده از شیوه تحقیق کیفی، به مطالعه و جمع آوری اطلاعات پرداخته و با استفاده از مشاهده و مصاحبه، در نمونه انتخابشده )از طریق نمونه گیری هدفمند( و تطبیق آن با جدول طراحی استخراج شده، این نتیجه حاصل شد که اقلیم و فرهنگ بهعنوان دو عامل مهم در نگاه جمعی به مسکن در همدان شناخته می شوند.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Community architecture, as a novel approach in architecture, has changed throughout ages. This approach has many concepts which have increased and decreased during the times, but the main concept of community architecture has always been the indirect participation of people in designing. Also, public spaces and stability have recently been added to these new parameters. Among three approaches available in the architecture including political, social and psychological ones, the one that is strongly related to community architecture is a fundamental aspect named sense of community. Sense of community is often defined as a feeling of belonging to a group of members. A feeling that shows the members matter to one another and to the group, and a common faith that ensures that the members needs will be met through their commitment to a unity. Sense of community has two important parts. The first part is individual and the second part is collective. Gender, age, education, level of income and ownership are related to the individual level, while membership, influence, Integration and fulfillment of needs, shared emotional connection are related to the collective part. Public spaces are the most important spaces which could increase the sense of community. They are recognized as being accessible to all groups, providing freedom of action for users. Some changes in modern society may lead to a decrease in the sense of community in public spaces of residential complexes. For instance, most of the people do not like to be present in public spaces for participating and using of facilities of them, or technology and media prevent people from being together. In this new condition, the sense of community will slowly disappear. This is a big problem for all countries all over the world. Identifying and creating the conditions that foster and strengthen sense of community within public spaces of residential complex is an important task for us. We can make suitable conditions to encourage people for coming in public spaces of residential complex and share their needs and beliefs through designing methods. The reduction in this context could be empowered by the presence and participation of people. Thus, we classify our data in two tables. The first table shows design methods in community design with behavioral patterns and performance of spaces, and in the second table some methods for making better facilities to public spaces of residential complex presents have been presented. The only residential complex with public spaces in Hamadan is Saidyeh complex. We have divided the site of this complex into some parts, and observe them for 5 months. 65 persons were randomly selected and interviewed about their needs. A table is drawn according to performance of spaces, behavioral patterns, designing methods and style of investigation (interview or observation). This study aims at examining the collected information through a qualitative method and evaluates the selected samples (through targeted sampling) and compares them with table of designed parameters. As a result, we concluded that the climate and culture could affect community architecture in Hamadan.... Keywords: Community Architecture, Community Feeling, Environmental Psychology.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. اسلامی، غلامرضا؛ و حناچی، پیروز؛ و کامل نیا، حامد. (1388). رویکرد طراحی جمعی در معماری (تحلیل و بررسی تطبیقی معماری جمعی با معماری اجتماعی و معماری مشارکتی). نشریه هنرهای زیبا. 39.47-60.


2. چرخچیان، مریم؛ و دانشپور، سید عبدالهادی. (1386).  فضاهای عمومی و عوامل موثر بر حیات جمعی. نشریه باغ نظر، 7،  19-28.


3. ذبیحی، حسین؛ رهبری­منش، کمال؛ و حبیب، فرح. (1390). بررسی رابطه بین میزان رضایت از مجتمع­های مسکونی و تاثیر مجتمع­های مسکونی­ بر روابط انسان. نشریه هویت شهر. 5(8)، 103-118.


4. شرکت گروه سرمایه­گذاری مسکن. (1382). مطالعات طرح مجتمع مسکونی سعیدیه. مهندسین مشاور شورا. همدان.


5. کامل­نیا، حامد؛ اسلامی، غلامرضا؛ و حناچی، پیروز. (1389). تحلیل و ارزیابی معماری جمعی بر مبنای شاخصه­های احساس جمعی. نشریه هویت شهر، 5(7)، 131-140.


6. گل، یان. (1387). زندگی در فضای میان ساختمان‌ها. (شیما شصتی،مترجم). تهران:انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی.


7. لنگ، جان. (1390). آفرینش نظریه معماری: نقش علوم رفتاری در طراحی محیط. (علیرضا عینی فر،مترجم). تهران:انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.


8. معینی، مهدیه؛ اسلامی، غلامرضا. (1388). رویکردی تحلیلی به کیفیت محیط مسکونی معاصر. نشریه هویت شهر، 10، 47-58. 


9. Biddulph, M. (2007). Introduction to Residential Layout .Amsterdam: Architectural Press.


10. Blanchard, A. L. (2008). Testing a Model of Sense of Virtual Community. Computers in Human Behaviour, 24, 2107-2123.


11. Chavis, D. M., Hogge, J. H., McMillan, D.W., & Wandersman, A. (1986). Sense of community through Brunswick's lens: A first look. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 24-40.


12. Cowan, R. (2005). The dictionary of urbanism. Tisbury, Wiltshire: Streetwise Press.


13. Daim. M. S., Bakri, A. F., Kamarudin, H., & Zakaria. S. A. (2012). Sense of Community in Gated and Non-Gated Residential Neighborhoods. Journal of environmental psychology, 50, 818-826.


14. Davidson, W. B., & Cotter, P. R. (1986). Measurement of sense of community within the sphere of city. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16(7), 608-619


15. Davidson, W. B., & Cotter, P. R. (1991). The relationship between sense of community and subjective well-being: A first look. Journal of Community Psychology, 19(3), 246–253.


16. Francis, J., Giles-Corti, B., Wood, L., & Knuiman, M. (2012). Creating sense of community: The role of public space. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, 401-409.


17. Fried, M. (1984). The Structure and Significance of Community Satisfaction. Journal of Population and Environment, 7, 61-86.


18. Gehl, J., & Gemzøe, L. (2004). Public spaces, public life, Copenhagen. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press & the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture Publishers.


19. Gusfield, J. R. (1975). Community: A critical response (1st English language ed.). New York: Harper & Row.


20. Hajer, M., & Reijndorp, A. (2001). In serch of new public Domain. Rotterdam: NAI Publishers.


21. Hamdi, N. (1991). Housing without houses: participation, flexibility, enablement. New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.


22. Harrison, D. A., & Martocchio, J. J. (1998). Time for absenteeism: A 20-year review of origins Offshoots and outcomes. Journal of Management, 24, 305-350.


23. Hester, R. (1996). Wanted: local participation with a view in J. L, Nasar & B. B, Brown (Eds). Public and private places. Proceedings of the 27^th Annual Environmental Design Reserch Association (EDRA) Conference. June,(pp 42-52). Salt Lake City, Utah, Oklahama, Usa.


24. Hiller, G. A. (1995). Definitions of community: area of agreement. Rural Sociology, (20), pp 111-123.


25. Horelli, l. (2002). A Methodology of Participatory Planning in R. B. Bechtel and A. Churchman (Eds), A Handbook of Enviromental Psychology. (pp 607-623). New York: John Wiley& Sons.


26. Hou, J., & Sung, N. (1998). Urban residents’ sense of community in Taichung Li-Ming community. Journal of Architecture (Taiwan), 24, 51-65.


27. Lang, J. (1994). urban design. American experience:van nostrand reinhold. London: Routledge.


28. Lennard, S. H. C., & Lennard, H. L. (1984). Public life in urban places: Social and architectural characteristics conducive to public life in European cities. (6^thed). Southampton, N.Y: Gondolier Press.


29. Levine, M., & Perkins, D. V. (1987). Principles of community psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.


30. Long, D. A., & Perkins, D. D. (2007). Community social and place predictors of sense of community: a multilevel and longitudinal analysis. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(5), 563-581.


31. Mak, W. W. S., Cheung, R. Y. M., & Law, L. S. C. (2009). Sense of community in Hong Kong: Relations with community-level characteristics and residents’ well-being. American Journal of Community Psychology, 44(1-2), 80-92.


32. Mannarini. T., Tartaglia. S., Fedi, s., & Greganti. k. (2006). Image of neighborhood: self image and sense of community. Elsevier. Journal of environmental psychology, 26, 202-214.


33. McMillan, D.W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6-21.


34. Moatasim, F. (2005). Practice of Community Architecture: A Case Study of Zone of Opportunity Housing Co‐Operative. Unpublished M.S Dissertation. McGill University.Montreal.


35. Moustafa, Y. (2004). Environmental design and local community. A theoretical framework tested through two case studies in Cairo. Egpt Unpublished PhD Thesis. Dept of Architecture. University of wisconsin-milwaukee.


36. Obst, P., Smith, S.G., & Zinkiewicz. (2002). Sense of community in science fiction fandom. Part 1: Understanding sense of community in an international community of interest. Journal of Community Psychology,  30,  87–103.


37. Plas, J. M., & Lewis, S. E. (1996). Environmental factors and sense of community in a planned town. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(1), 109–143.


38. Prezza. M., & Costantini, s. (1998). Sense of community and life satisfaction: investigation in three different territorial contexts. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 8( 3),  181–194.


39. Rogers, G. O., & Sukolratanametee, S. (2009). Neighborhood Design and Sense of Community: Comparing Suburban Neighborhoods in Houstan Texas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 92, 325-334.


40. Scopelliti, M., & Giuliani, M. V. (2004). Choosing restorative environments across the lifespan: A matter of place experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 423-437.


41. Toker, Z. (2007). Recent trends in community design: the eminence of participation. Journal of Design studies, 28( 3), 309-323.


42. Wates, N., & Knevitt, C. (1987). Community architecture: how people are creating their own environment Penguin. London: New York.


43. Zhang. W., & Lawson. G. M. (2009). Meeting and greeting, activities in public outdoor spaces. Urban Design International, 14( 4), 207-214.


44. Zhang, H., & Lin, S. H. (2012). Sense of Community in Taiwan and its Relationships with the Residential Environment. Social and Behavioral Sciences,  35, 335–343.