Biography: Frank Lloyd Wright - Elke Weesjes

Book & Author : Some Place Like Home - Toby Israel

Off ice Layouts and Col laborat ion - Wouter Tooren

Safety of Bicycle Underpasses - Pieter Jan Stallen & Henk Jelle Zandbergen

Architecture and Environmental Psychology

urnalof Social Sciences

Ju ly 2011

CREDITS

Editor-in-Chief:

Elke Weesjes

Executive Editor:

Mark Fonseca Rendeiro

Design :

Michelle Halcomb

Editorial Board :

Mark Fonseca Rendeiro,

Anouk Vleugels,

Ruth Charnock,

Danielle Wiersema

Daphne Wiersema

Questions and Suggestions:

Send an e-mail to:

journal@united-academics.org

Advertisement :

Send an email to:

advertising@united-academics.org

Address :

Oudezijds Voorburgwal 274 1021 GL Amsterdam

The United Academics Journal of Social Sciences is interdisciplinary, peer reviewed and interactive. We provide immediate Open Access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. In doing so, this journal underlines its publisher’s ethos, which is to ‘Connect Science & Society’. United Academics is an independent platform where academics can connect, share, publish and discuss academic research. Furthermore it facilitates online publications while respecting the author’s copyrights. We will publish themed issues bimonthly, each consisting of a collection of articles, work-in-progress pieces and book reviews showcasing the broadest range of new (interdisciplinary) research in Social Sciences from both established academics as well as students. While many academic journals are online and a growing number are available in openly accessible venues, the internet has not been utilized to its full extent. Therefore we have created a journal which truly does tap the power of the web for interactivity. To begin with research papers and other contributions published in this journal, contain interactive media such as videos maps and charts in order to make research more accessible and engaging. Secondly, in order to extent the peer review system, which is currently still limited with only a few colleagues reviewing papers, we invite the United Academics community to submit commentaries. By opening up the commenting and feedback process we will foster better critique of work. We want to encourage researchers to interact with the research, provide feedback and collaborate with authors.

FOCUS

CONTENTS EDITORIAL 3

ARTICLE ONE 7

How to Create offiCe Layouts tHat stimuLate CoLLaboration? by: wouter tooren

ARTICLE TWO 24

Designing subjeCtive (anD objeCtive) safety of biCyCLe unDerpasses: a soCio-teCHniCaL approaCH

By: pieter jan m. staLLen & Henk jeLLe ZanDbergen

BIOGRAPHY 31

frank LLoyD wrigHt: greatest arCHiteCt of aLL time? by: eLke weesjes

BOOK & AUTHOR 44

some pLaCe Like Home. using Design psyCHoLogy to Create iDeaL pLaCes - toby israeL

by: DapHne wiersema

GET PUBLISHED 52

3

We are living in an age where technology en-courages us to be isolated or to socialise

without face-to-face interaction. Social networks have made our world smaller; it has never been so easy to (re)-connect with people all over the world. Although aware of the positive impact of on-line chat, email and social networks, scientists who study our newfound connectivity worry that for ex-ample the distinction between genuine friends and acquaintances is becoming blurred. This problem has largely to do with the ano-nymity that comes with the use of social networks or a website’s chat function. This electronic inter-action displaces the social interaction, keeping people apart. It is so convenient, in fact, that peo-ple lack the drive to actually interact face to face. People are social animals above all and removing that aspect can affect their social development as well as the quality of their work. Wouter Tooren, one of this month’s contrib-utors, emphasises how important it is for office workers to read body language and other indirect communication facilities. In his article he argues that the physical work environment shouldn’t be neglected in our attempt to enhance the quality and quantity of knowledge work. The central idea

July

EDITORIAL

Architecture and

Environmental Psychology

4

to his research is that by stimulating face-to-face contact in the work place, collabo-ration will increase. A cross fertilisation between architec-ture and environmental psychology is key when attempting to create a socially invit-ing environment where people feel at ease and interaction is encouraged. Whilst ar-chitecture is a well established discipline, environmental psychology is a relatively new one. It is a branch of psychology which deals with behaviour in relation to the en-vironment. It acknowledges that the envi-ronment influences behaviour at different levels and that the personality make-up of people of a country is shaped by the na-ture and type of environment in which they live. Environmental psychology might be a

new discipline, but the ideas it is based on are not. The renowned architect Frank Lloyd Wright developed methods that peo-ple can employ in order to find and cre-ate their ideal home or work place i.e., a place that represents and matches them, a place where they feel comfortable. In his portfolio Ausgeführte Bauten und Entwür-fe which was published in 1910, he asked himself: What makes a building beautiful? What is style? What is harmony? For him these things are byproducts. They are the result of developing a project with emo-tions and character. A harmonious identity in any kind of way creates style almost au-tomatically. An architect can apply his own ideas and put his own soul into the product he creates. But he can only put a stamp on his design to a certain extent, because he needs to take into account who the build-ing is for, what is it’s social and emotional context and what is it’s location. With these words, Wright built a bridge between the two disciplines - architecture and environ-mental psychology - which are central to this current issue.

A cross fertilisation between architecture and environmental psychology is key when attempting to create a socially inviting

environment

5

Get your Books now!

studymanager.nl

scan this code and Get €10,- discount

ARTICLE ONE

7

H ave you ever experienced how the physical location of your desk influ-

ences who you meet on a regular day-to-day basis? Through my conversations with researchers working in office buildings I learned that the location of rooms can have a significant influence on the amount of direct face-to-face communication that researchers experience during the course of a day. For instance, those who worked in

a more secluded, quiet room, reported lit-tle contact during the day, while those who worked near an elevator or a coffee dis-penser reported that they sometimes had to shut the door to prevent people from dis-turbing them. In this article, I will discuss why it is that organisations have to stimu-late face-to-face interactions between em-ployees and how the layout of buildings can contribute to this.

How to Create Office Layouts that Stimulate Collaboration?

ARTICLE ONE

Firstly I would like to discuss what so called knowledge work is. Western economies are primarily based on knowledge work: work where the brain is utilised as opposed to the use of physical strength.1 Examples of knowledge work are: research and de-velopment of new products, scientific re-search, marketing of new products, sales administration etc. Most work done in of-fice buildings falls under the umbrella of knowledge work, as long as the emphasis lies on the use of cognitive resources. In the last decade we have seen a growing interest in how knowledge work can be supported through organisational means and the use of digital applications. An example is the flexible office concept where employees can choose where and when they want to work. As a result, the work environment itself became somewhat devalued as a strategic tool to enhance the quality and quantity of production. In this article, I will argue that the physical work environment shouldn’t be neglected in our

1 Drucker, P. (1959) Landmarks of Tomorrow. New York: Harper.

attempt to enhance the quality and quan-tity of knowledge work. The central idea is that by stimulating face-to-face contact at the work place, collaboration can be pro-moted. This in turn will contribute to the success of knowledge work.

The content of knowledge work.When talking about knowledge work, most of us think of scientists sitting behind their desks all day trying to come up with new and innovative ideas. Indeed, knowledge work is cognitive in the sense that em-ployees have to invest their own individual memory, insight and analytical powers in order to develop and create ideas.2 Howev-er, besides having a cognitive side to it, the success of knowledge work also depends on the social side of work (e.g. interactions and collaboration of co- workers). This is caused by the complexity of the tasks which encourages employees to interact and col-laborate together to maximise the quality of

2 Heerwagen, J.H., Kampschroer, K., Powell, K.M. & Loftness, V. (2004) Collaborative knowledge work environments. Building research & information, 32 (6), pp. 510-528.

9

their work.3 For ex-ample, nowadays it’s virtually impossi-ble for a single em-ployee to possess all the knowledge and skills needed to develop high-tech trains, airplanes. and super cars. It is much more ef-fective to work to-gether and combine the best knowledge and skills of several employees. Even in a situation where re-searchers are highly specialised, like those working in a university, the feedback from colleagues on one’s work can greatly im-prove the quality and usability of the indi-vidual’s work outcome. Furthermore, the sharing of knowledge ensures that eve-rybody pursues the same goals. Together these examples warrant the conclusion that

3 Schon, D. A. (1991) The Reflective Practitioner. Alderschot: Ashgate Publishing.

social interac-tions are an im-portant ingredi-ent of knowledge work that need to be stimulated. I n t e r a c t i o n s between em-ployees are fa-cilitated by the social networks employees par-ticipate in. These networks are maintained by

formal and informal contact; moments that employees have during the day.4 From observational research we know that em-ployees in the office mainly communicate through brief but frequent face-to-face contact.5 Most of these conversations are 4 Allen, T.J. (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technical Information within R&D Organizations, Cambridge: MIT Press, Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. (2000). The Social Life of Information. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.5 Brill, M., Weidemann, S. & BOSTI Associates (2001). Disproving Widespread Myths About

ARTICLE ONE

not planned but happen spontaneously as people walk from their workspace to other places in the office, like the toilet or the cof-fee machine. The reason these kinds of face-to-face contacts are also preferred seems to lie in the richness of information they con-tain compared to, for instance, information conveyed via an email. As one research-er explained to me: “With email I need to think what I want to write, think about the structure and content of the message, check for grammar and spelling and con-trol for the right address and subject. And this not for one message, but often for two to three messages during one conversa-tion. With face-to-face contact, I can just walk in, tell my story and have immediate feedback about the content and whether the message is correctly coming across or disturbed through misinterpretation. Plus I Workplace Design. Jasper: Kimball International; Reder, S. & Schwab, R.G. (1990). The temporal structure of cooperative activity, inCSCW’90 Proceedings pp. 303–320. New York: ACM Press; Heerwagen, J.H., Kampschroer, K., Powell, K.M. & Loftness, V. (2004). Collaborativeknowledge work environments. Building research & information, 32 (6), pp. 510-528.

have the benefit of knowing what emotions are being expressed. The richness of face-to-face contact saves me a lot of time.” The comment of this particular re-searcher is representative of the prefer-ence of most researchers that I have met. It also fits nicely with the basic premise of social presence theory6 which explains why face-to-face contact is so powerful. Social presence theory states that non-ver-bal cues are essential for communication within a group. Non-verbal communication has the added bonus that it can transfer social-emotional information. When em-ployees meet in person their non-verbal communication unconsciously strengthens their social cohesion, making it easier to understand each other on a personal lev-el.7 The prevelance of face-to-face contact

6 Ramirez, A., Jr., & Zhang, S. (2007). When online meets offline: The effect of modality switching on relational communication. Communication Monographs, 74 (3), pp 287-310. 7 Wolfeld, L.R. (2010). Effects of Office Layout on Job Satisfaction, Productivity and Organizational Commitment as Transmitted through Face-to-Face Interactions. Colonial Academic Alliance Undergraduate Research Journal, 1 (1), article 8.

11

leads to an important asset in any knowl-edge organization: shared knowledge. When employees see and speak to each other, they share knowledge. This can be at a factual level, e.g. knowing on what tasks a colleague is working on, or at a social-emotional level, e.g. knowing if the colleague is experiencing difficulties and needs help. The shared knowledge gained through face-to-face contact makes em-ployees aware about where colleagues are, what activities they are engaged in and what intentions they have.8 By raising the level of shared knowledge through face-to-face contact, the available potential in a group of employees can be used more efficiently.9 For example, for employees to make use of certain knowledge or skills

8 Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2001). A Descriptive Framework of Workspace Awareness for Real Time Groupware. CSCW’01. Dordrecht: Kluwer; Heerwagen, J.H., Kampschroer, K., Powell, K.M. & Loftness, V. (2004). Collaborativeknowledge work environments. Building research & information, 32 (6), pp. 510-528.9 Peponis, J., Bafna, S., Bajaj, R., Bromberg, J., Congdon, C., Rashid, M., Warmels, S., Zhang,Y. & Zimring, C. (2007). Designing Space to Support Knowledge Work. Environment and Behavior, 39 (6), pp. 815-840.

that are available in the organisation, they first have to know where these are located. In essence the office layout can contribute to the amount of knowledge that is shared by facilitating regular and meaningful face-to-face contact. Regular contact also makes existing information easier to handle. The more of-ten information is shared, the more the cog-nitive load for each individual employee is lowered. This happens because informa-tion is spread out over more people, mak-ing the task to keep track of all the infor-mation and progress for any individual less difficult to do. Research shows that an in-crease in shared information can also lead to a higher interdependency between em-ployees, greater production, more creative solutions for problems and a higher dedi-cation and identification with the group.10

10 Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The SocialCapital of Corporate R&D Teams. Organization Science, 12(4), pp. 502-517. Wolfeld, L.R. (2010). Effects of Office Layout on Job Satisfaction, Productivity and Organizational Commitment as Transmitted through Face-to-Face Interactions. Colonial Academic Alliance Undergraduate Research Journal, 1 (1), article 8.

ARTICLE ONE

Knowing what happens gives us the possibility to help others. This benefit leads to shared production, in which two or more employees realise that the combined effort of shared knowledge and skills leads to better quality work.11 On such occasions, face-to-face contact also offers the possi-bility to optimise coordination and informa-tion exchange, making the work process itself more efficient. To conclude, face-to-face contact gen-erally leads to higher levels of shared in-formation which can lead to a better use of cognitive potential in an organisation. Therefore, for organisations where knowl-edge is the main production outcome, the sharing of information between employees is of the utmost importance.12 This is valu-able for all knowledge organisations, espe-

11 Kraut, R.E., Egido, C. & Galegher, J. (1990). Patterns of contact and communication inscientific research collaboration, in J. Galagher, R.E. Kraut and C. Egido (eds): Intellectual Teamwork. Hillsdale: Earlbaum. 12 Criscuolo, P., Saltor, A., & Ter Wal, A. (2010). The role of proximity in shaping knowledgesharing in professional services firms. Paper presented at the summer conference 2010 on ‘opening up innovation: strategy, organization and technology’, imperial college London business school, June 2010.

cially those who are active in research and development. These organisations usually work with multi-disciplinary teams where the exchange of information becomes vi-tal for mutual understanding and coordina-tion. The realisation that face-to-face con-versations are the main way to improve shared knowledge and production is im-portant because we may be able to stimu-late it through proper planning of the office layout. When communication between de-partments or employees goes wrong, there often seems to be a natural tenden-cy to look at the human components that might be malfunctioning. Indeed, this was also the focus of much of the psychologi-cal research that was carried out, for ex-ample- on the effects of team diversity on conflict.13 The environmental component is often sadly overlooked, and it is here where we can make headway with care-fully designed office environments, while

13 De Dreu, C.K.W., & Weingart, L.R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict and teameffectiveness: A meta analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, pp 741-749.

13

thinking about what behaviour we want to promote. So, how can the layout of an of-fice influence face-to-face contact?

How can office layouts influence face-to-face contact?We now turn to the question of how office layouts can improve shared knowledge by stimulating face-to-face contact. I will pre-sent three ways in which office layouts can influence face-to-face contact: through the distance between employees, the visibility of employees and the integration of office space within the entire layout. I have cho-sen these three because I see them as the most promising. I do not intend to give a full summary here of research that is avail-able on this subject. For more inspiration I advise the reader to investigate work by Peponis,14 which offers interesting sugges-tions for future research. To start off, the distance between em-

14 Peponis, J., Bafna, S., Bajaj, R., Bromberg, J., Congdon, C., Rashid, M., Warmels, S., Zhang,Y. & Zimring, C. (2007). Designing Space to Support Knowledge Work. Environment and Behavior, 39 (6), pp. 815-840.

ployees is important because the larger the distance, the more physical efforts an employee has to take to reach a co-work-er. Research by Allen15 showed that the chances for spontaneous contact between employees reduces to virtually zero with distances greater than 30 meters. Unless it has a specific purpose, for example a walk to a laboratory, walking distances over 30 meters is of little use because most ser-viceareas (coffee machines, copiers etc.) 15 Allen, T.J. (1971) Communications networks in R&D laboratories. R&D Management, 1(1), pp.14–21 & Allen, T.J. (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technical Information within R&D Organizations, Cambridge: MIT Press.

Long hallways are not spontaneously travelled by employees.

ARTICLE ONE

are within the 30 meter radius. Thus in or-der to support face-to-face contact, the lay-out of an office building has to take into ac-count that employees do not tend to travel distances over 30 meters. Distance has a connection with the second way of how layout influences em-ployees: through visibility. The further an employee is seated from an active walking path with lots of traffic, the less the employ-ee is likely to be seen by employees who pass by. Backhouse and Drew, for exam-ple, found that employees who are walking through an office hallway briefly scan the

faces and postures of co-workers to see if they are available for conversation.16 Em-ployees who stare at their computer screen or at their papers communicate that they are busy and cannot be disturbed. Em-ployees who look around or assume a ‘not working pose’ communicate that they are available for spontaneous conversation. These results inform us that a high trans-parency within the work space influences the possibility that employees can detect

16 Backhouse, A. & Drew, P. (1992) The design implications of social interaction in a workplace setting. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 19, pp. 573–584.

Open space increases transparency and visibility on the work floor.

A well located service area can make sure that employees cross the entire floor.

15

potential conversation partners, increas-ing the chances of spontaneous face-to-face contact.17 It also works the other way around: in high transparency work spaces an employee sitting behind his desk can see what is happening inside the office. This increases the possibility that an em-ployee can ‘pick out’ a co-employee who is passing by for spontaneous contact should the need arise. Apart from distance and visibility, the

17 Wolfeld, L.R. (2010). Effects of Office Layout on Job Satisfaction, Productivity and Organizational Commitment as Transmitted through Face-to-Face Interactions. Colonial Academic Alliance Undergraduate Research Journal, 1 (1), article 8.

third way that office layouts affect face-to-face contact is through integration. Inte-gration can be understood as the central-ity of the location of a particular office in comparison to all other offices within the work place. The more central the office, the better.18 A more integrated office can en-hance the possibility for spontaneous face-to-face contact because a higher volume of potential conversation partners pass the office. The possibility for spontaneous face-to-face contact is also influenced by the integration of walking paths. Paths that connect all offices to active walking lines ensure an absence of quiet, overlooked ar-eas, where employees are excluded from shared information. A well integrated layout with strategically placed service areas mo-tivates employees to cross the entire floor and leaves no one on a secluded island.19

18 Serrato, M.G. (2002). Building based communication research. Gedownload op 11 maart 2011 van http://www.tradelineinc.com. Ramirez, A., Jr., & Zhang, S. (2007). When online meets offline: The effect of modalityswitching on relational communication. Communication Monographs, 74 (3), pp. 287-310.19 Rashid, Kampschroer, Wineman, & Zimring, 2004; Steen & Markhede, 2010

A kitchen area can enhance integration by attracting a lot of employees.

ARTICLE ONE

To sum up, the layout of office build-ings can improve face-to-face contact by minimising the travel distance, enhancing the visibility of employees and by integrat-ing office spaces. To analyse if existing and proposed building plans support face-to-face contact, a technique is available that informs us about characteristics of the building layout. This technology is called space syntax analysis. Space syntax anal-ysis generates information about building layouts that enables us to predict whether a proposed layout will work for the intended goal i.e., to stimulate face-to-face contact. This can help designers create better en-vironments. For example, if we detect an area with a low level of integration, we can outfit this location with an ‘activity magnet’ such as a lunchroom or service desk that stimulate people to walk by. The key is to make sure that no dead areas exist and that careful design enables maximum po-tential for visibility and eye contact. In the next paragraph we will take a closer look at space syntax analysis.

Space syntax analysis as a means to describe building layouts.The three elements in which office lay-outs can influence face-to-face contact: distance, visibility and integration, can be researched using space syntax analysis. Space syntax analysis is a set of descrip-tive techniques first presented by Hillier and Hanson in their book The Social Logic of Space (1984). Originally Hillier and Han-son created space syntax analysis to dis-sociate the socially significant properties of space from their geometric shape. Howev

Another great way to increase face-to-face contact is by offering sports and games for employees to enjoy together.

17

er, space syntax analysis can also be used as a technique to predict social behaviour. The basic premise of space syntax analy-sis is that it is possible to identify certain un-derlying structures of space that are linked to observable patterns of behaviour.20 One

20 Peponis, J., & Wineman, J. (2001). Spatial Structure of Environment and Behavior, in R.B. Bechtel & A.Churchman: handbook of environmental

of the relations between space and behav-iour is the ob-servation that spaces that are more accessi-ble also have a higher proba-bility to be used for movement. This means that the distri-bution of move-ment is a func-tion of spacial configuration. From a practi-

cal point this tells us that if a certain hallway is more accessible to reach a destination, employees who need to get to the destina-tion will use this hallway more often as op-posed to a hallway that is not accessible. An interesting result of being drawn to the

psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

A map of a circular layout showing integration. Blue is low integrated, yellow is intermediate, red is high. Notice that on this circular map the integration value for all the rooms is relatively equal. This also means that a service location on one side, e.g. a kitchen, will bring the map out of balance, generating a lot of contact next to the service location, but less contact away from it. This is because people are more attracted toward the service location, making it less likely to visit other parts of the map.

ARTICLE ONE

same accessible hallway is that it leads to a co-presence between employees who see each other walking, which generates fa-miliarity and co-awareness between these same employees. This in turn stimulates spontaneous face-to-face contact. For ex-ample, the more I see my colleague walk-ing through the same corridor, the more we share a connection based on co-presence, and the more probable it is that we engage

in a face-to-face conversation. When we do have face-to-face contact, we build up shared knowledge. Space syntax analysis uses 2D build-ing maps as input. These are broken down into components (e.g., rooms), analysed with algorithms and finally represented in either new maps and graphs or in a data form that signals a characteristic of a par-ticular space (e.g., a number signalling low

visibility). The result is a measurement of configurational accessibility of an individual space within a building or for the building as a whole. I’ll now pre-sent two interesting kinds of data that space syntax anal-ysis can generate. One prominently used measurement in space syntax

An example of a visibility map. Blue is showing low visibility, yellow is intermediate, red is high. Notice that out of the three centre bottom rooms, the middle room has a higher visibility. Although from a structural point of view, all three rooms are more or less equal. The middle room has a higher visibility because it can ‘look’ at multiple spaces at once. For this reason, an employee sitting in the middle room has more opportunity to spot a colleague for face-to-face contact.

19

analyses is called integration. This is simi-lar to the same kind of integration that we discussed earlier. In space syntax analy-sis, integration is an algebraic function of the average number of rooms one has to cross to reach all other destinations in the office (e.g., other rooms). The results give us an idea about the overall accessibility of a space. The integration value allows us to compare multiple building layouts with each other; the layout with the highest in-tegration value is best suited to enhance contact between employees. Another great addition from space syntax analysis is that it can calculate a visibility index for a par-ticular space by looking at how many other spaces are reachable without crossing ob-structions like walls or partitions. This gives us the possibility to study plans in terms of their visual fields. In the last 20 years we have seen more and more positive rela-tions between configurational accessibility of space and human behaviour. One ex-ample of this is the relation between ac-cessibility and pedestrian traffic on streets, which showed that when a choice has to

be made between two paths, pedestrians have a preference for more accessible walkways.21 In contrast, the research body on offices is rather limited. In the next par-agraph we will look at a recent research finding and we shall explore the content of my own research that I’m carrying out for my master thesis.

Using space syntax to optimize office layouts. In my opinion, space syntax analysis can offer a solution for the evaluation of existing offices and as well as new office designs. Although there are not many examples of research where space syntax analysis was used to study the relation between face-to-face contact and building layouts, those that did, showed promising results. One example can be found in Toker and Gray’s (2008) work looking at the effect of office layouts on communication between em-ployees.22 More specifically, they looked at

21 Hillier, B. (1996). Space is the machiene. Cambride: Cambridge University Press.22 Toker, U. & Gray, D.O. (2008). Innovation spaces: Workspace planning and innovation in U.S. university

ARTICLE ONE

differences in distance, visibility and inte-gration of office spaces on short, face-to-face interactions between employees within six university research labs. The objective of the study was to identify how workspace planning relates to consultations between scientists. Researchers working in the uni-

research centers. Research Policy, 37, pp.309–329.

versities kept logbooks on their contacts and filled in a survey questionnaire. The results showed that integration (i.e., the centrality of a room) was the largest pre-dictor of contact between researchers. Vis-ibility and walking distance also had signifi-cant effects. The findings suggest that in

terms of configuration, more accessible rooms increase the chances of bumping into other scientists. In my own research project I aim to rep-licate the possible relation between building layouts and patterns in face-to-face contact between employees in seven psychology depart-ments at four Dutch univer-sities. I use distance, vis-ibility and integration data of individual offices as inde-pendent measurements to explore whether they have an effect on the distribu-tion of face-to-face contact between employees (who

An example of a layout that is suboptimal for face-to-face contact. In this case, both the left and the right side fall under the same department. Each side has their own copier and share the secretary office. This effectively divides the department in two geographical areas, with neither side seeing each other during the day. The result is a reduction of shared information based on face-to-face contact, while both sides could have information that is worth sharing for everybody on the department.

21

talks to who and where). In addition to the research by Toker and Gray, I look at differ-ences between employees’ level of shared awareness about the research topics their co-employees are working on and what their opinion is about the quality of the col-laborative environment. In line with their research, activity logbooks and surveys are used to generate data. The analysis of the different office layouts is carried out us-ing a specific program written to perform space syntax analysis (called Depthmap). I expect employees who are either in less integrated offices, in offices with a low vis-ibility or in offices further away from col-leagues, will have less face-to-face con-tacts during the day. Furthermore, I ex-pect this to have a negative influence on the availability of shared knowledge and to lead to a more negative opinion about the quality of the collaborative environment. At the same time as this article is being writ-ten, the data is being collected, which is why it is too early to draw conclusions. Environmental psychology is about how people interact with their environment.

This means that although, based on the results generated by space syntax analy-sis, one may predict high levels of face-to-face contacts between employees, this not necessarily so in the real world. Steen and Markhede, for example, showed that - contrary to what space syntax predicted - interactions between employees with-in an open office are often guided along organisational lines (e.g. research or lab groups) instead of physical barriers (e.g. walls, doors).23 Indeed, organisations differ in the amount of emphasis they place on face-to-face contact between employees. Organisations also differ in the amount of formal meetings. Therefore, to control for organisational influences, I also col-lect data on the organisational structure of the six different departments. This will en-able a comparison of data obtained about face-to-face communication with the data on organisational structure. For example, I look at the quantity and office locations

23 Steen, J. & Markhede, H. (2010). Spatial and Social Configurations in Offices. The Journal of Space Syntax, 1(1), pp.121-131.

ARTICLE ONE

of professors and assistant professors, as these employees tend to generate more contact based on their function within the organisation. Furthermore, by conducting interviews with key players in the organisa-tion, e.g. research directors, I try to find out how the organisation is promoting interper-sonal contact and the sharing of informa-tion. This will hopefully offset most of the organisational influences to give us insight into how the building layout can support or-ganisations. The results might shed more light on the usability of space syntax analysis to predict how well an office is suited to pro-mote face-to-face contact. This in turn can help us to design better offices for the fu-ture, where employees work in an environ-ment better suited to sustain and develop collaboration. This can contribute to the success of organisations and companies who rely on knowledge work as their pri-mary production asset.

WOUTER TOOREN (1985) is an ap-plied cognitive psychologist working on his master’s thesis on space syntax analysis at the University of Amster-dam, in collaboration with the Center for People and Buildings. After graduation he wants to pursue a career as an envi-ronmental psychologist. To develop this career he is currently looking for a PhD position. He is part of a professional network of environmental psychologists called ‘netwerk omgevingspsychologie’ and writes a blog about environmen-tal psychology where visitors can read about new developments in the field (visit Wouter’s blog at http://www.build-ingsenses.nl).

23

United Academics Magazine brings it back to life.

Your thesis in our magazine? Contact us.

Finally. You’ve finished your thesis, you turned it in, you completed your studies & your work disappears on a shelf somewhere.

Was it all a waste of time?

NO.

ARTICLE TWO

The Netherlands is well known for its exceptionally high frequency of bicycle rides per person (with Denmark as a solid second), whether for shopping,

commuting (commonly across distances up to 7 km) or recreational purposes. Well over 80% of the population of the Netherlands have at least one bike. For a number of reasons the future of bicycle riding remains shiny. Beyond the happy bike riding citizens, policy makers also love the bike as it reduces both obesity and pollution. Dutch cities regularly compete for the title of Bike-City of the Year. To that end, various efforts are spent to promote and facilitate bicycle use, e.g. by priority green at traffic lights and by the creation of bicycle freeways. However, one obstacle has not yet received much attention: bicycle underpasses.

DESIGNING SUBJECTIVE (AND OBJECTIVE) SAFETY OF BICYCLE UNDERPASSES: A SOCIO-

TECHNICAL APPROACH

PIETER JAN M. STALLEN & HENK JELLE ZANDBERGEN

ARTICLE TWO

early half of the riding public, women more often than men, avoid using underpasses at night. Admittedly, this number is likely to be less dramatic for new underpasses which are meeting stricter standards such as unrestricted lines of sight throughout the entire tunnel and adequate transitions of lighting at either end. Yet underpasses have qualities that make them inherently unattractive. Typically, an underpass needs to be seen as the best option for getting from A to B to everybody. It can achieve that end only at the expense of personal costs. Un-derpasses per se impose behavioral con-straints by offering no exits within them, and they force uniformity upon users be-cause everyone without exception has to proceed in the same direction. The result-ing high imbalance of predictability be-tween self and some supposedly hidden other (imbalance of power) can fuel feel-ings of insecurity. To offset these psychological draw-backs several ideas are practiced nowa-days in building underpasses, ranging from

27

cost-effective graffiti-painting by members of the community to more expensive inter-actively illuminated walls. Most of these techniques aim at affecting sensory per-ception, whether via conscious or uncon-scious routes. Although this may success-fully alter impressions of an underpass’ for users, it is less likely that this type of positive stimulation will also take the wor-rying individual sufficiently away from his particular (in this case, underpass-related) negative sentiment (see, e.g., Josephson, Singer and Salovey, 1996). A stronger, that is, more demanding interference is prob-ably needed. Research by Van Dillen and Koole (2008) suggest that the job could

be done by active involvement of working memory. In a series of experiments they showed that, after viewing negative pic-tures, people report less negative moods when complex math rather than simple or no math problems had to be solved before giving their rating. Moreover, the effect of math problem solving on negative moods was stronger for unannounced than an-nounced math problems, which fits partic-ularly well with a working memory account: performing simple or predictable tasks means reliance on more habitual process-es which typically leave more room for at-tention to be spent on other, mood-related information. Finally, solving math problems

ARTICLE TWO

had a stronger moderating impact on neg-ative mood when participants had viewed strongly rather than mildly negative pic-tures. It should be noted that the inhibition of negative feelings by cognitive distraction is different from the active suppression of

emotional thoughts. Research has shown that when people were distracted in the above mentioned ways, their moods were not deteriorated again by subsequent ru-mination. It should also be noted that dis-traction will not necessarily be the optimal

emotion regulation strategy under all circumstances. In particular, it may not be the most effec-tive way to reduce negative moods when the source of the negative emo-tion itself remains intact, such as in the event of problem-atic relationships, or difficulties at work. In general, distrac-tion is no substitute for problem solv-ing. But in situations where the particular person-context in-

29

teraction is the very source of the negative effect, distraction may lead to substantive distance from the feeling, with repeated distraction probably allowing the person to acquire a significantly different appre-ciation of the person-context interaction. These observations, we believe, are highly relevant to a variety of situations in the field. The socio-technical architecture of bicycle underpasses is certainly one of them. Based upon the above-presented cognitive account of emotion-processing we expect that people afraid of bicycle passes may structurally benefit from ways that actively involve their working memory when passing through. PLEASantPASS® has been developed by the first author with this objective in mind (or, to be honest, with having it ‘somewhat’ in mind). Basically it is a play of Question & Answer: briefly before the person enters the passageway Ques-tion X (about subject X) is posed upon a display; inside the passageway the user will see additional information upon a screen, or hear about X (sounds lasting no more than a few seconds) from speakers; finally,

when leaving the passageway behind, the Answer will appear upon a second display.1 Figure 1 illustrates a possible sequence of spatial cues when PLEASantPASS® is op-erating in audio mode. New Q&A-combinations will be dis-played several times each hour in order to be responsive to a wide range of poten-tial user interests, and to avoid exposure to ‘old’ information. Via the corresponding website, users themselves will also be of-fered the opportunity to submit Q&A’s for display. User-access to screens will be made dependent upon frequency of tunnel-use as determined by Blue Tooth or RFID counts.2 Note that this means showing full respect for individual freedom of choice as the individual can only participate after he himself has explicitly switched on his Blue Tooth or has collected the RFID-tag. To-gether, the various socio-techniques not

1 A short animation in Dutch, English, German and Danish is showed at www.pleasantpass.com in the menu top right. Click on ‘Tunnel van de Toekomst / Oss’ [Full English version of website will be on line by august 10th 2011]2 Patent protection.

ARTICLE TWO

only considerably heighten the attention-value of the first stimulus (the Question), they will also stimulate social cohesion. It will be the more frequent users, those living in the nearby neighborhoods, who will be-come most active in this respect. As such, it may become one of the very means that will create ‘defensible space’ (Oscar New-man; see Crowe, 2000), with its consistent positive effects on subjective and objective safety in this part of the public domain: un-derpasses. From the above it can be inferred that we expect to see several positive effects to result from applying PLEASantPASS® to underpasses, including the aesthetic and on subjective safety (fear of harassment, etc.). With Van Dillen and Koole we believe that they will be mediated by attention and working memory processes. Both these expectations and beliefs should be put to empirical test in order to get a better es-timate of the size of these effects in real life settings like bicycle underpasses. We plan to do this in two steps. First, we will design a laboratory experiment with two

groups of female respondents looking at a brief movie on screen showing, from a cyclist’s perspective, the road to, the en-trance of, and the passing through of an underpass at dusk. One group will be view-ing the underpass in normal mode and one in PLEASantPASS® mode. Respondents’ instructions will be such that it will be easy to imagine themselves cycling through the underpass. The most important measure will be the group comparison of perceived safety at the moment the underpass has been passed, with fear of underpass-es (state anxiety) as covariate. Second, PLEASantPASS® will be mounted in one of the 3 bicycle underpasses of the N329-“Road of the Future” in Oss/Netherlands (completion planned by spring 2013). This offers opportunities to measure attitudes of various (cycling) residents towards cross-ing the N329 both before and after its re-construction. Before getting our hands on these results, quite some time will have passed. We welcome any further practical and the-oretical ideas in the meantime.

31

PIETER JAN STALLEN is a profes-sor at the Psychology Department at Leiden University (the Netherlands). His present research interests focus on how affect (mood, value) and social factors affect the auditory perception of environmental sounds, such as when exposed to airplanes. Beside this in-terest in aversive sides of sound in the public domain he is also interested in the opposite: how could one make us of environmental sounds in attractive ways? PLEASantPASS® is one of his answers( http://www.pleasantpass.com )

HENK JELLE ZANDBERGEN is a cognitive psychologist who is passion-ate about music. His interest in music found his way into his studies : Henk Jelle wrote his thesis on how emotions affect judgments about loudness. His work at PLEASANTPASS allows him to combine all his passions in coming up with new audiovisual applications and products that affect how people be-have and feel in public spaces. Henk Jelle also works as a researcher at the Stichting Landelijke Expertisegroep Veiligheidspercepties, a professional network that focuses on how to influ-ence people’s safety perceptions.

BIOGRAPHY

Andrew Lloyd Wright

‘...not only do I fully intend to be the greatest architect who has yet lived, but fully intend to be the greatest architect who will ever live. Yes I intend to be the greatest architect of all time.’ (Frank Lloyd Wright)

1867-1959

By: Elke Weesjes

BIOGRAPHY

Wright lived up to this bold and rather arrogant statement, being named

‘the greatest American architect of all time’ by the American Institute of Architects. Furthermore, in 1991, the Architectural Record published a list of the one hun-dred most important buildings of the 20th century; twelve Frank Lloyd Wright build-ings appeared, including Fallingwater, the Robie house, the Johnson Administra-tion Building, the Guggenheim, Taliesin, as well as the demolished Larkin Building and Imperial Hotel. Wright designed about 1000 structures, some 400 of which were built. He was famous for his ‘organic ar-chitecture’ which he described as one that “proceeds, persists, creates, according to the nature of man and his circumstances as they both change.’ Wright’s work was highly creative, innovative and ahead of its time. He had to fight for the acceptance of every new design. Beyond his work, his personal life was eccentric as well , char-acterised by personal losses, success but also controversy.

The boy from WisconsinFrank Lloyd Wright was born, the first of three children, in rural Wisconsin in 1867, just two years after the end of the American Civil War. His father, William Carey Wright, was a well-educated musician, composer and minister from a family of New England intellectuals. His mother was Anna Lloyd-Jones, daughter of a Unitarian preacher who had emigrated from Wales when his ideas became too radical for his Welsh followers. In his autobiography, Wright claimed that his mother, who was a county school teacher, had preordained his career choice. According to him, Anna wanted her son to grow up and build beautiful buildings, which is why she decorated his nursery with en-gravings of English cathedrals. Throughout his childhood, she continued to motivate her eldest son to become an architect. When Wright was nine years old, Anna visited the Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia and saw an exhibit of educational blocks cre-ated by Friedrich Wilhelm August Fröbel. The blocks, known as Froebel Gifts, were the foundation of his innovative kindergar-

35

ten curriculum. A trained teacher, Anna was excited by the program and bought

a set of blocks for her son and he spent much time playing with the blocks. They

were geometrically shaped and could be assembled in various combinations to form three-dimensional compositions. In his autobi-ography Wright talks about the influence of these ex-ercises on his approach to design and links this early childhood experience to the geometrical clarity of many of his buildings.

SeparationIn the mean time the family had moved to Weymouth, Massachusetts where Wil-liam became a minister of a small congregation. His wage was meagre and consequently the Wright family struggled financially which made William de-cide to return to Wiscon-Unity Temple

BIOGRAPHY

sin. They settled in Madison where Anna’s parents helped their son-in-law find em-ployment. William started teaching mu-sic lessons and served as the secretary to the newly formed Unitarian society. Soon after Wright turned 14 his par-ents separated. Anna had been unhappy for a while due to her husband’s inability to provide for his family. After several years of financial hardship, she asked William to leave. He accused her of a lack of physi-cal affection and a lawsuit in 1885 finalised the divorce. William left Wisconsin after the divorce and Wright claimed he never saw his father again. After his father’s depar-ture, Wright decided to change his middle name from Lincoln to Lloyd in honour of his mother’s family, the Lloyd Joneses. He also felt, as the only male left in the family, that he was now financially responsible for his mother and two sisters.

Budding ArchitectIn his autobiography Wright emphasises how much of an impact growing up in rural Wisconsin had on him. He wrote: “As a boy,

I learned to know the ground plan of the re-gion in every line and feature. For me now its elevation is the modelling of the hills, the weaving and fabric that clings to them, the look of it all in tender green or covered with snow or in full glow of summer that bursts into the glorious blaze of autumn. I still feel myself as much a part of it as the trees and birds and bees are, and the red barns.” His early interest in engineering and architecture, fostered by his mother, moved Wright to take a job as an assistant for Allan Conover who was the Dean of the Universi-ty of Wisconsin’s department of Engineer-ing. Wright spent two semesters studying civil engineering at the University of Wis-consin and also assisted architect Joseph Lyman Silsbee with draft and supervision of the construction of Unity Chapel. The Chapel was planned in 1886 on the direc-tion of the Reverend Jenkin Lloyd Jones who was Wright’s uncle. In 1887 Wright left Madison for Chi-cago where he continued to work for a few months with Silsbee. A year later he took a drafting job with the firm of Adler and

37

Sullivan where he worked directly under Louis Sullivan for six years. Sullivan, who was one of the few influences Wright ever acknowledged, was known for his adage “Forms Follows Function,” which Wright lat-er revised to “Form and Function are One.” Sullivan and Wright ended their working relationship when Sullivan found out that Wright had been accepting commissions for ‘bootleg’ house designs behind his back. The two rekindled their friendship much later in life and in his autobiography Wright referred to Sullivan as his ‘beloved master.’ A few years before parting company with Sullivan, Wright had married Catharine Tobin and built a home in the Chicago sub-urb of Oak Park which is now known as the Frank Lloyd Wright Home and Studio. He decided to establish his own architectural practice in the city centre, but soon added a studio to his Oak Park home and moved his office there. Between 1890 and 1903, the couple had six children together.

Organic Architecture & Prairie HousesWright was very successful in this period

and established himself as a talented and renowned architect. He built his first revo-lutionary and innovative masterpiece from his own practice in 1893. This building was the Winslow House in River Forest, Illinois. This house, which was his first client’s home, clearly portrayed Wright’s direction in architecture with its expansive, open proportions. Wright wanted to create a natural link between mankind and his envi-ronment. He called this particular style “Or-ganic architecture” which reflected both the individual needs of the client, the nature of the site and the native materials available. Some of Wright’s most famous designs during these years were for “Prairie Hous-es.” These houses were marked by hori-zontal lines - which were thought to evoke and relate to the native prairie landscape - flat or hipped roofs with broad overhang-ing eaves, windows grouped in horizontal bands, integration with the landscape and discipline in the use of ornament. Prairie Houses were the first effort at creating a new, indigenous American architecture. Other Chicago architects were also de-

BIOGRAPHY

signing similar buildings and the movement became known as “The Prairie School” or “The Chicago Group”. The Prairie School was linked to the ideals and design aesthet-ics of the Arts and Craft Movement, which had begun in the late 19th century in Eng-land by Johan Ruskin and William Morris. This movement, like “Prairie School,” em-braced handcrafting and craftsman guilds as a reaction against the new assembly line and mass production manufacturing

techniques, which its followers felt created inferior products and dehumanised workers. Nevertheless Wright did em-brace the machine and even urged its use, not to imitate hand carving, but to bring out the simplicity and beauty of wood. His emphasis on sim-plicity and his use of naturally treated materials, became a hallmark of his work. His most famous designs of this period were the Martin House and the

Larkin Building in Buffalo; the Robie House in Chicago; and the aforementioned Unity Temple in Oak Park, which was America’s first important architectural work in poured concrete

A New BeginningIn 1910, after 22 years of marriage, Wright left his family and practice in Chicago. To-gether with Mamah Borthwick Cheney, the wife of a client, he went to Europe. Whilst in Europe he worked on two portfolios

Wright’s Usonian Home

39

which were published by Ernst Wasmuth. The two publications resulted in an inter-national recognition of Wright’s work and influenced other (European) architects. A year later Wright moved back to the US and decided to construct a home in a val-ley near Spring Green, Wisconsin. He chose the name of the Welsh poet Taliesin whose name means “shining brow” or “ra-diant brow.” Wright positioned his home on the brow of the hill rather than on the peak so that Taliesin would appear as though it arose naturally from the landscape. Wright and Mamah Borthwick (now going by her maiden name) moved into Taliesin in 1911. Three years later on August 15, 1914, a do-mestic worker named Julian Carlton set fire to the living quarters of the home. Whilst the fire raged he butchered seven people with an axe. Amongst the dead were Mamah and her two children. Carlton survived the fire but died in jail six weeks later. Wright, who was in Chicago at the time of the fire, eventually rebuilt the living quarters, naming it Taliesin II in honour of Mamah.

Rebuilding LifeAfter recovering from the horrendous trag-edy, Wright not only rebuilt his home but also his personal life. In 1922 he married his second wife, sculptress Miriam Noel. In the mean time he worked on big projects like the earthquake proof Imperial Hotel in Tokyo and several California residences such as the Hollyhock House and the Mil-lard House. The latter was Wright’s first use of “textile block” in which specially de-signed pre-cast concrete blocks were wo-ven together with steel rods and concrete. Misfortune struck again in 1925. Only a few years after rebuilding Talies-in II, its living quarters were again de-stroyed by fire. Wright, who blamed the second fire on an electrical surge through the telephone system caused by a storm, began the rebuilding of Talies-in, named Taliesin III, shortly afterwards. Wright’s marriage to Mariam Noel didn’t last long, the couple divorced and in 1928 the architect married Olga Lazovich (known as Olgivanna), daughter of the Chief Justice of Montenegro. Work dried up due to the

BIOGRAPHY

Great Depression and with few architec-tural commissions coming his way, Wright turned to writing and lecturing. He pub-lished two main works: An Autobiography (1932) and The Disappearing City (1932). Besides inspiring young architects through his writing, Frank Lloyd Wright and his wife also founded an architectural apprentice-ship program at Taliesin. The school was known as the “Taliesin Fellowship.” Their aim was “to provide a total learning en-vironment, integrating all aspects of the apprentices’ lives in order to produce re-sponsible, creative and cultured human beings.” Besides gaining experience in architecture, apprentices were also edu-cated about construction, gardening, farm-ing, music, art, dance and even cooking. Things started to pick up again in the mid-1930s. Wright made a come-back with several important commissions - the SC Johnson Wax Administration Building in Racine, Wisconsin; Falling-water house in rural Pennsylvania; and Jacobs I. The latter was the first execut-ed “Usonian” house, which were small in-

expensive single story buildings with flat roofs and large cantilevered overhangs. These works revived Wright’s career and brought in a flood of commissions. Around the same time, Wright decid-ed he wanted a winter residence in Arizona to escape the harsh Wisconsin weather. Together with the Taliesin Fellowship, he began the construction of Taliesin West as a “Desert Camp” where he planned to live during the winter season. This residence, which was a considered a bold new en-deavour for desert living, would serve as Wright’s architectural laboratory for more than 20 years. During these years Wright continued to work on designs for his Uso-nian homes which were just as popular as his Prairie houses.

Last DecadesIn the 1950s Wright continued to devel-op the concept of the Usonian homes. In his book The Natural House, published in 1954, he first used the term ‘Usonian Au-tomatic’ to describe a Usonian style house made of inexpensive concrete blocks.

41

The modular blocks could be assembled in a variety of ways. Wright hoped that home buyers could save money by build-ing their own Usonian Automatic houses.

Later that year, Wright took an apart-ment at the Plaza Hotel in New York to work on his plans for the Guggenheim Mu-seum. He stayed there between 1954 and

Guggenheim

BIOGRAPHY

1959 and completely redecorated the hotel apartment and called it Taliesin East. The Guggenheim project had been an ongo-ing endeavour. Already in 1943, Wright had been approached by Hilla Rebay and Solomon Guggenheim to design a perma-nent structure for their art collection. It took him 15 years, 700 sketches and six sets of working drawings to create the muse-um. On October 21, 1959, ten years after the death of Guggenheim and six months after the death of Wright on April 9 1959, the museum finally opened its doors to the general public. Frank Lloyd Wright had an astound-ing capacity for self-renewal and was tire-less in his efforts to create an architecture that was truly American. Through his work, his writings, and the hundreds of appren-tice architects that trained at his side, his ideas spread throughout the world. As he himself predicted, Frank Lloyd Wright is in-deed world’s greatest architect who left an amazing legacy.

Bibliography:Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, Frank Lloyd Wright : the heroic years, 1920-1932 (New York Rizzoli 2009)Alan Hess, Frank Lloyd Wright : the build-ings (New York : Rizzoli 2008)Ingrid Steffensen, ‘Frank Lloyd Wright and the “Gift” of Genius’, in: The Journal of American Culture, Sep/2009Frank Lloyd Wright, Ausgefuhrte Baut-en und Entwurfe von Frank Lloyd Wright (Ernst Wasmuth Verlag, Berlin 1908)Frank Lloyd Wright, An Autobiography (Longmans Green New, York 1932)Frank Lloyd Wright, The Disappearing City (William Farquhar Payson, New York 1932)Frank Lloyd Wright, An Autobiography (Du-ell, Sloan and Pearce, New York 1943)Frank Lloyd Wright, A Testament (Horizon Press, New York 1957)

Online Recruitment & Online Jobs

The Dutch job site www.ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl is an initiative of Online Recruitment Ad-vies, a publishing company in The Netherlands. Online Recruitment Advies is a succesful young company with over 1.000 domains and 500 websites in Europe, Asia and Latin America.ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl is a typical example of the success of this innovative online pub-lisher. Understanding of the local Dutch employment market and health care industry made Zor-gEnWelzijnVacatures.nl one of the leading Job Sites for health care employers and candidates in The Netherlands.

7 Online Recruitment Sources:

According to Online Recruitment Advies and ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl there are 7 Online Re-cruitment sources to consider for each job:

1. Own website of the employer2. Social media 3. General job sites4. Specific job sites such as www.ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl 5. General news sites6. Specific news sites such as United-Academics7. Search Engines; www.ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl has over 200 domains and websites which can be found on page 1 in the results of Search Engines such as google. For example VerpleegkundigenVacatures.nl (NursesJobs.nl) and AniosVacatures.nl (DocterJobs.nl) and Ziek-enhuizenVacatures.nl (HospitalJobs.nl).

If you are looking for health care job oppertunities in The Netherlands; please visit www.ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl.Employers, of you are looking for top level nurses, executives or phd candidates in the Dutch health care market, please contact us at www.ZorgEnWelzijnVacatures.nl.

BOOK &AUTHOR

45

Some place like home

Using Design Psychology

to Create Ideal Places

Toby Israel

BY: DAPHNE WIERSEMA

BOOK & AUTHOR

Some Place Like Home describes a new method for creating ideal places called

Design Psychology. It is written for those who want to find and create the house that matches the ‘self’ and also helps architects and designers to create that ideal place for others. The book offers a series of exercis-es to help individuals explore their sense of home. The fundamental principle Design Psychology is built upon is the idea that we all have emotional attachments to certain places, surroundings, and atmospheres in our past. An example could be a huge kitch-en where family and friends gathered and that you came to associate with ‘welcome’, ‘intimacy’, ‘warmth’ or the forest near your house where you used to build huts when you were a kid and that you now associ-ate with ‘adventure’, ‘privacy’ and ‘friend-ship’. Other associations could be ‘organ-ic’, ‘wooden’, ‘oriental’ which refer to how it looked or ‘village’ and ‘city’ referring to where it was located. Together, these as-sociations constitute our ‘sense of home’. In adulthood we somehow try to rec-

reate these symbols of our past in order to feel at home in our present day dwellings. Often, our dwellings already contain links to the past and already match the person-ality of the owner. For instance, there is re-search showing that people can accurately describe the personality of its owner by just looking at the objects in and furnish-ing of the house.1 However, these matches are generally thought of to be the result of unconscious processes. This becomes evident from the interviews throughout the book with renowned architects such as Michael Graves where the writer explores their ‘environmental autobiographies’ and how their work was affected by them. Ar-chitects were generally not aware of the existence of links with their past. The ex-ercises featured in the book, such as a guided visualization of the past, help us to uncover these unconscious associations in order to consciously pursue the ‘best’ of our

1 Gosling, S. D., Ko, S. J., Mannarelli, T., & Morris, M. E. (2002). A room with a cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, pp. 379-398.

47

past. Furthermore, the ordering of the ex-ercises allow us to do this in a structured manner. Besides focusing on the past, the exercises also ask you to find out what ob-jects in your presence are special to you and why; exploring in what way the house meets the needs of its various users (e.g., children, visitors) and how these spaces (i.e., private, shared, and public space) are balanced. As you read through the book and do the exercises, you also come to know what

the author herself uncovers from the exer-cises and how she uses this information to find a new house and subsequently shape it into an ideal place. Furthermore, we ac-quire information on how Israel together with architects apply the Design Psychol-ogy principles to design a school building that will satisfy the needs of children, teach-ers and parents alike. In the end, instead of being just a place for shelter and secu-rity or a place to gain esteem from others, the thus created house (or school) will be a place for the self growthand actualization while feeling at home.

Q&A Toby Israel

Where can we place Design Psychology within the larger context of Environmen-tal Psychology i.e., the psychology that focuses on the interactions between people and their surroundings? “Environmental Psychology is a research-based field that has produced many won-derful studies regarding the interaction of

The book offers a series of exercises

to help individuals

explore their sense of

home

BOOK & AUTHOR

people and place. A criticism of E.P. has long been that such research is often dif-ficult to apply. Design Psychology, while an offshoot of Environmental Psychology, pro-vides a comprehensive, easy-to-use pro-cess that allows us to translate theory into satisfying design. The name ‘Design Psy-chology’ was chosen to imply this active application of theory into practice.” In your book you write that Design Psy-chology is mostly a subjective method that people can employ in order to find and create their ideal home i.e., a place that represents and matches with the self. However, even though everyone has a self that is unique and the out-come of the process of Design Psychol-ogy (i.e., the steps one takes to create awareness of one’s ideal home) there-fore is subjective, what are the theoreti-cal and scientific underpinnings of De-sign Psychology?“In the introductory chapters of the three sections of my book (‘Past’, ‘Present’, and ‘Future’), I discuss the theoretical and sci-

entific underpinnings of Design Psychol-ogy. There have been many thinkers who’ve contributed to my ideas beginning with the wonderful writings of Clare Coop-er Marcus on environmental autobiogra-phy. Design Psychology draws on other theories such as those regarding place at-tachment, child development, place per-ception, etc., as discussed also in those three sections of the book. By the way, I also think of the qualitative interviews I conducted with Michael Graves, Charles Jencks and Andres Duany in Some Place Like Home as a form of primary, qualita-tive research regarding the influence of past place on designers.”

What triggered you to first think about Design Psychology and what steps did you take to develop it?“Early on, while getting my Ph.D. in Envi-ronmental Psychology, I read Clare Cooper Marcus’ article “House as Symbol of Self” and was really influenced by it. When I became an associate professor, I taught a class on ‘The Meaning of Home’ and test-

49

ed the related Design Psychology exer-cises I’d developed as part of the curricu-lum. Places from the past really seemed to reverberate for students and influence their designs. This made me realize the importance of creating a ‘Toolbox’ of exer-cises that designers could use to help their clients ‘design from within.”Writing Some Place Like Home enabled me to distill the ideas behind my years of teaching and research, as well as further develop and use the ‘Design Psychology Toolbox’ with the ‘live’ projects that formed the book’s case studies. I realized it was important to give this method a name - - “Design Psychology”: “The practice of ar-chitecture, planning and interior design in which psychology is the principal design tool.” The method is based on the theory/points 1-8 that appear in the Introduction.”

Design Psychology helps individuals to find and shape their ideal home, to make it a place that fully represents and matches the self. The result is that the house gets imbued with meaning and

becomes a symbol for who we are. How does this differ from what people al-ready automatically and unconsciously do: that their houses reflect their per-sonality and character? What are the ex-tra benefits of using design psychology and the past, present and future steps in your book for creating the ‘home as self’? “Great question. I think we often automat-ically and unconsciously repeat the past, even if our past wasn’t necessarily healthy for us. The same thing happens when creating a home. We may automatically create a place just like the one where we grew up - - even if we hated that environ-ment! By going through the Design Psy-chology steps, we can be become more aware of the positive aspects of our envi-ronmental pasts (and negative ones, too) and choose to repeat only those elements of design that are life-enhancing for us. Of course, some people do this anyway but most people (including designers) are una-ware of the unconscious influence of past place and think that they ‘should’, ‘ought’ or

BOOK & AUTHOR

‘must’ create spaces like the ones done by design gurus, ones in shelter magazines or on TV. They don’t believe in their own ability to express themselves. I call Design Psychology a kind of “emancipatory de-sign” that helps designers and clients cre-ate more authentic places. “ As you investigate in your book by in-terviewing various architects, the work of architects is also influenced by their personality and (childhood) experienc-es. How did they react when they un-covered these links? “I’ve gone on to take other famous design-ers and personalities through my Design Psychology exercises - - Margo Grant Walsh (retired VP of Gensler), Jane Pauley (news commentator), as well as other less well known designers. There is always an Ah! Ha! moment for them as they come to understand more deeply where their own inspiration stems from i.e. the combination of past influences, their personality, cultur-al/ design trends, etc. I find each story to be so unique and intriguing yet there are

also commonalities i.e. the importance of grandparents’ homes often emerges, the need to ‘break free’ of design training to ‘speak’ with their own design voice. Yet I find that many designers haven’t had the time or training to really explore their au-thentic voice or that of their client. I’d love to be able to do further action research on where differences stem from and how those differences can be translated into fi-nal, satisfying design. In the future I’d also like to continue and summarize my Design Psychology research work with female de-signers.”

Design Psychology offers a new meth-od for designers and architects to cre-ate places that match the wishes of their clients. How does this new method dif-fer from the ways in which designers and architects have been working until now? Do designers and architects have to use other skills, for instance? “Design Psychology is different from tradi-tional methods that designers use in that it provides a comprehensive series of ex-

51

ercises (the Design Psychology Toolbox) that designers can use during the program-ming process. These exercises help en-sure that clients’ emotional and social (not just practical and aesthetic) needs are met. Most designers think that they DO consid-er such human factors when they design. Some who have a listening ear and good interviewing skills are able to hit the mark. However, in my experience, most design-ers really lack this training as part of their education.”

How was the Design Psychology meth-od received by designers and archi-tects? I can imagine that your message, which places the clients first, poses a challenge to some designers and ar-chitects who put their own desires and creativity first.“Some designers realize how much they can expand their personal knowledge and skills using Design Psychology meth-ods. I’ve done some wonderful teaming with architects who are open to this ap-proach. Others who think they already do

what I do ask, “Why do they need this?” If those designers attend one of my lec-tures and go through even one of my exer-cises - - they get the difference right away!”

In your book, you describe how Design Psychology was used in the process of designing a new school and how the fu-ture students, their parents and teachers were involved in the process. As such, Design Psychology seems to make a statement for future users to have a say about the design. Will this affect how the schools, homes and buildings of the future will look? In what way?“I hope Design Psychology will affect not only how places look but how they feel in the future. Hopefully, using the Design Psychology approach will enable us to cre-ate schools, homes and other buildings that are much more emotionally and so-cially satisfying.”

What future do you see for Design Psy-chology and what are your plans with it?

BOOK & AUTHOR

“Every week I get emails from people around the world asking where they can study Design Psychology. I have to an-swer that no formal course of study exists yet. University design and psychology de-partments I’ve approached have struggled to see where they can ‘fit’ this square peg into what they see as their well-rounded, traditional curriculum. While I would still love to see a Design Psychology course established, I’ve tried to fill the gap in the meantime by offering mentorship sessions, online and in-person courses and continu-ing to lecture around the world about De-sign Psychology. Meanwhile in terms of research and practice, I’m currently concentrating my ef-forts on ways to use Design Psychology to create healing environments. Readers can find out more about this by going to my newest websites: www.oasisbydesign.net and www.robetowellness.com.”

Toby Israel, Ph.D. is a founder of the field of Design Psychology. Trained as an Environmental Psychologist and with a Masters in Education, Dr. Isra-el has over twenty-five years of expe-rience in design, psychology, the arts and education. She has served as an environmental consultant in the USA and UK including as head of design research for LRK Architects and of the Visual Arts Program for the New Jersey State Council on the Arts. A former pro-fessor of architecture and psychology at the University of Lincoln (U.K.), her most recent projects andpresentations involve using Design Psychology to create healing environ-ments. She currently writes Psychol-ogy Today’s “Design on My Mind” blog.

GET PUBLISHEDCONTACT & SUBMISSIONS

We wish to emphasize that the United Ac-ademics Journal of Social Sciences pub-lishes work of post-graduate and post-doctoral researchers. To encourage the cross-fertilization of disciplines we have chosen a plurality of fields and facilitate a productive interaction between the widest possible range of post-graduate authors and the public. The Social Sciences are the disciplines that explore aspects of hu-man society. This term includes anthropol-ogy, archeology, geography, history, law, linguistics, psychology, political science and sociology. To maintain a high aca-demic standard, articles submitted should be based on research undertaken during post-graduate or post-doctoral studies. Ar-ticles should be original in approach and subject matter.

GUIDELINES

The journal is dedicated to a specific top-ic, but we also encourage academics to submit on any facet of Social Sciences. Articles should be sent as an email at-tachment to: elke.weesjes@united-aca-demics.org.

• Provide a brief abstract of approximately 250 words. • Articles should be based on original re-search.• If you have any ideas for media that you would like to be part of your article, please send them in an attachment along with where you would like them to be placed. We encourage creativity and feel that the more ideas you have in this context, the better your article will look. • Articles should be between 2500 and 3500 words, book reviews should be no more than 1000 words and a WIP piece should be no more than 1500-2000 words in length. • All quotations in the text should be in sin-gle quote marks (double for quotes within quotes) and long quotes should be indent-ed without quotation marks. • Use footnotes. In respect of references, give full details. E.g. Arend Lijphart, the politics of accommodation, pluralism and democracy in the Netherlands in the Neth-erlands (University of California Press, Berkeley Los Angeles 1975) 17-18. Subse-quent references should give the author’s name, short title and page number.• Spell out numbers to twenty, centuries and percentages. • Try to avoid jargon, but where it is par-ticularly relevant or where it is necessary, explain all jargon clearly.We reserve the right not to publish articles which do not conform to the standards es-tablished by the peer review process.