An environmental preference model through ecological approaches

Abstract

It is observed that while some urban outdoor spaces become preferred places with many users and rich activity patterns, some others become non-preferred, abandoned places which people avoid. In this study in order to answer these kinds of questions on urban outdoor spaces, a conceptual framework is established. Instead of the approaches which take human and environment as separate entities, ecological approaches which acknowledge these two as an inseparable whole was adopted. Understanding environmental preference through concepts of ecological approaches is aimed. “Behavior Setting Theory” and “Affordance Theory”, which are products of ecological perspective on human-environment relationship, were considered, the concepts of these theories were associated with environmental preference, and a model was established and explained. Urban outdoor spaces were considered as behavior settings; components of a behavior setting like milieu, behavior pattern, synomorphy were applied to outdoor spaces. The activities performed in urban outdoor spaces defined as “behavior patterns”, the physical properties of place and time as “milieu” and consistency between the personal attributes of users and physical properties of place as “synomorphy”. Since successful urban outdoor spaces are preferred by more users than others, in these places richly various behavior patterns are observed. It was considered that, this is the result of various opportunities afforded by milieu of outdoor spaces and these opportunities can be defined by “Affordance Theory”. Thus affordance and behavior setting concepts are combined in a model and environmental preference is explained. The last part of the study contains the explanations of these concepts on a taken urban outdoor space. The activities performed in an outdoor urban space schematized through adopted concepts by this way behavior setting, milieu, affordance and synomorphy concepts were embodied. Keywords: Behavior setting, Affordance, Environmental preference, Urban outdoor space, Human-environment relationship, Ecological approach

Keywords

• Behavior setting, Affordance, Environmental preference, Urban outdoor space, Human-environment relationship, Ecological approach

Ekolojik yaklaşımlar doğrultusunda çevresel tercih modeli

Abstract

Bazı kentsel mekanlar çok sayıda kullanıcının yer aldığı, çok çeşitlilikte etkinliklerin sergilendiği ve tercih edilen yerler haline gelirken bazılarının boş kaldığı, sakınılan yerlere dönüştüğü ve tercih edilmediği görülmektedir. Bu çalışmada kentsel açık mekanlara ilişkin bu tür soruların yanıtlanmasında kullanılabilecek kavramsal bir çatkı ortaya koyulmaya çalışılmıştır. İnsan ve çevre bütününü ayrı varlıklar olarak ele alan yaklaşımlar yerine, bu iki kavramı ayrılmaz bir bütün olarak kabul eden ekolojik yaklaşımlar benimsenmiştir. Bu yaklaşımların ortaya koyduğu kavramlar kullanılarak insanın çevresel tercihinin daha iyi anlaşılabilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Ekolojik yaklaşımla ortaya koyulan Davranış Konumu Teorisi ve Olanaklılık Teorileri ele alınmış, çevresel tercih ile bu teorilerin kavramları ilişkilendirilmiş, bir modele oturtulmuş ve açıklanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda kentsel açık mekanlar bir davranış konumu olarak irdelenmiş, teorinin ortaya koyduğu konumun ortam, davranış kalıbı (örüntüsü), eşgüdüm (sinomorfi) gibi bileşenleri kentsel açık mekanlara uyarlanmıştır. Kentsel açık mekanlarda oluşan etkinlikler “davranış kalıbı”, mekanın ortaya koyduğu fiziksel özellikler ve kullanım zamanları “ortam” kullanıcıların bireysel özellikleri ile mekanın fiziksel özellikleri arasındaki uyum ise “sinomorfi” olarak tanımlamıştır. Başarılı kentsel açık mekanlar daha çok kullanıcı tarafından tercih edildiklerinden buralarda daha zengin çeşitlilikte davranış kalıpları gözlemlenir. Bu durumun kentsel mekanların ortamlarının kullanıcılara sunduğu imkanların çeşitliliğinin sonucu olduğu, bu imkanların Olanaklılık Teorisi ile tanımlanabileceği düşünülmüştür. Böylece olanaklılık kavramı ve davranış konumu kavramları bir modelde bir araya getirtilmiş ve çevresel tercih açıklanmıştır. Çalışmanın son kısmında bu kavramlar kentsel bir açık mekan seçilerek örneklendirilmiştir. Bu kentsel açık mekanda oluşan etkinlikler, ele alınan kavramlar ile şematize edilmiş; davranış kalıbı, ortam, olanaklılık, sinomorfi gibi kavramlar böylece somutlaştırılmıştır. Anahtar kelimeler: Davranış konumu, Olanaklılık, Çevresel tercih, Kentsel açık mekan, İnsan-çevre ilişkisi, Ekolojik yaklaşım

Keywords

• Davranış konumu, Olanaklılık, Çevresel tercih, Kentsel açık mekan, İnsan-çevre ilişkisi, Ekolojik yaklaşım

References

1. Alfonzo, M.A., 2005. To walk or not to walk? The Hierarchy of Walking Needs. Environment and Behavior, 37(6):808-836.
2. Altman, I., 1976. Some Perspectives on the Study of Man- Environment Phenomena. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental Psychology; People and Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Second Edition, 27-36 s.
3. Barker, R.G., 1968. Ecological Psychology; Concepts and Methods for Studying the Environment of Human Behavior. Stanford University Pres, Stanford, California.
4. Barker, R.G., 1976. On the Nature of the Environment. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L. G. Rivlin (Eds.). Environmental Psychology; People and Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Second Edition, 12-26 s.
5. Bechtel, R.B., 1982. Contributions of ecological psychology to the evaluation of environments. International Review of Applied Psychology, 31, 153-167.
6. Clark C., Uzzell D.L., 2002. The affordances of the home, neighborhood, school and town centre for adolescents. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22, 95-108.
7. Fajen, B.R., Turvey, M.T., 2003. Perception, categories, and possibilities for action. International Society for Adaptive Behavior, 11(4):274–278.
8. Gärling, T., 1998. Introduction: Conceptualizations of human Psychology, 18, 69–73. Journal of Environmental

9. Gehl, J., 1987. Life between Buildings: Using Public Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
10. Georgiou, D., Carspecken, P.F., 2002. Critical Ethnography and Ecological Psychology: Conceptual and Empirical Explorations of a Synthesis. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(6):688-706.
11. Gibson, B.D., 1991. The Airport as a Behavior Setting: The Impact of Setting Legibility on Compliance to Smoking Regulations. Doktora Tezi, the University of Utah, United States, Utah.
12. Gibson, J.J., 1986. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, London. Associates, Inc.,
13. Greeno, J.G., 1994. Gibson’s Affordances. Psychological Review, 101(2): 336-342.
14. Gump, P.V., 1971. The behavior setting: A promising unit for environmental designers. Landscape Architecture, January, 130-134.
15. Gür, Ş., 1996. Mekan Örgütlenmesi. Gür Matbaacılık, Trabzon.
16. Heft, H., 1997. The Relevance of Gibson’s Ecological Approach to Perception for Environment-Behavior Studies. In G. T. Moore, R. W. Marans (Eds.) Advances in Environment, Behavior, and Design, Volume 4. Toward the Integration of Theory, Methods, Research, and Utilization. Plenum Press, New York. 71-106 .
17. Heft, H., 2001. Ecological Psychology in Context: James Gibson, Roger Barker and the Legacy of William James’ Empiricism. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
18. Hillier, B., Musgrove, J. ve O’Sullivan, P., 1976. Knowledge and Design. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental Psychology; People and Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Second Edition, 69-83 s.
19. Ittelson, W.H., 1976. Some Issues Facing the Theory of Environment and Behavior. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental Psychology; People and Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Second Edition, 51-59 s.
20. Ittelson, W.H., Franck, K.A., O’Hanlon, T.J., 1976. The Nature of Environmental Experience. In S. Wapner, S. B. Cohen, B. Kaplan (Eds.), Experiencing the Environment. Plenum Press, New York. 187–206 s.
21. Kounin, J.S., Sherman, L.W., 2001. School environments as behavior settings. Theory into Practice, 18(3): 145-151.
22. Kyttä, M., 1997. Children's Independent Mobility in Urban, Small Town, and Rural Environments. In: Camstra R. (Editor), Growing Up in a Changing Urban Landscape. Royal Van Gorcum, Assen, 41-52 s.
23. Kyttä, M., 2002. The affordances of children’s environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1): 109-123.
24. Kyttä, M., 2004. The extent of children’s independent mobility and the number of actualized affordances as criteria or child-friendly environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24: 179–198.
25. LeCompte, W.F., 1974. Behavior Settings as Data Generating Units fort the Environmental Planner and Architect. In J. Lang (Ed.), Designing for Human Behavior. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross Inc., 183-193 s.
26. Loebach, J., 2004. Designing Learning Environments for Children: An Affordance-Based Approach to Providing Developmentally Appropriate Settings. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Dalhousie University, Halifax.
27. Miller P.C., Shim J. ve Holden G.W., 1998. Immediate contextual influences Environmental affordances and demands. Journal of on Environmental Psychology, 18: 387-398. behavior: Moos, R., 1976.
28. Conceptualizations of Human
29. Environments. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L.
30. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental Psychology; People and
31. Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
32. Inc. Second Edition, 37-51 s.
33. Mumcu, S., 2009. Açık Mekanlarda Davranış Konumları: Oturma Davranışının Değişiminin İncelenmesi. KTÜ, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora tezi.
34. Orzek, A.M., 1987. Innovations in ecological psychology: Conversations with Roger and Louise Barker. Journal of Counseling and Development, 65: 233-237.
35. Özbilen, A., 1983. Meryemana (Sümela) Kırsal Yöresinde, (Çevre Tasarımı için Kullanıcıya Referans Olan) Yapay- Doğal İmgelem Öğelerinin Araştırılması, Basılmış Doktora Tezi, KTÜ Fen Blimleri Enstitüsü, KTÜ Basımevi Trabzon.
36. Proshansky, H.M., 1976. Environmental Psychology: A Methodological Orientation. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental Psychology; People and Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., Second Edition, 59-69 s.
37. Read, M.A., Sugawara, A.I., Brandt, J.A., 1999. Impact of space in the physical environment on preschool children’s cooperative behavior. Environment and Behavior, 31(3): 413-428.
38. Schoggen, P., 1989. Behavior Settings; A Revision and Extension of Roger G. Barker’s Ecological Psychology. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
39. Scott, M., 1980. Ecological theory and methods for research in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 14(3): 279–294.
40. Scott, M.M., 2005. A powerful theory and a paradox ecological psychologists after barker. Environment and Behavior, 37(3): 295–329.
41. Stamps III, A.E., 2007. Mystery of environmental mystery: Effects of light, occlusion, and depth of view. Environment and Behavior, 39(2): 165-197.
42. Stokols, D., 1978. Environmental psychology. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 29: 253–295. Annual Reviews Inc.
43. Stoffregen, T.A., 2000. Affordances and events. Ecological Psychology, 12(1): 1-28.
44. Stoffregen, T.A., 2003. Affordances as properties of the animal-environment system. Ecological Psychology, 15(2): 115-134.
45. Taylor, R.B. 1988. Human Territorial Functioning: An Empirical, Evolutionary Perspective on Individual and Small Group Territorial Cognitions, Behaviors, and Consequences. Cambridge University Press. New York.
46. Thompson, B.J., 2003. Architectural hermeneutics V: Harry and the philosopher’s stone. Environment and Behavior, 35(4): 478–485.
47. Tisot, M.C., Thurman, S.K., 2002. Using behavior setting theory to define natural settings: A family centered approach. Inf. Young Children, 14(3): 65-71.
48. Weisman, G.D., 1983. Environmental programming and action research. Environment and Behavior, 15(3): 381– 408.
49. Weiss, K., Feliot-Rippeault, M., Gaud, R., 2007. Uses of places and settings preferences in a French Antarctic Station. Environment and Behavior, 39(2): 147-164.
50. Wicker, A.W. 1976. Undermanning Theory and Research: Implications for the Study of Psychological and Behavioral Effects of Excess Human populations. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson, L. G. Rivlin (Eds.), Environmental Psychology; People and Their Physical Settings, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., Second Edition, 83-99 s.
51. Withagen, R., Michaels, C.F., 2005. On ecological conceptualizations of perceptual systems and action systems. Theory & Psychology, 15(5): 603-620.
52. Wright, H.F., 1956. Psychological development in Midwest. Child Development, 27(2): 265-286.