Review of Research on Biophilic Building with Bibliometric Analysis Assessment

Öz

Biophilic design, an approach emphasizing the integration of nature into human life, is gaining increasing importance. This bibliometric review and content analysis aim to comprehensively analyze and synthesize the scientific literature in the field of biophilic building design. In this context, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis and content analysis were conducted to identify trends and research gaps in biophilic building research conducted between 2006 and 2023. Using Scopus data, the analysis was performed with the Bibliometrix tool. The study results identify the most influential countries, institutions, studies, authors, and keywords focusing on concepts such as biophilic design, biophilic architecture, and biophilic building. According to the findings, the study highlights the importance of incorporating natural systems and processes into the design of the built environment to enhance human health. This research underscores the significance of studies on the impact of biophilic design on mental health, overall well-being, and social relationships.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bibliometric Analysis
• Biophilic
• Biophilic design
• Biophilic Building Research
• R Studio-Biblioshiny

Biyofilik Bina Konulu Araştırmaların Bibliyometrik Analiz Yönetim ile İncelenmesi

Öz

Doğanın insan yaşamıyla bütünleşmesini vurgulayan bir yaklaşım olan biyofilik tasarım giderek önem kazanmaktadır. Bu bibliyometrik inceleme ve içerik analizi, biyofilik bina tasarımı alanındaki bilimsel literatürü kapsamlı bir şekilde analiz etmeyi ve sentezlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda, 2006-2023 yılları arasında yapılan biyofilik bina araştırmalarındaki eğilimleri ve araştırma boşluklarını belirlemek için kapsamlı bir bibliyometrik analiz ve içerik analizi yapılmıştır. Analiz, Scopus verileri kullanılarak Bibliometrix aracı ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma sonuçları, biyofilik tasarım, biyofilik mimari ve biyofilik bina gibi kavramlara odaklanan en etkili ülkeleri, kurumları, çalışmaları, yazarları ve anahtar kelimeleri tanımlamaktadır. Bulgulara göre çalışma, insan sağlığını geliştirmek için doğal sistem ve süreçlerin yapılı çevre tasarımına dahil edilmesinin önemini vurgulamaktadır. Bu araştırma, biyofilik tasarımın ruh sağlığı, genel refah ve sosyal ilişkiler üzerindeki etkisine ilişkin çalışmaların öneminin altını çizmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bibliyometrik Analiz
• Biyofili
• Biyofilik Tasarım
• Biyofilik Bina Araştırması
• R Studio-Biblioshiny

Kaynakça

1. Mohammed, I., Onur, Z., & Çağnan, Ç. (2023). An Exploration of Biophilic Design Features within Preschool Interiors. Sustainability, 15(15), 11913.
2. Nieuwenhuis, M., Knight, C., Postmes, T., & Haslam, S. A. (2014). The relative benefits of green versus lean office space: Three field experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 20(3), 199.
3. Klepeis, N. E., Nelson, W. C., Ott, W. R., Robinson, J. P., Tsang, A. M., Switzer, P., ... & Engelmann, W. H. (2001). The National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 11(3), 231-252.
4. Ryan, C. O., Browning, W. D., Clancy, J. O., Andrews, S. L., & Kallianpurkar, N. B. (2014). Biophilic design patterns: emerging nature-based parameters for health and well-being in the built environment. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 8(2), 62.
5. Browning, B., Garvin, C., Ryan, C., Kallianpurkar, N., Labruto, L., Watson, S. & Knop, T. (2012). The Economics of Biophilia. In The Economics of Biophilia, 2nd ed.; Terrapin Bright Green LLC: New York, NY, USA, p. 40.
6. Ko, W. H., Schiavon, S., Zhang, H., Graham, L. T., Brager, G., Mauss, I., & Lin, Y. W. (2020). The impact of a view from a window on thermal comfort, emotion, and cognitive performance. Building and Environment, 175, 106779.
7. Browning, W. D., Ryan, C. O., & Clancy, J. O. (2014). 14 patterns of biophilic design Improving Health & Well-Being in the Built Environment. New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.
8. Nyrud, A. Q., Bringslimark, T., & Bysheim, K. (2014). Benefits from wood interior in a hospital room: A preference study. Architectural Science Review, 57(2), 125-131.

9. Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of environmental psychology, 15(3), 169-182.
10. Wilson, E. O. (2001). Nature matters1. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 20(3), 241-242.
11. Nielsen, T. S., & Hansen, K. B. (2007). Do green areas affect health? Results from a Danish survey on the use of green areas and health indicators. Health & place, 13(4), 839-850.
12. 1Zhong, W., Schröder, T., & Bekkering, J. (2022). Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, wellbeing, and sustainability: A critical review. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 11(1), 114-141.
13. Wilson 1984
14. Africa, J., Heerwagen, J., Loftness, V., & Ryan Balagtas, C. (2019). Biophilic design and climate change: performance parameters for health. Frontiers in Built Environment, 5, 28.
15. Yin, J., Zhu, S., MacNaughton, P., Allen, J. G., & Spengler, J. D. (2018). Physiological and cognitive performance of exposure to biophilic indoor environment. Building and Environment, 132, 255-262.
16. Gullone, E. (2000). The biophilia hypothesis and life in the 21st century: increasing mental health or increasing pathology?. Journal of happiness studies, 1(3), 293-322.
17. Ulrich, R.S.(1993) ‘Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes’, in S.R. Kellert and E.O. Wilson (eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis (Island Press, Washington DC), pp. 73–137.
18. Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (Eds.). (1993). The biophilia hypothesis. Island press.
19. Kellert, S. R. (2008). Dimensions, elements, and attributes of biophilic design. In Biophilic design: the theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life, 3-19, John Wiley & Sons.
20. Parsaee, M., Demers, C. M., Hébert, M., Lalonde, J. F., & Potvin, A. (2019). A photobiological approach to biophilic design in extreme climates. Building and Environment, 154, 211-226.
21. Gong, Y., Zoltán, E. S., & János, G. (2023). Healthy Dwelling: The Perspective of Biophilic Design in the Design of the Living Space. Buildings, 13(8), 2020.
22. Rousseau, D. M. (Ed.). (2012). The Oxford handbook of evidence-based management. Oxford University Press.
23. Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?. Scientometrics, 1, 359-375.
24. Goyal, S., Chauhan, S., & Mishra, P. (2021). Circular economy research: A bibliometric analysis (2000–2019) and future research insights. Journal of cleaner production, 287, 125011.
25. Wang, H., Sun, F., Su, J., Bold, S., & Koondhar, M. A. (2023). Mapping research trends and identifying missing research gaps in green environment and public health: a bibliometric analysis for 2003–2021. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-30.
26. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of informetrics, 11(4), 959-975.
27. Mora Forero, J. A., Nieto Mejia, A., & León-Gómez, A. (2023). A Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Review of Dark Tourism: Trends, Impact, and Prospects. Administrative Sciences, 13(11), 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13110238.
28. León-Gómez, A., Mora Forero, J. A., & Santos-Jaén, J. M. (2023). A Bibliometric Analysis of Sustainability Education in Tourism Universities. SAGE Open, 13(3), 21582440231193215.
29. Virú-Vásquez, P., Pardavé, R. H., Coral, M. F. C., Bravo-Toledo, L., & Curaqueo, G. (2022). Biochar and Compost in the Soil: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scientific Research. Environmental Research, Engineering and Management, 78(3), 73-95.
30. Cahlik, T. (2000). Comparison of the maps of science. Scientometrics, 49(3), 373-387.
31. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of informetrics, 5(1), 146-166.
32. Cobo, M. J., Martínez, M. Á., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Fujita, H., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015). 25 years at knowledgebased systems: a bibliometric analysis. Knowledge-based systems, 80, 3-13.
33. Alkhammash, R. (2023). Bibliometric, network, and thematic mapping analyses of metaphor and discourse in COVID19 publications from 2020 to 2022. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1062943.
34. Yin, J., Arfaei, N., MacNaughton, P., Catalano, P. J., Allen, J. G., & Spengler, J. D. (2019). Effects of biophilic interventions in office on stress reaction and cognitive function: A randomized crossover study in virtual reality. Indoor air, 29(6), 1028-1039.
35. Gray, T., & Birrell, C. (2014). Are biophilic-designed site office buildings linked to health benefits and high performing occupants?. International journal of environmental research and public health, 11(12), 12204-12222.
36. Sanchez, J. A., Ikaga, T., & Sanchez, S. V. (2018). Quantitative improvement in workplace performance through biophilic design: A pilot experiment case study. Energy and Buildings, 177, 316-328.
37. Zhong, W., Schröder, T., & Bekkering, J. (2022). Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, wellbeing, and sustainability: A critical review. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 11(1), 114-141.
38. Almusaed, A. (2010). Biophilic and bioclimatic architecture: analytical therapy for the next generation of passive sustainable architecture. Springer Science & Business Media.
39. Wijesooriya, N., & Brambilla, A. (2021). Bridging biophilic design and environmentally sustainable design: A critical review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 283, 124591.
40. Totaforti, S. (2018). Applying the benefits of biophilic theory to hospital design. City, Territory and Architecture, 5, 1-9.
41. Mangone, G., Capaldi, C. A., van Allen, Z. M., & Luscuere, P. G. (2017). Bringing nature to work: Preferences and perceptions of constructed indoor and natural outdoor workspaces. Urban forestry & urban greening, 23, 1-12.
42. Abdelaal, M. S., & Soebarto, V. (2019). Biophilia and Salutogenesis as restorative design approaches in healthcare architecture. Architectural science review, 62(3), 195-205.
43. Candido, C., Chakraborty, P., & Tjondronegoro, D. (2019). The rise of office design in high-performance, open-plan environments. Buildings, 9(4), 100.
44. Coates, G. J. (2013). The sustainable urban district of Vauban in Freiburg, Germany. International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 8(4), 265-286.
45. Nanu, L., Ali, F., Berezina, K., & Cobanoglu, C. (2020). The effect of hotel lobby design on booking intentions: An intergenerational examination. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 89, 102530.
46. Ramzy, N. S. (2015). Biophilic qualities of historical architecture: In quest of the timeless terminologies of ‘life’in architectural expression. Sustainable Cities and Society, 15, 42-56.
47. Hähn, N., Essah, E., & Blanusa, T. (2021). Biophilic design and office planting: a case study of effects on perceived health, well-being and performance metrics in the workplace. Intelligent Buildings International, 13(4), 241-260.