BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2017, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1, 279 - 294, 18.04.2017

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Bechtel, R.B. (1997). Environment & Behavior: an introduction. Thousand Oaks. California:
  • Sage Publications.
  • Bostanoğlu (Eryücel), G. (1985). Role of sex differences on environmental preferences (Master
  • thesis). Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
  • Brebner, J. (1982). Environmental psychology in building design. London: Applied
  • Science Publishers Ltd.
  • Butler, D. L., Biner, P. M. (1987). Preferred lighting levels: variability among settings,
  • behaviors, and individuals. Environment and Behavior, 19(6), 695–721.
  • Cassidy, T. (1997). Environmental psychology: behaviour and experience in context. Hove:
  • Psychology Press.
  • Cline, R. J., Puhl, C.L A. (1984). Gender, culture, and geography: a comparison of seating
  • arrangements in the United States and Taiwan. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,
  • (2), 199-219.
  • Collins, B. L. (1975). Windows and people: a literature survey. Washington: Department of
  • Commerce/National Bureau of Standards.
  • Dempsey, D. (1974). an introduction to environmental psychology. New York: Holt,
  • Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
  • Finnegan, M. C., Solomon, L. Z. (1981). Work attitudes in windowed vs.
  • windowless environments. Journal of Social Psychology, 115, 291–292.
  • Gifford, R. (2013). Environmental psychology matters. Annual Review of
  • Psychology, 65, 541-579.
  • Heerwagen, J. H., Orians, G. H. (1986). Adaptations windowlessness: a study
  • of the use of visual decor in windowed and windowless offices. Environment and Behavior, 18,
  • –639.
  • Heimstran, N.W., Mcfarling, L.H. (1974). Environmental Psychology. Wad
  • Sworth: Publishing Company, Inc.
  • Krathwohl, D.R. (1997). Methods of educational & social science research: an
  • integrated approach. MA: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, Inc.
  • Leather, P., Pyrgas, M., Beale, D., Lawrence, C. (1998). Windows in the
  • workplace: sunlight, view, and occupational stress. Environment and Behavior, 30(6), 739.
  • Leventhal, G., Lipshultz, M., Chido, A. (1978). Sex and setting effects on
  • seating arrangement. The Journal of Social Psychology,100, 21-26.
  • Michelini, R. L., Passalacqua, R., Cusimano, J. (1979). Effects of seating
  • arrangement on group participation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 99, 179- 186.
  • Nagy, E., Yasunaga, S., Kose, S. (1995). Japanese office employees’
  • psychological reactions to their underground and above-ground offices, Journal of
  • Environmental Psychology, 15(2), 123–134.
  • Pedersen, D. M. (1994). Privacy preferences and classroom seat selection. Social
  • Behavior and Personality, 22(4), 393-398.
  • Totusek, P. F., Staton-Spicer, A. Q. (1982). Classroom seating preference as a
  • function student personality. Journal of Experimental Education, 50(3), 159-163.
  • Vischer, J. C. (1996). Workspace strategies: environment as a tool for work. New
  • York: Chapman & Hall.
  • Wang, N., Boubekri, M. (2009). Investigation of declared seating preference and
  • measured cognitive performance in a sunlit room. Journal of environmental Psychology, 30(2),
  • -238.
  • Yildirim, K., Akalin-Baskaya, A., Celebi, M. (2007). The effects of
  • window proximity, partition height, and gender on perceptions of open-plan offices, Journal of
  • Environmental Psychology, 27, 154–165.

SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1, 279 - 294, 18.04.2017

Öz

To know the user's preference makes possible to design functional, comfortable and high quality spaces. The analysis of seating preferences of cafeteria users will enable a good designed cafeteria to continue as a successful commercial enterprise. The aim of the research is to find out which places are preferred by users in a cafeteria and how their preferences are determined by age, gender and profession factors. The research data was obtained by physical space analysis, observation and interview method after having drawn the sketch of cafeteria space. Data was collected by interview with 65 users randomly chosen from Çankaya University staff. The result of the research reveals that the seating preferences are influenced by spaces near windows with broad daylight and outdoor view. Contrary to the literature, user's age, gender and profession do not effect their seating preferences. 

Kaynakça

  • Bechtel, R.B. (1997). Environment & Behavior: an introduction. Thousand Oaks. California:
  • Sage Publications.
  • Bostanoğlu (Eryücel), G. (1985). Role of sex differences on environmental preferences (Master
  • thesis). Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
  • Brebner, J. (1982). Environmental psychology in building design. London: Applied
  • Science Publishers Ltd.
  • Butler, D. L., Biner, P. M. (1987). Preferred lighting levels: variability among settings,
  • behaviors, and individuals. Environment and Behavior, 19(6), 695–721.
  • Cassidy, T. (1997). Environmental psychology: behaviour and experience in context. Hove:
  • Psychology Press.
  • Cline, R. J., Puhl, C.L A. (1984). Gender, culture, and geography: a comparison of seating
  • arrangements in the United States and Taiwan. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,
  • (2), 199-219.
  • Collins, B. L. (1975). Windows and people: a literature survey. Washington: Department of
  • Commerce/National Bureau of Standards.
  • Dempsey, D. (1974). an introduction to environmental psychology. New York: Holt,
  • Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
  • Finnegan, M. C., Solomon, L. Z. (1981). Work attitudes in windowed vs.
  • windowless environments. Journal of Social Psychology, 115, 291–292.
  • Gifford, R. (2013). Environmental psychology matters. Annual Review of
  • Psychology, 65, 541-579.
  • Heerwagen, J. H., Orians, G. H. (1986). Adaptations windowlessness: a study
  • of the use of visual decor in windowed and windowless offices. Environment and Behavior, 18,
  • –639.
  • Heimstran, N.W., Mcfarling, L.H. (1974). Environmental Psychology. Wad
  • Sworth: Publishing Company, Inc.
  • Krathwohl, D.R. (1997). Methods of educational & social science research: an
  • integrated approach. MA: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, Inc.
  • Leather, P., Pyrgas, M., Beale, D., Lawrence, C. (1998). Windows in the
  • workplace: sunlight, view, and occupational stress. Environment and Behavior, 30(6), 739.
  • Leventhal, G., Lipshultz, M., Chido, A. (1978). Sex and setting effects on
  • seating arrangement. The Journal of Social Psychology,100, 21-26.
  • Michelini, R. L., Passalacqua, R., Cusimano, J. (1979). Effects of seating
  • arrangement on group participation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 99, 179- 186.
  • Nagy, E., Yasunaga, S., Kose, S. (1995). Japanese office employees’
  • psychological reactions to their underground and above-ground offices, Journal of
  • Environmental Psychology, 15(2), 123–134.
  • Pedersen, D. M. (1994). Privacy preferences and classroom seat selection. Social
  • Behavior and Personality, 22(4), 393-398.
  • Totusek, P. F., Staton-Spicer, A. Q. (1982). Classroom seating preference as a
  • function student personality. Journal of Experimental Education, 50(3), 159-163.
  • Vischer, J. C. (1996). Workspace strategies: environment as a tool for work. New
  • York: Chapman & Hall.
  • Wang, N., Boubekri, M. (2009). Investigation of declared seating preference and
  • measured cognitive performance in a sunlit room. Journal of environmental Psychology, 30(2),
  • -238.
  • Yildirim, K., Akalin-Baskaya, A., Celebi, M. (2007). The effects of
  • window proximity, partition height, and gender on perceptions of open-plan offices, Journal of
  • Environmental Psychology, 27, 154–165.
Toplam 49 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Nazlı Nazende Yıldırım

Yayımlanma Tarihi 18 Nisan 2017
Gönderilme Tarihi 14 Haziran 2016
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2017 Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Yıldırım, N. N. (2017). SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 21(1), 279-294.
AMA Yıldırım NN. SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. Nisan 2017;21(1):279-294.
Chicago Yıldırım, Nazlı Nazende. “SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA”. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 21, sy. 1 (Nisan 2017): 279-94.
EndNote Yıldırım NN (01 Nisan 2017) SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 21 1 279–294.
IEEE N. N. Yıldırım, “SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA”, Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, c. 21, sy. 1, ss. 279–294, 2017.
ISNAD Yıldırım, Nazlı Nazende. “SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA”. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 21/1 (Nisan 2017), 279-294.
JAMA Yıldırım NN. SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2017;21:279–294.
MLA Yıldırım, Nazlı Nazende. “SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA”. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, c. 21, sy. 1, 2017, ss. 279-94.
Vancouver Yıldırım NN. SEATING PREFERENCES OF STAFF THAT USES ÇANKAYA UNIVERSITY CAFETERIA. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2017;21(1):279-94.