The built environment and aesthetics ab. camilo lopez

The Built Environment and Aesthetics: Exploring the Impacts of Building Form on Behavioral Patterns

URP 6200 Planimetrics Research Camilo Lopez 2014

College of Design and Social Inquiry Florida Atlantic University School of Urban and Regional Planning

Author

Camilo Lopez

Title

The Built Environment and Aesthetics: Exploring the Impacts of Building Form on Behavioral Patterns

School

Florida Atlantic University

Program

School of Urban and Regional Planning

Degree

Master of Science

Professor

Yanmei Li

Semester/year

Fall 2014

Abstract Objective of the Study This report assesses building aesthetics relative to their built environment, its physical presence and the cognitional response from the observer. The analysis focuses on building aesthetics and how that directly or indirectly reflects into social behavioral patterns of individuals. The fields of aesthetics and built environments has long concentrated on their independent semantics and yet not addressed interrelations. This theme is important to the planning profession due to its intrinsic value on how policies are created and their repercussions on everyday life of Americans. The objective is to find the effect of building aesthetics to user behavior in a spectrum of happiness or depression reproduction, and to elaborate a rubric mechanism that would serve decision-makers, planners, urban designers, architects and any

2

other related field in the process to understand what type of building form/aesthetics, triggers what type of behavior, to what type of users.

Academic Background and Methodology Based on previous literature and studies, assimilation of urban behavioral pattern dynamics have ability to expand on the planning of healthy environments: physically, emotionally, and mentally. Scientist, researchers, architects, philosophers, sociologist, urban planners, and many more have all examined the phenomenon of happiness, well being, and built environment.

However, none have taken a closer look at the fundamental influence that beautiful buildings have on the outlook of individual behavior. The way in which the image of a place is perceived affects psychological processes that are embedded in individual cerebrum systems as mentioned by Kevin Lynch in his book "The Image of the City" (1960). Direct effect of emotions of building aesthetics is studied. The analysis is conducted in a series of triangulations of specifics topics based on a quantitative research methodology. Data is analyzed on response to divergent demographic profiles, physical stimuli's, and reflection of socio-economic patterns.

Findings and Conclusion The research hypothesis were for the most part confirmed. It was found that building aesthetics and socio-economic profiles affect user's mood status of happiness and depression in relation to their individual time of interaction. However, the level of importance that each participant showed had no significant relation with behavioral responses. In addition, preconceived building aesthetics confirmed that low-level of building aesthetics reflects a negative behavioral

3

response compare to a high level scenario. Participants that were exposed to high level aesthetical building values showed a higher percentage of happiness and importance levels.

Keywords Aesthetics. Urban Form, Behavioral Patterns, Psychological Process, Built Environment

I. Introduction This section gives an introductory overview on the topic of this study and addresses the research gap from previous studies. Research objective and questions are presented as for its importance in the planning theory and practice, as well as, new contribution and significance. In addition definitions to some specific terminology are given for layperson understanding.

Background The built environment provides the "play ground" and setting by which people live their lives, and it impacts their senses, emotions, participation in physical activity and community life, their sense of community, and the general well being of society (Butterworth, 2000). American societies are reflected on the type of built environment in which they perform. Policy makers and planning professionals are intrinsically responsible for the variety of behavioral shifts that occurred within American neighborhoods. Land form regulations are prescriptive for a certain kind of built environment that dismisses the question of beauty from the start. Policy makers have designed policies that minimize profitable risk of developers, therefore the idea of bound rationality has been embedded in the economical and social development of American cities (Mohamed, 2006). Rational and pragmatic building forms has been adopted, in response, to assist economic growth. The class segregation and high differences have had an immense 4

impact on the gap between the psychological perspectives between contrasting population profiles. Why is important for planning theory and practice? Well, planning professionals and students should understand from the mere beginning that their profession embodies the work to provide safety, comfort and secure living conditions to the community. The community is what planners are working for: therefore the comprehension of the people's behavioral and psychological response to built stimuli's is imperative for the creation of healthy communities, in regards, to their physical, emotional and mental conditions. The allocation of the right conditions for this healthy communities will them lead to a positive outcome in livelihood and economic growth. Contribution of this report to planning theory and most importantly planning profession will enable decision-makers to measure what level of building aesthetics will trigger what level of behavioral outlook. Its significance is paramount as we strive to advanced human integrity by understanding the complex network of human perceptive cognition.

Research gap Previous literature and studies, have examined the subject of built environment and aesthetics.

Researchers and philosophers has mentioned that aesthetics brings happiness (uplifting), values (caring), feelings and positive emotions that advanced human unity. On built environment sociologist suggest that it shapes how we feel and promotes actions/active behaviors. Scientist concluded that more than fifty percent of human happiness is attributed to external stimuli's. In addition, healthy communities are categorized by physical activity, low disease rates, economic growth, diversity and educated by researchers and planners. Therefore, the intend of this research is to fill the knowledge gap on healthy communities by incorporating the factor of aesthetics on built forms as it contributes to healthy communities. In all aspects of mentally, 5

physically, and emotionally status aesthetics triggers behavioral patterns that move people that move the city. It is suggested that we are behaviorally shaped by our surroundings.

Research objective Based on the above review on the research gap in healthy communities, the main objective of this research is to find out what relationship lies between urban built form, buildings, aesthetics, emotions, psychological preferences, and whether an objective measure like a rubric criteria sheet could be used to explain and predict outcomes. In order to accurately assessed the relationship between the design of the built environment aesthetical values and the repercussions that it has in the individual behavioral and psychological patterns, the following research questions and hypothesis is developed. First, to understand the psychological scientific reception of our neural optic system in response to external stimuli's. How does the human eye transmits emotional and rational senses to the cerebrum system and that generates a conceived understanding of an external object aligned with an aesthetical perception. The neurotransmitter composition and its sensitive reactors. Second, a clear comprehension of universal beauty has to be understood in detail to better assist the objective of an uplifted community. This research attempts to address the following research questions:

1. What is the building aesthetics in the cities/neighborhoods of South Florida tricounty region?

2. What are the socioeconomic profiles of different cities/neighborhoods with different built environments?

6

3. How does the behavioral patterns shift from different cities/neighborhoods with different built environments?

4. What are the aesthetical values of different districts in relation to the demographic and economic profiles?

5. What is the socioeconomic performance of different cities/neighborhoods with different built environments?

6. What are the land regulations in different cities/neighborhoods with different demographic profiles?

7. What are the aesthetical values of different cities/neighborhoods with different built environment?

8. Repeat questions 2-7 with similar cities/neighborhoods with similar built environments?

9. What are the emotional responses to external stimuli's on the built environment?

10. What are the individual attitudes to aesthetical values?

11. Response on aesthetical values from different demographic groups?

12. Response on aesthetical values from similar demographic groups?

13. Response on aesthetical values from different and similar income groups?

14. What are the repercussions of the zoning systems in South Florida tri-county region?

A more detailed review and justification for these set of questions is presented in section 3 methodology.

7

Definitions Aesthetics

A branch of Philosophy dealing with the nature of art, beauty, and taste, with the creation and appreciation of beauty

Neuroaesthetics

A neuroscientific approach to beauty. An analysis that investigates the experience of beauty and appreciation of art on the level of brain functions and mental states

Urban Form

The visible shape or configuration of a relatively large and permanent human settlement

Behavioral Pattern

A recurrent way of acting by an individual or group toward a given object or in a given situation

Pattern Recognition The process of recognizing a set of stimuli arrangement in a certain pattern that is characteristic of that set of stimuli Cognitive Science

Study of mind and its processes as it research on intelligence and behavior, especially focusing on how information is presented in faculties such as perception

Built environment

A material, spatial and cultural product of human labor that combines physical elements and energy in forms for living, working and playing. It has been defined as "the human-made space in which people interact".

Thus corresponding to each research question, the null and alternative hypothesis are as follows: case 1

8

H0 : There are no repercussions on individual behavioral patterns in relation to the built environment H1 : There are repercussions on individual behavioral patterns in relation to the built environment case 2 H0 : There are no repercussions on individual behavioral patterns in relation to the aesthetics of buildings H1 : There are repercussions on individual behavioral patterns in relation to the aesthetics of buildings

Organization of the study This research is organized as follows. In the next section, a literature review on the built environment and aesthetics: exploring the impacts on urban form and behavioral patterns, will be assessed to determine what others have said about the topic. It also exemplifies the relation of healthy communities to the built environment and categorizing it as the predominant cause of a negative or positive setting. Then, a specific research problem, regarding the psychological effects of the built environment aesthetics in the individuals is formulated. This is followed by a detailed description of the methodology and analytical techniques utilized to conduct this research. Results and tabulation of the analysis perform follow. The final section of the paper contains both specific conclusions on the research problem as well as speculations on how this research has extended the knowledge in the area of built environment, aesthetics and behavioral patterns.

9

II. Literature Review Scientists, researchers, architects, and urban planners have all looked at the phenomenon of happiness, well being, and the built environment. However, none of them have taken a closer look at the intrinsic influence that the beauty of a building have on the output of an individual behavior. In most cases the current literature focuses on the influence that the built environment and urban design have on healthy communities. The focus entails a variety of examples that explains the concepts of physical engagement through design. The literature that will be discussed in the following paragraphs describes the relationship between urban design and urban planning, pedagogy of place, domains for health and well being, health impact assessments (HIA), psychology of residential developers, physical activity, pedestrian behavior and perception of urban environments, pragmatic rationality, aesthetic quality, embodied cognition, perception, the question of beauty, built environment and well being. The literature review will be organized as follows: (1) what others have said about the built environment and healthy communities, (2) what others have said about the relationship between aesthetics and behavior patterns, (3) summary of the concepts explained, (4) how the research questions were derived from the literature and the contribution of the research to fill the void of current planning literature.

Built Environment and Healthy Communities The built environment has direct influence on healthy communities due to the inherent practice of providing the adequate infrastructure and design vision to encourage or inhibit physical activity (Butterworth, 2000). According to the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the allocation of proper activities in accordance with the accessibility and the modes of 10

transportation is critical to the development of healthy communities. From this perspective the idea of a healthy community in streamline through the vision of a physical composition. The viewpoint of access, health and built environment interactions are planned in response to the demographic profiles, supply and demand, economic factors and program activities (Ross, 2014). As illustrated above these are some of the multiple layers that influence the development of a healthy community. The significance in the comprehension of sociological profiles and tendencies are the basis to undertake any design endeavor. In providing the adequate "play ground" the chances of reaching the overall behavioral goals expected from the characters is higher. Additionally, by providing project specific criteria that evaluate the physical quality of the built environment are also stressed in the community involvement in decision/policy making (Ross, 2014). Place making and behavioral patterns are strictly linked to policy making and bureaucratic decisions. Social and physical transformation as a product of the political economy that affects the local, regional, and national levels (Triantafillou, 2005). As it is clear that all processes are concerned with evolutionary trends that work in a "snowball effect", it is imperative to comprehend the behavioral and psychological perception of single individuals in response to their built environment that reflects on the family, neighborhood, community, city, county, region, state, country and world. The central role of the planning profession is to provide environments which support healthy behavior on an individual and collective manner (Thompson, 2014). In the Prevention Magazine "live a healthy life", scientist and researchers conducted an analysis in American cities to determine the level of happiness. In total 25 cities were ranked as the most happiest, healthiest cities in America (Coenen, 2014). In most cases cities were measure by means of health levels: low heart disease, low cancer rates, low 11

diabetes rates, well fed, eating organic produce, healthy cholesterol levels, etc. An additional form of measure included the physical health: focused on fitness, workout land, easy commutes, high levels of pedestrian activity, walking to work, high levels of bike ridership, high number of gyms and fitness centers, well planned park systems, etc. The third item to measured the 25 happiest, healthiest cities in America concerned mental health: High number of college graduates, educated society, optimistic, most active, high percent of people with health coverage, low rates of violent crimes, lowest unemployment rates, spiritual pioneers, low level of psychiatric treated people, etc. As a result that gap that have been created by only referring to healthy, physical, and mental well being in a spectrum of health diseases and educational levels only addressed a small portion of the direct factors. The mental status of every individual embodies an embodied cognition that makes reason and knowledge in response to external inputs (the environment). Therefore, in an effort to critically assessed the question of healthy behavior, this proposal will examined psychological and behavioral patterns as reflected on the aesthetics of the built environment.

Aesthetics and Behavioral Patterns The general mentality assures that there are two separated paradigms in reference to aesthetics and pragmatics. What people observe in their daily lives are a product of a pragmatic ideal of rational planning that supports economical and social developments (Verma, 1996). On the other hand, the question of aesthetics is vague in definition in cause to the collective experience and personal perception of each individual. However, for aesthetics there is a general notion in each individual that agrees on some form of beauty. The aesthetic/beauty response that involves emotions that include being uplifted, moved, exhilarated, entranced, 12

pleased, exited, happy and positive (Phillip, 2001). Aesthetics can be measured by harmony, order, symmetry, level of complexity, and level of comfort among other items that pleased the perceptive and cognitive processes (Birkhoff, 1933). All of this emotions are shared by every individual on the basis of their state of being. Since everybody is affected by the phenomenon of aesthetics it is logical that the way people perceived their built environment have direct repercussions on their behavioral status. For instance, the difference in psychological reactions of a deteriorated building to a newly development. In the former the individual might express a psychological pattern of uncertainty, careless, depression and other negative conceptions that are reflected at home, work and in the community. Directly or indirectly the individual neural system might reflect a level of discomfort and would persist in the neurological storage system.

On other side, the newly development might be reflected in optimism, joy, pleasure, happiness and other positive outcomes. "the extent to which an external factor or combination of factors evokes a pleasurable emotional response from the stimulation of our five bodily senses of sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch. This response establishes a resonance within ourselves and with the external factors responsible for that stimuli. Resonance helps to promote positive affirmation of ourselves, enhances our well being and encourages positive identity with the casual environmental factors" (Phillip, 2001). In order to reach a desirable built environment that would promote our most intrinsic positive attitudes, happiness and behavioral goals it is imperative to be aligned with pragmatic forces and decision making. Policy makers highlight the fact that simple, non-aesthetic, efficient, rational, functional and economical developments are bound rationality supported by the community (Verma, 1996). The counter response is that people adapt to what they are provided, certainly unless they can do something about it, 13

therefore people are adapted to the bound rationality that is being provided. It seems as if the false idea of straightforward functional environment is intended for the achievement of capital accumulation under competitive globalization (Gunder, 2011). Late capitalism is in fact one of the primary actors in the material morality, values and behavior. Researchers say that no gene can define anyone's happiness. A person's outlook on life is often shaped to a large degree by their circumstances and previous life events, this means that externalities played a crucial role in the development of a person's character and metal preferences. In addition, researchers concluded that genetic (internal) factors provides 35 to 50 percent of the variance in human happiness, therefore the other 65 to 50 percent are attribute to environment spatial (external) elements (Brice, 2012). The neurotransmitter serotonin in humans plays a major role in emotions and mood swings. That is a monoamine that is located in the gastrointestinal tract and regulates intestinal movements. This actor is attributed as a contributor to feelings of well being and happiness, as an internal factor. In physiological and psychological analysis it is understood that the human emotions and behaviors work in a series of interrelate relations between the internal mechanisms and the external attributes. The human perceived and object, the object in the human mind generates a cognitive understanding based on previous knowledge through neurotransmission. As a result, the output is quantified on the person's behavioral response to the object. The human is a being of reactive impulses.

Summary of Concepts Current literature on the effects of the built environment on behavioral patterns lacked a specific recognition on the interrelated outputs of aesthetics. The abandonment of the topic is alarming to everyone. Socio-economic outcomes that are generated threatened the mental 14

well being of individuals: the human race as a whole. The concepts analyzed based their focus on healthy environments that promote physical, social, and economical conditions. It lacks an accurate comprehension on the type of psychological and behavioral patterns generated by the aesthetics of the built forms. For the most part it is logical that the components of social behavior are recognized by these sources, however the application of their analysis have been devoted to other topics. The differences in perception of the built environment from an urban design professional to that of an urban planner varies in great magnitude, and it establishes a gap between policy making and aesthetics (Luc Anselin, 2011). Planning professionals are rigid in their perceptions of functionality and rationality. As an outcome people on the daily basis see the land regulation (zoning) prescriptions on the built environment. What planners should consider is the behavioral and psychological affects that those developments create in the community. Furthermore, the behavioral and psychological effects of accepted aesthetics. By comparing the outcomes a differentiation analysis can assist in the creation of more "healthy" environments. Complexity in the understanding of the neurotransmitter system, perception, embodied cognition, spinal cord, central nervous system, and other physiological elements might aid in the process of reaching a mentally healthy society. The built environment impacts individuals on the daily basis, therefore their behavioral and psychological attitudes might be attribute to those external factors that planners, architects and urban designers planned.

III. Methodology This section will present the model, methods, and approach for performing the analyzes for the study. First, a research model developed based on the theoretical framework and accompanying hypothesis are presented. Then the chosen methods for both statistical analyses 15

and empirical study reviewed. Next, the study procedures are covered in detail. Finally, the preliminary data processing is reviewed before actual analyses.

Model development and hypothesis The research design will consist of a quantitative research method to respond to the following aspects: 1. Determine the level of impact of building aesthetics on behavior •

Happy Behavior

•

Depress Behavior

•

Territorial Behavior

•

Optimistic Behavior

2. Determine the level of impact of aesthetically built environment on socio-economic indicators •

Income

•

Education

•

Occupation

In order to filter the information necessary for the success of the research, an elaborated strategy that would enable the analysis to cover a broad number of key components would be narrowing down into the essence and origin of the real situation. This research proposal is based on the basis of an explanatory initiative. On the idea of narrowing down the information and the spectrum from where the data will be collected, the methodology will consist of a phase oriented strategy. The purpose is to dismantle the project into independent subdivisions

16

that would specify on each topic. The topics are behavioral stimuli's and responses, aesthetics of built environment, and socioeconomic profiles. First, the research will conduct a detail data collection on scientific discourse for perceptual and behavioral apprehension. Following the site selection and participants selection will be conducted. After, to gather data from the primarily source (participants) the research will conduct a series of interviews, surveys, mental image analysis, visual comparative analysis, observation, and socio-economic data tabulation. Then edit, tabulate, and classify data to specific categories, such as, socio-economic profile, behavioral profile, and aesthetic profile. Finally results will be presented in a generated matrix that would link the interrelationship of these three profile components. Publication will be in form of a rubric table that would tell the user what type of aesthetical building would trigger what type of behavioral status to what type of person. support of the elaborated analysis.

The methodology implemented for this research proposal will be conducted in a systematic manner. The basis for this methodology lies on the understanding of individual components, as generators of a whole. The project design will be phase oriented with pre-formulated guidelines. However, the process is open to eventualities and to changes when needed. The first step is to examine the potentiality of different study areas. The research team will elaborate a process of selection to narrow down the study to three sites. The method of selection will consist of land use, level of activity, aesthetical value (according to scientific measure not general input) and high level of people that spends more than 8 hours within the area.

17

The developed research framework Research method First phase: Data will be collected and gathered to fully comprehend psychological perceptive mechanisms and behavioral pattern analysis of human beings. The scientific input to the research will aid to provide comprehensive comparative tables and an in depth understand of the physiological elements that triggers the overall success of the research.

Second phase: Site selection and participants selection will be conducted. The total study areas were narrow down to three by simplification of selection defined by sites with low, medium and high aesthetical values of built environment. The high value study area will consist of all the three formulate headings and subheadings to quantify aesthetics: first, attentive perception which triggers hierarchy, color, and iconic qualities. Second, aesthetic enjoyment which triggers level of detail and comfort ability. Third, explicit recognition of order and harmony which triggers symmetry and likeness. The medium value study area will consist of attentive perception which triggers color, and aesthetic enjoyment that triggers level of detail. For the low value study area none of the formulate criteria will apply. The site do not hold any characteristics attribute to aesthetics (based on an aesthetical review table that would be provided to guide researchers on the selection). The data for the city/neighborhood will generated a broad understanding of the context that surrounds the area. It is critical to understand the site in its macro level.

Intended to gathered data on context, demographics, population growth, income, shifts in 18

population, level of success, education attainment, behavioral composition, future visions, and modes of transportation. Each category will be analyzed in an evolutionary approach (chronological), in order to recognize tendencies. The information adopted will be based on factual sources and empirical observations. The research will center its analysis on these specific three areas as representative to a broader region (sampling). The analysis on this three areas will gathered an in depth comprehension of activities/events, land use, landmarks, level of conformity, level of income, level of education, level of happiness, and aesthetical features.

As a method of measurement 75% or more prescribed characteristics shall be present in the corresponding sites. On the other hand, the selection of participants will consist of having a public input of more 50% of the total population that commutes within the study area.

Participants will be analyzed based on their daily exposure to the study area. People will be consider: by passer (2 hours or less), sporadic visitor (4 hours or less), and working person (one who spends 8 hours or more within the study area). The measure a person spends within the study area will defined the level of impact on their behavioral outlook.

First hand data analysis Phase three: An analysis of the participants will be conducted based on their direct inputs and feedback. The analysis consist of interviews/surveys, mental image analysis, and visual comparative analysis.

Interviews and surveys will defined the behavioral prospects, aesthetical values, and building qualities based on direct input from participants. Close ended questions on happiness, aesthetics, buildings, aggressiveness, communication, territorial, optimistic, color, and order

19

would be among the list. The survey method will be conducted on a structure basis of a formal list of questions, with closed ended questions. People to be survey need to be in the spectrum of people that spends more than 8 hours, 4 hours or less, and two hours or less in the same area on a daily basis. The number of people to be survey varies, due to the need to tabulate as much as needed. The survey will take place at the major landmarks surrounding the study site.

The framework for this analysis is intended to recognize critical behavioral reactions and interrelations of the people to their built environment and aesthetics. The survey and observation will take place on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. At three different times (9am-1pm-5pm) in order to understand the social tendencies in more detail, within the fact that at this times and days there is a major influx of potentialities. The interview assessment will be held in public and specific locations of high pedestrian activity, with open ended questionnaires. This method will promote a chatting type interview that would facilitate the openness of the public: therefore constructive feedback. The mental image analysis will be conducted as a workshop interactive exercise that would let researchers know what stands out in the memory of the participants based on: level of hierarchy (low, mid, and high), element at stake, characteristics, color and geometrical shape. For the visual comparative analysis a series of images will be shown to participants and ask to choose based on a pre-established criteria.

The benefit of this analysis will trigger the perceptive outlook of participants to happiness, aesthetics, and preferences.

Observational assessment Phase four:

20

The focus of the analysis will reverse itself from participants to researchers. Now, the analysis will be conducted and observed by professional technicians without any direct input of participants. Observation task will consist of observing the physical characteristics of participants to elaborate a psychological/behavioral profile based on their appearance. The examiner will be given prescribed criteria tables that would target different aspects: gender, location of interaction with building, clothing style or elements, foot wear, use of technological elements, and mode of mobility. The observation method would be targeted to participants, their activities, reactions, psychological attitudes and situations in which their encounter the built environment. The type of observational tactic will consist of a mixture of both a structure and unstructured methodology. The observant will be assign a key position on the site to visualized and collect data based on a pre-formulated checklist of things to be observed.

However, the observant is free to tabulated data outside checklist if necessary. The observant will look for material elements that people carries to hint in their behavioral status: like the use of technological devices. After observing participants, researchers will conduct a socioeconomic profile analysis. Here a social and economic characteristic of every participant will be defined by the incorporation of secondary statistical data from governmental sources. The analysis will focus on aspects of: Level of income, education attainment, occupation, race/ethnicity, and age group. These aspects are subject to change as needed by adding necessary or removing non-necessary data.

The study Study Area

21

A sample of three study areas in South Florida Region were identify based on levels of aesthetics of the built environment. Criteria used to identify the study areas were based on scientific, literary, and reliable guidelines that enable researchers to be objective. In addition, areas of similar socio-economic condition were selected to better assist objectivity and partiality among participants. The first site is considered of low aesthetical values in regards to its built environment: the building constitutes the negation of attentive perception, aesthetic enjoyment, and order. The site is located in Miami Beach, Florida at the intersection of Dade blvd and 19th Street. More specifically for simplification purposes the research narrow down analytical interest to supermarket users. The second site is considered of medium aesthetical values: having attentive perception properties, such as, color or building materials and some sort of aesthetic enjoyment in level of detail. The site is located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida at the intersection of Andrews blvd and NE 6th Street. The third site is considered of high aesthetical values: having attentive perception of hierarchy, color, and iconic elements.

Aesthetic enjoyment in level of detail and comfort ability, as well as, explicit recognition of order and harmony with architectural elements that symbolizes symmetry and likeness. The site is located at the on Collins Ave between 69th Street and 67th Street in Bal Harbour, Florida. **note: All sites selected shall constitute at least 75% of the established criteria

Participants A sample of 50 participants (60% male, 40% female) representing and average middle-aged population (mean age 37.2) in three study areas in the South Florida Region participated in the experiment. Data from participants was used in final analysis as first-hand input and secondary

22

data that revealed direct sourcing. In an attempt to maintain an objective and partial outcome from the study participants quantity, sex, and age had to be consistent in all study areas. Out of the 50 participants 17 were workers (8 hour presence) of the supermarkets which entitled them as fully engaged. 17 participants were persons of sporadic appearance (2 hours presence) which entitled them as of moderate engaged shoppers. And 16 participants were persons of passer-by ( 30 min or less presence) which entitled them as light engaged. **note: All participants shall constitute at least 75% of the established criteria

Stimuli A sample of three Publix Supermarkets were used in the study consisted. Three divergent buildings with different architectural features. Each of the buildings were categorized by the researchers group on basis of their aesthetical values ranging from low to high. Each stimuli acted on scenarios of similar socio-economic characteristics and urban setting. These buildings were selected as stimuli objects in the study due to the fact that they represent demand use places. Consequently, there is a constant use of the place and impact with participants has larger indexes. In this research level of interaction of participants with stimuli represents a significant variable.

Data processing Phase five: Include tabulation of all data, results, and unification. In tabulation socio-economic analysis data will be narrow down to three separated groups: low, medium, and high income profiles.

23

The aesthetic of buildings profile based on participants input and general rubric will consist of: low, mid, and high value. For behavioral profile of participants the criteria will be based on: sad, comfort, and happy status. As a result, the generation of a matrix to compare socio-economic profile and behavioral patterns with aesthetics on building will be created. The purpose of this tabulation of results will aid in the overall goal to generate a rubric for policy-makers, planners, architects, and urban designers. The rubric table will tell the user what type of social-economic person will react in which way to what type of building aesthetics. Primarily data would be indentified as newly collected data that would be generated by the research (observation, survey, interview, and experimental methods). Additionally, secondary data would be identified as existing information tabulated by the research (secondary data). The tabulation of both primary and secondary data will correlate the validation of the analysis. In addition an experimental approach will be regarded as a major instrumental technique in this research. The ability to gather and tabulate data on past record as a tool to recognized tendencies is vital for this research. The trajectory of key components to the research and their evolution through time will enable a better comprehension of the behavioral trends in response to the built environment and aesthetical values. How population shifts with new developments, deteriorate housing, and with current pragmatic building forms. It will also aid us on the formulation of new predictions to come.

The utilization of this approach would help the research in an attempt to triangulate quantitative findings with each other. Based on interconnecting specific topics with one another. Understanding the interrelation of various psychological, physical, and environmental qualities will serve the research and contribute to the profession in an attempt to dismantle 24

complexity in planning "healthy" environments, and provide a real device that would aid the professional: hence the community.

IV. Analysis and Findings This section for the most part focuses on the analytical results pertinent to the effects of building aesthetics to human behavior. A detail explanation of the results are given: all data was tabulated and analyzed using several techniques from traditional to elaborated software models. In addition to tables and graphs that were tabulated in the analysis is presented.

Results In regards to the influence of building aesthetical values to human perception and therefore human behavioral output primary data concluded that: In a low building aesthetical setting male that had 8 hours (workers) or more of interaction with an average age of 37.5 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with a high school diploma or more, and an average income of $25,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 22%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 45% same as depression levels. Due to the high number of males that were depressed the behavioral response was negative.

In a low building aesthetical setting female that had 8 hours (workers) or more of interaction with an average age of 38 years old, mostly of White descendent, with a high school diploma or more, and an average income of $30,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 50%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 37.5% and depression level of 25%. Due to the high number of importance and little generation of optimistic/happy behavior the response was negative.

25

In a low building aesthetical setting male that had 2 hours (shoppers) or more of interaction with an average age of 43 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $38,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 33%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 45% and the depression level of 22%. Due to the small amount of importance, happiness is undermined; therefore behavioral response negative.

In a low building aesthetical setting female that had 2 hours (shoppers) or more of interaction with an average age of 43 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $40,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 50%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 37.5% and the depression level of 75%. Due to the high number of importance and high number of depression generation the behavioral response is negative.

In a low building aesthetical setting male that had 30 minutes (sporadic) or less of interaction with an average age of 44 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $35,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 75%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 37.5% and the depression level of 62.5%. Due to the high number of importance and high number of depression generation the behavioral response is negative.

In a low building aesthetical setting female that had 30 minutes (sporadic) or less of interaction with an average age of 34 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $35,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 75%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 37.5% and the depression level of 62.5%. Due to the high number of importance and high number of depression generation the behavioral response is negative.

26

In a medium building aesthetical setting male that had 8 hours (workers) or more of interaction with an average age of 37 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with a high school diploma or more, and an average income of $18,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 56%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 67% and depression level of 22%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a medium building aesthetical setting female that had 8 hours (workers) or more of interaction with an average age of 22 years old, mostly of White descendent, with a high school diploma or more, and an average income of $30,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 88%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 62.5% and depression level of 38%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a medium building aesthetical setting male that had 2 hours (shoppers) or more of interaction with an average age of 30 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $50,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 56%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 67% and the depression level of 38%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a medium building aesthetical setting female that had 2 hours (shoppers) or more of interaction with an average age of 27 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $38,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 75%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 62.5% and the depression level of 25%. More

27

than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a medium building aesthetical setting male that had 30 minutes (sporadic) or less of interaction with an average age of 46 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $35,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 37.5%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 37.5% and the depression level of 22%. Less than half of the participants showed a significant level of importance and happiness: therefore the behavioral response is negative.

In a medium building aesthetical setting female that had 30 minutes (sporadic) or less of interaction with an average age of 19 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $50,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 62.5%.

The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 62.5% and the depression level of 37.5%.

More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a high building aesthetical setting male that had 8 hours (workers) or more of interaction with an average age of 27 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with an Associate's Degree or more, and an average income of $18,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 67%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 78% and depression level of 11%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a high building aesthetical setting female that had 8 hours (workers) or more of interaction with an average age of 38 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an High School or more, and an average income of $30,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 75%. The level of 28

happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 62.5% and depression level of 25%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a high building aesthetical setting male that had 2 hours (shoppers) or more of interaction with an average age of 32 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $53,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 78%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 67% and the depression level of 22%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a high building aesthetical setting female that had 2 hours (shoppers) or more of interaction with an average age of 32 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $38,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 62.5%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 87.5% and the depression level of 37.5%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** In a high building aesthetical setting male that had 30 minutes (sporadic) or less of interaction with an average age of 48 years old, mostly of Hispanic descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an average income of $53,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 25%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 75% and the depression level of 12.5%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of happiness, however importance levels are not significant: therefore the behavioral response is negative.

In a high building aesthetical setting female that had 30 minutes (sporadic) or less of interaction with an average age of 44 years old, mostly of White descendent, with an Associate Degree or more, and an 29

average income of $50,000 showed that the level of building aesthetics importance was 75%. The level of happiness generated by building aesthetics was of 75% and the depression level of 12.5%. More than half of the participants showed a significant level of building aesthetics importance and of happiness: therefore the behavioral response is positive.** **denotes positive measures

V. Conclusion and Contribution This section will first review the analysis results in light of their practical implications to U.S land form regulations and design practitioners. Then the limitations on future research potential is reviewed. Finally, the conclusions and contributions from this study are drawn.

Practical implications This report serves as means in the process of policy making. The goal/ends is to developed a system to measure impact of building aesthetics on user's behavior. By elaborating such mechanism decision-makers, planners, urban designers, architect, and any other related field can better assist in positive social and psychological outcomes.

Limitations and future research In aim to better assist decision-makers this study serves as an initial step. Limitations in public participation and participants impartiality are points to consider. For future research planning professionals and social researchers should consider further analysis on subjects of perception, social behavior and zoning regulations. All further research shall constitute fundamental objectivity on building, landscape, and streetscape aesthetical values. It is recommended that future research proceed with psychoanalytical processes that would aim at elaborating an even 30

more objective perspective. The theme of human behavior as well as any other natural process is likely to be not definitive. To understand human behavioral it is imperative to interconnect a complex variety of elements, from neurons to textures and colors.

Concluding remarks The importance of this research is to provide an understanding on implications that aesthetical values of the built environment have on behavioral patterns of individuals. The question of beauty is underpinned by forces of rational economic incentives. It is in the best hopes of this research proposal to change approaches of planning professionals, architects, decision-makers and designers towards the question of aesthetics. It is not a manner of vanity, it is a manner of reflecting a human sensibility through policy making. As a result of this research planning professionals and theorist should find a source to decipher the difficult interrelations of the human state of mind in response to beauty of the built environment. Planning professionals and theorist preached the ideological romantic planning solutions that embodies the utopian well fare of the community. It is time that planners focus on real-time goal directed actions that serves community mood status through the enhancement of beauty. Let's put some love into it!

Contribution The contribution of this research proposal is of a great magnitude to the expansion of professional planners, architects, decision-makers, and other design oriented mind set, and for the overall benefit of the community in general. By assimilating the various patterns of behavioral and psychological aptitudes generated by the aesthetics on the built environment it

31

is possible to think of a joyful, positive, energetic, happy and peaceful community. The shift in urban behavioral analysis will set a precedent for future generations of planning practitioners and theory. By taking a step forward in an attempt to comprehend the multiple interrelations of different fields of study, and the integration of this elements: the planning profession will benefit to provide detailed planning solutions. The creation of the Aesthetical Behavior (aB) table would formulate concrete results to aid policy-makers and planning professional. The aB will serve as a criteria device that would specify what type of aesthetical values in buildings would produce what type behavioral patterns on what type of person.

32

References

Birkhoff, G. D. (1933). Aesthetic Measure. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Botton, A. d. (2006). The Architecture of Happiness. New York: Vintage International.

Brice, M. (2012, August 29). Scientist FInd Happiness Gene in Woman. Medical Daily , pp. 1-6.

Butterworth, I. (2000). The Relationship Between the Built Environment and Well Beign: A Literature Review. Victorian Health Promotion Foundation , 3-46.

Cerin, E. (2011). Statistical Approaches to Testing the Relationships of the Built Environment with Resident-Level Physical Activity Behavior and Health Outcomes in Cross-Sectional Studies with Cluster Sampling. Journal of Planning Literature , 151-167.

Cervero, R. (2002). Built environments and mode choice:toward a normative framework. Transportation Research Part D , 7, 265-284.

Coenen, S. M. (2014, October 14). 25 Happiest, Healthiest Cities In America. Prevention , pp. 1-13.

Crane, R. (2000). The INfluence of Urban Form on Travel: An Interpretive Review. Journal of Planning Literature , 15 (3), 3-23.

Ewing, R., & Dumbaugh, E. (2009). The Built Environment and Traffic Safety: A Review of Empirical Evidence. Journal of Planning Literature , 23, 347-367.

Fajans, J., & Curry, M. (2001). Why Bicyclists Hate Stop Signs. Access , 28-31.

Gunder, M. (2011). Commentary: Is Urban Design Still Urban Planning? An Exploration and Response.

Journal of Planning Education and Research , 184-195.

Heinen, E., van Wee, B., & Maat, K. (2010). Commuting by Bicycle: An Overview of the Literature.

Transport Reviews , 30 (1), 59-96.

Krizek, K. J., & Johnson, P. J. (2006). Proximity to Trails and Retail: Effects on Urban Cycling and Walking.

Journal of the American Planning Association , 72 (1), 33-42.

Krizek, K. J., & Roland, R. W. (2005). What is at the end of the road? Understanding discontinuities of onstreet bicycle lanes in urban settings. Transportation Research Part D , 10, 55-68.

Lopez, R. US Metropolitan Sprawl Index - Sprawl Index 1990 and 2000 Methodology. Boston: Boston University School of Public Health.

33

Luc Anselin, J. L. (2011). Where Do Planners Belong? Assessing the Relationship between Planning and Design in American Universities. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2011 31 , 196–207.

Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Mohamed, R. (2006). The Psychology of Residential Developers: Lessons from Behavioral Economics and Additional Explanations for Satisficing. Journal of Planning Education and Research , 28-37.

Phillip, R. (2001). Aesthetic Quality of the Built and Natural Environment: Why does it Matter? In W. P. Rusticali, Green Cities: Blue Cities of Europe (pp. 225-247). Rimini, Italy: WHO Collaborating Centre for Tourist Health and Travel Medicine.

Randall, T. (2010). GIS-based land use diversity index model. Ontario: University of Toulouse.

Ross, A. R. (2014). Health Impact Assessments and Healthy Schools. Journal of Planning Education and Research , 141–152.

Scruton, R. (2009). Beauty. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sohn, K. (2011). Multi-objective optimization of a road diet network design. Transportation Research Part A , 45, 499-511.

Southworth, M. (1997). Walkable Suburbs?: An Evaluation of Neotraditional Communities at the Urban Edge. Journal of the American Planning Association , 63 (1), 28-44.

Thompson, J. L. (2014). The Three Domains of Urban Planning for Health and Well-being. Journal of Planning Literature , 239-256.

Triantafillou, M. A. (2005). Reflections on the Pedagogy of Place in Planning and Urban Design. Journal of Planning Education and Research , 25-75.

Turner, B. S. (2006). The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Verma, N. (1996). Pragmatic Rationality and Planning Theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research , 5-14.

Zacharias, J. (2001). Pedestrian Behavior Pedestrian Behavior and Perception in Urban Walking Environments. Journal of Planning Literature , 3-18.

34

Tables and Figures Figure 1. Visual analysis of sites .................................................................................................................. 36 Figure 2. Participants selection ................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 3. Importance Survey Low ............................................................................................................... 38 Figure 4. Importance Survey Medium ........................................................................................................ 39 Figure 5. Importance Survey High ............................................................................................................... 40 Figure 6. Happiness Survey Low.................................................................................................................. 41 Figure 7. Happiness Survey Medium .......................................................................................................... 42 Figure 8. Happiness Survey High ................................................................................................................. 43 Figure 9. Depression Survey Low ................................................................................................................ 44 Figure 10. Depression Survey Medium ....................................................................................................... 45 Figure 11. Depression Survey High ............................................................................................................. 46 Figure 12. Level of Importance ................................................................................................................... 47 Figure 13. Level of Importance per interaction .......................................................................................... 48 Figure 14. Level of Happiness ..................................................................................................................... 49 Figure 15. Level of Happiness per interaction ............................................................................................ 50 Figure 16. Level of Depression .................................................................................................................... 51 Figure 17. Level of Depression per interaction ........................................................................................... 52 Figure 18. Male Low Visual Analysis ........................................................................................................... 53 Figure 19. Female Low Visual Analysis........................................................................................................ 54 Figure 20. Male Medium Visual Analysis .................................................................................................... 55 Figure 21. Female Medium Visual Analysis................................................................................................. 56 Figure 22. Male High Visual Analysis........................................................................................................... 57 Figure 23. Female High Visual Analysis ....................................................................................................... 58 Figure 24. Option A tabulation ................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 25. Option B Tabulation ................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 26. Option C Tabulation ................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 27. Demographic Questionare ......................................................................................................... 62 Figure 28. Demographic Survey Low .......................................................................................................... 63 Figure 29. Demographic Survey Medium ................................................................................................... 64 Figure 30. Demographic Survey High .......................................................................................................... 65 Figure 31. aB Rubric .................................................................................................................................... 66

35

Figure 1. Visual analysis of sites

36

Figure 2. Participants selection

37

Figure 3. Importance Survey Low

38

Figure 4. Importance Survey Medium

39

Figure 5. Importance Survey High

40

Figure 6. Happiness Survey Low

41

Figure 7. Happiness Survey Medium

42

Figure 8. Happiness Survey High

43

Figure 9. Depression Survey Low

44

Figure 10. Depression Survey Medium

45

Figure 11. Depression Survey High

46

Figure 12. Level of Importance

47

Figure 13. Level of Importance per interaction 48

Figure 14. Level of Happiness 49

Figure 15. Level of Happiness per interaction

50

Figure 16. Level of Depression 51

Figure 17. Level of Depression per interaction 52

Figure 18. Male Low Visual Analysis

53

Figure 19. Female Low Visual Analysis

54

Figure 20. Male Medium Visual Analysis

55

Figure 21. Female Medium Visual Analysis

56

Figure 22. Male High Visual Analysis

57

Figure 23. Female High Visual Analysis

58

Figure 24. Option A tabulation

59

Figure 25. Option B Tabulation

60

Figure 26. Option C Tabulation

61

Figure 27. Demographic Questionare

62

Figure 28. Demographic Survey Low

63

Figure 29. Demographic Survey Medium

64

Figure 30. Demographic Survey High

65

Figure 31. aB Rubric

66

The Built Environment and Aesthetics: Exploring the Impacts of Building Form on Behavioral Patterns

URP 6200 Planimetrics Research Camilo Lopez 2014

College of Design and Social Inquiry Florida Atlantic University School of Urban and Regional Planning

67