22 minute read
VISUAL ESSAY
from NEUROARCHITECTURE
by Lara Fowler
TO WHAT EXTENT DOES ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN INFLUENCE THE SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING OF SOCIETY
Figure 3 / Collage expressing distress of society trapped in an urban environment
(by Author)
Advertisement
INTRODUCTION
According to statistics the average human being in modern day society can spend up to 80% of their life inside buildings (Channon 2018). So, when questioning the importance of how the urban environment can affect us psychologically, it is literally life changing. With one in four people in the UK living with diagnosable mental health issues, such as depression, the importance of spaces and architecture having a positive influence on our lives is highly significant (Channon 2018). Neuroarchitecture has been explored and applied by many different architects, including Peter Zumthor. As well as this, architectural practises such as The Centre for Conscious Design, founded by Itai Palti, are focussed on addressing the urban challenges that society faces today.
The purpose of this essay is to explore the ways in which humans are psychologically affected by our built environment, and to what extent we, as architects, should consider these factors when designing. The discussion draws on some of the finer topics within the theory of neuroarchitecture; how technology impacts our sensory experience of architecture, how the circadian rhythm is impacted by design, and how we can mould architectural design features to have a positive influence on wellbeing (both psychologically and physically). This discussion relates to two architectural Case Studies designed by Peter Zumthor, which focus on the methods (lighting and acoustics) of creating atmosphere (Zumthor 2006). Through the consideration of these methods, the discussion will draw on how they contribute to the psychological effect of the urban environment.
The discussion aims to explore the extent to which the architectural profession has responded to the current research of urban wellbeing and current problems within society regarding mental health. To achieve this, current studies of neuroarchitecture and surrounding topics will be included in the discussion, aiming to clarify the importance of psychological impact of the built environment on today’s society.
1. NEUROARCHITECTURE
Architecture in the English dictionary is defined as ‘the art and practice of designing and making buildings’ (McIntosh n.d.), whereas in the American dictionary the term is defined as ‘the art and science of designing and making buildings’, adding another dimension to the meaning. The term neuroarchitecture however, cannot be found within the most recognised dictionaries, this suggests and confirms that it is a relatively new term and it has only been explored recently. Despite this there are many written pieces which express its existence. Some studies have even explored the term to the extent of dividing neuroarchitecture into different categories. Melissa Marsh writes that there are three categories; ‘Neuroscience of the design process’, ‘Neuroscience of the experience of architecture’ and ‘Neuromorphic architecture’ (Marsh 2015). In contrast to this, in Peter Zumthor’s book ‘Atmospheres’ we are introduced to nine chapters outlining nine factors which contribute to the neuroarchitecture of a building.
Although there have been varying approaches to the topic of neuroarchitecture, the importance of its consideration within our built environment is highly regarded. This has been taken to the extent of scientific research being carried out in order to prove neuroarchitecture’s existence. Researcher Oshin Vartanian has found through research that our multiple sensory networks can be engaged by our built environment. For example, when experiencing architecture, ones motor responses are triggered to either avoid or approach a structure. This partially demonstrates how we are psychologically affected by our built environment (Vartanian et al., 2015).
One of the factors which determines these responses are the previous experiences of each individual person. A person’s experience of architecture largely relies on their past experiences and memories, which could pose certain dilemmas when considering the designing of architecture. How could someone design a structure for someone else who possesses different experiences? As an example of this, a young architect given the task of designing a home for an elderly person may have trouble understanding the different values and needs of the elderly person (Robinson, Pallasmaa 2015). This demonstrates the importance of client to architect relationships, as an understanding of who the space is accommodating is vital to meet the psychological needs of the person(s).
Figure 4 / Image expressing a designers mind trapped by urbanism
(by Author)
1.1 Neuromorphic Architecture
Figure 5 / Iconic Buildings with Silhouettes of People
(Paleari 2014)
Marsh’s article ‘The Future of Neuro-Architecture Has Arrived’ introduces a new term, ‘neuromorphic architecture’ (Marsh 2015). Neuromorphic architecture refers to the question of ‘what if a building had a brain’, or more specifically, a nervous system (Robinson, Pallasmaa 2015).
Within today’s society humans are becoming increasingly comfortable with relying on technology. It could be argued that we are encouraged to rely on it due to the increasing demand for technological devices when going about everyday tasks. There are no signs of this demand decreasing, therefore it is likely that there will be an increase of technology within the urban environment. A current example of this is how modern technology has reinvented residential electronics, such as lighting and temperature systems, to be controlled through apps on our phones. Through progressions like this, in the future our surroundings may be programmed to respond to our actions to assist us through technology (Robinson, Pallasmaa 2015). Consider a home designed for the elderly which is programmed to respond to its inhabitants. A step could transform itself into a ramp in response to sensing the movement of a wheelchair approaching, or a chair could gently tilt forward in response to the shifting weight of a person struggling to stand up. The architecture would adapt to provide a ‘level of human support’, aiding nurses and other employees who would usually be providing support around the clock (Robinson, Pallasmaa 2015). There are many positive aspects of this concept, however, the demand for technology could end up having a negative effect on the mental wellbeing of society. Using the elderly as an example in this case, it would reduce the amount of human contact they would receive daily. This would cause a decline in mental health among the elderly due to the lack of human interaction, which is an already existing problem.
Although an ingenious concept, neuromorphic architecture is a somewhat terrifying possibility of the future, as we become increasingly separated from the natural world. The increasing rate of technology blocks society off from other elements which have a beneficial impact on our mental health, such as our sensory knowledge and social interactions. This is where the true importance of neuroarchitecture within design is then in need of being considered, to ensure societies mental health does not decline in correlation with the rise of technology in the built environment. The impact of technology will be further explored later in the discussion.
2. THE SENSES
Figure 6 / The five human Senses
(Microvector 2019)
Oshin Vartanian explains that our multiple sensory networks (vestibular, somatosensory, auditory, olfactory, and visual systems) can be engaged through the architecture around us (Vartanian et al., 2015). However, in modern design it is not uncommon that there is primarily only one sense that is being considered by architects, namely our visual sense.
Within architectural practices today it is a concern that the consideration and success of a design is primarily based on how aesthetically pleasing the design is. Although it is unquestionable that this has a positive effect on society, it is sometimes the case that the functionality and attention to detail with regards to enhancing life can be somewhat forgotten. Suggesting that it could be more important to appeal to us visually rather than address our individual mental wellbeing and the benefit to society as a whole. The question of how society is going to be psychologically affected by a building is rarely considered, especially when discussing the narrower topic of how mental wellbeing is affected. One of the contributing factors towards this could be that architects and designers are sometimes skipped in the process of construction today when possible, as they can be simply viewed as an added expense to the construction process. Despite the valuable knowledge and understanding of design which they contribute, functionality and appearance is usually placed at the forefront in achieving a successful piece of architecture (Goldhagen 2017).
Unfortunately for society this could mean the designing of an office, for example, is very efficient at fitting countless employees within a building and appearing aesthetically pleasing, however the spatial design and lighting could cause for a somewhat depressing workspace. If the design is not considered well enough, the wellbeing of these employees could suffer due to lack of knowledge in the design process. This could result in companies spending more money in the future, as they end up having their offices redesigned at a later stage due to being criticised for the lack of consideration of the psychological impact on employees. It has been shown that a well designed work environment, where all aspects of the design have been considered, results in happier employees which then in turn has a direct affect on the company’s success.
2.1 Architectural Imagery
With the progression of technology and the boom of social media sites such as Instagram and Facebook, most people are only able to experience modern architecture through online imagery. Although this creates countless opportunities for people to be exposed to what they would normally be unable to see, it also creates a culture of laziness among others due to the easy visual access that is available online. Society is somewhat left to try and create their own sensory experience of structures, fully relying on individual memories and the visual impression of images with which they are presented. This can have a negative effect on the mental wellbeing of society as it encourages people to become shut off from the physical world.
Maurice Merleau-Ponty explores the idea that only speaking to one of the senses can create the existence of a ‘Phantom’ within a person’s mental being (Merleau-Ponty 2012). Something will only approach full existence when it can communicate with at least two of the human senses. For example, if one could get a real sense of the smell or acoustics which are present within the architectural imagery engaging multiple senses thus adding multiple dimensions to a visual experience. It could be argued that although we are visually exposed to millions of images in our lifetimes, we are not experiencing them fully and therefore they simply become small memories. These memories of imagery can then be easily distorted depending on a person’s past experiences; altering the memory to suit how the individual wanted to experience the image with their own senses. Society cannot possibly protect themselves from the inevitable erosion of time, unless someone can physically experience the architecture repeatedly to remind their senses of what has been experienced (Certeau 2013, p.xxi). This is due to their individual interpretation of the structure based on unique memories and perceptions from life experiences.
Although technology and social media have brought many opportunities for spreading the appreciation of architecture, the psychological appreciation of architecture is being somewhat lost through a burgeoning spread of architectural imagery. Through society vastly experiencing modern architecture online, it is more difficult for architects to create stand out designs which would be viewed as worth a visit. This would contribute to a lack of need for the consideration of neuroarchitecture due to architecture gaining more recognition through appearance.
Figure 7 / Peter Zumthor’s studio’s proposed renderings for LACMA’s David Geffen Galleries
(Poundstone 2019)
- Hélène Binet (Binet 2015)
2.2 Sensory Knowledge
Figure 8 / Expression of modern society trapped in an urban environment
(by Author)
Within the book The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the senses, Pallasmaa states that to create ‘life enhancing’ architecture, one would have to design a structure to have a positive effect on all the senses of a visitor simultaneously (Pallasmaa 2012). This furthers the views of Merleau-Ponty and suggests that due to our lack of full experiential architecture fuelled by the rise of technology, we are no longer enhancing our knowledge and full sensory experiences. It has become too easy to flick through images without feeling the need to be physically involved with architecture. Perhaps this is what leads to the lack of consideration of the sensory experience by architects, as to cater to the exposure from social media today, the most influential factor is to be visually impressive.
Stated by Michel De Certeau ‘our society is characterized by a cancerous growth of vision, measuring everything by its ability to show or be shown and transmuting communication into a visual journey’ (Certeau 2013, p.xxi). Taking this into consideration it is not surprising that the main focus of design today lies within the visual aspect, as this is the only way that it could reach a wider market over social media, especially as the most viral imagery is that which shocks and surprises it’s viewers. Society is being considerably deprived of sensory knowledge due to the effortless access to superficial imagery of modern day architecture (Pallasmaa 2012, p.25). Our lack of wealth of sensory experiences can lead to a negative effect on our physical and mental wellbeing due to the way in which humans were designed to be an active species. In extreme cases, an attachment to technology can lead to depression and anxiety.
2.3 Isolation from Nature
In addition to our lack of sensory knowledge, due to the rapid growth of technology today, humans are becoming increasingly isolated from the natural world (Schweitzer et al. 2018) which is also in some aspect, encouraged by our built environment. With a growing population in urban environments, humans are being increasingly shut off from the natural world, despite being physically programmed to survive in the natural environment. Through research it has been found that when humans talk about their experiences with the natural world, there is a positive emotional connection (Schweitzer et al. 2018). This aids the growth of the theory of biophilia, which is becoming increasingly popular within modern architecture due to the positive outcomes it has on humans. Biophilic design, is designing in such a way that it draws on the inherent human connection with nature, aiming to benefit the psychological health of its users.
The boom of agriculture, technology, engineering, industrial revolution and modern architecture has only rapidly progressed in the last five thousand years of human history. Prior to these stages in evolution, human lives were surrounded by nature which was relied upon for daily survival. Today a lot of our logical skills, critical thinking and practical abilities, as well as the way in which we design can be related to the skills with which we evolved and used to survive in the early stages of evolution (Kellert et al. 2008). Through the growing awareness of this connection, biophilic design is increasing in popularity and being seen more frequently in modern architecture. Due to the large positive impact that nature has on human’s mental wellbeing, biophilic design is increasingly seen within office refurbishment, residential areas (figure 9), educational centres and within the design of the hospitality sector (figure 12). In addition to this it is gradually being considered more within healing spaces. Another contributing factor to the growth of biophilic design is the rise in awareness for the environment amongst younger generations. With climate activists helping to educate the public of the threats that face our natural world today, sustainable design is highly regarded in order to benefit the wellbeing of society.
Documents such as the Biophilic Design Guidebook help to inform designers how best to achieve beneficial architecture to both the environment and society (Anon 2018). With the continuing growth of biophilic design in the future it is hopeful that society will continue to benefit from its positive influence on the mental and physical wellbeing of society.
Figure 9 / Landmak architecture house residential architecture Vietnam
(Astbury 2020)
3. LIGHT AND ACOUSTICS
Peter Zumthor, is an award-winning architect who is famous for designing minimalist structures suchas the Thermal Baths, Switzerland (figure 11 and 12). Zumthor is an example of an architect that informs us of why there is such an importance in the atmospheres of a structural design, and thus how we are psychologically affected by architecture. Through analysing Peter Zumthor’s award winning architecture we can observe the ways in which architects can manipulate natural light, as well as tactically use artificial light, to create certain psychological effects/emotions on society. As humans we are naturally attracted by light whether artificial or natural, therefore it plays a very significant part in neuroarcitecture. There have been several findings of the psychological effect that lighting has on people. An example of research is from Dr. John Flynn in which he considered how spaces give people varying feelings/ emotions (Flynn et al., 1979). Figure 10 displays the findings of Flynn’s research:
Figure 10 / Table demonstrating results of research carried out by Dr John E. Flynn
(Flynn et al. 1979)
Flynn’s research indicates that through the manipulation of lighting, humans form subjective impressions and varying emotions depending on the intensity and distribution of light within a room. Through the results of this research, architects could benefit by making lighting choices based on what psychological feeling they want to convey to users rather than only considering aesthetic factors.
Figure 11 / Peter Zumthor’s Therme Vals Spa view of outdoor pool
(Frearson 2016)
Figure 12 / Peter Zumthor’s Therme Vals Spa interior
(Frearson 2016)
3.1 Light
Figure 13 / Diagram demonstrating the Circadian Rhythm
(Malczan 2019)
Light is one of the main contributors in creating atmospheres within space. As well as this it has been found through research that natural light has a large impact on our mental wellbeing as humans. This could be a result of humans originally having to rely on natural light to survive, gaining an indication of time from day to night. A lack of exposure to natural light during the day also has a negative impact on our circadian rhythms (Figure 13).
The circadian rhythm regulates our body clock throughout the day, relying on daylight to indicate to our bodies times of sleepiness and feeling awake (Channon 2018). In addition to this our circadian clock turns genes on and off around our bodies controlling our internal organs and ensuring our bodies work in routine (PANDA 2020). This is even more important now due to creation of artificial light, as our bodies are constantly adjusting to the confusion of blue light we are frequently exposed to.
Recently researchers have found a way to manipulate blue light to help people to focus more instead of creating tiredness. This has been put into testing with astronauts and so far, has proved successful (PANDA 2020). Through these findings, work spaces may thrive in the future and improve the mental wellbeing of society rather than aiding the decline of mental health.
3.2 Lighting in Working Environments
Figure 14 / Staples SAD Light Station experiment
(Agarwal 2018)
Unfortunately, today only some people are lucky to be exposed to a healthy amount of natural light due to modern day living/ working environments. It has been explored mainly within workspaces due to these being the primary non-residential spaces used by most of the population daily. Research has shown that staff based within office spaces which don’t provide any natural light, sleep for an average of 46 minutes less than those who work in offices which do provide natural daylight (Channon 2018). However, in some country’s that lack sunlight hours during the winter months, employees may only be exposed to light when in the office, thus missing out on natural light. This causes psychological issues for some, including SAD (Seasonal affective Disorder), anxiety, stress and fatigue (Agarwal 2018). This has been demonstrated through a research project which was carried out through surveys by Arlington Research for the UK company Staples in 2018 (Figure 14).
The key findings of this research based on lighting within offices revealed that 81% of employees based in the EU expressed that their current office spaces impacted their mental health. As well as this, one in five employees described their workspace as ‘depressing’. Other research states that just 13 minutes of natural daylight has significant antidepressant benefits (Anon 2018), which proves the importance of neuroscience in the design of lighting.
3.3 Lighting in Healing Spaces
Another example to consider is the way in which we use lighting within our healing spaces such as hospitals. These are spaces which usually trigger avoidance, not only because we psychologically link them with poor health and disease, but also because many of them are not aesthetically the most welcoming of spaces. This is partially due to this psychological link, but also due to the primary factors of design being function and sanitation rather than comfort. As you walk into a hospital you are usually greeted with an uncomfortable waiting room which is filled with bright white light (Figure 15). This is often installed in healing spaces as white conveys the impression of hygiene and cleanliness. However, being the first impression on visitors, it can sometimes cause discomfort to patients and result in having a negative effect on the patient’s psychological experience.
Extra consideration needs to be taken when designing healing spaces due to the primary group of people its functioning for. Considering the impact lighting can have on a person’s health, it is a vital part of the design process, especially as patients may need to stay for an extended period. However, due to the high demand of these spaces, it is usually very difficult to provide all patients and visitors with the benefits of natural light. This could be having a negative effect on patients who aren’t near windows, as this could contribute to a disruption of their circadian rhythms causing discomfort. Moreover, in shared hospital rooms nurses will need to attend to patients during the night, turning on artificial lights which could cause disruption to patients within the same room. This causes an impairing effect on the restoration and healing process of these patients (Robinson, Pallasmaa 2015).
In contrast to public hospitals, in a different type of healing space (counselling and mental health), design can be more beneficial to visitors when lighting is dimmed and of softer tones. This induces a relaxed and more pleasant feel for visitors. This has been proven through psychological research, which also found that having more dimmed lighting within counselling spaces gave a more favourable impression of the interviewer, and self-disclosure to its visitors (Miwa & Hanyu, 2006). Considering the benefits found through this research it would be more beneficial to have zones of dimmed lighting throughout hospitals varying on the needs of the patients within the spaces. This could create a more positive relationship between societies psychological link with hospitals.
Figure 15 / Typical NHS waiting room in the UK
(Matthews-King 2019)
3.4 Acoustics: With the example of Healing Spaces
- Maurice Merleau-Ponty (Merleau-Ponty 2012)
Zumthor compares the acoustics of a space to ‘large instruments’, referring to the way in which materiality and shape within an interior can manipulate how noise is being transmitted throughout (Zumthor 2006). When observing the noises of everyday life that surround us on a constant basis, it becomes clear that it is near to impossible to ever reach a state of complete silence. Maurice Merleau-Ponty uses a metaphor to describe the stream of constant noise around us by saying ‘I pick up a thread that I had dropped, but that was not broken’. This suggests that even when we stop consciously listening to our surroundings, we are still aware of them, contributing to the theory that we rarely experience true silence in our lifetimes (Merleau-Ponty 2012). When the acoustics of an environment become intrusive, it can begin to have negative effects on mental wellbeing, causing anxiety (Channon 2018).
Referring to the research of healing spaces, it has been found to affect the rate of revisiting patients. Patients who had been exposed to a good acoustic environment (quiet, no echoing) gave a more positive review of their experience with the working staff in the environment. In contrast to this, when patients were exposed to an uncomfortable negative acoustic experience (loud, sound bouncing), they were found to have a higher rate of re-hospitalisation (Andrade et al. 2016). This research shows the extent to which the acoustics within architectural design can affect the psychological wellbeing of society, supporting the importance of neuroarchitecture.
CONCLUSION
The presented study was undertaken to determine the extent to which the architectural design has an impact on the social and psychological wellbeing of modern-day society. One of the more significant findings to emerge from this study is that the design of artificial lighting within a space can cause disruption to the natural circadian rhythm. This causes a negative effect on the overall health of society, both mentally and physically. The findings of this research provide insights for how the built environment not only can influence mental wellbeing but also physical wellbeing. A further study could assess the extent to which architectural design can affect physical wellbeing more specifically. This would be vital to enhance our knowledge of neuroarchitecture from a different dimension.
The second major finding of this paper was the extent to which technology has a negative effect on the way in which we experience architecture today. Research suggests that due to the booming interest in social media and easy access to architectural imagery, societies sensory knowledge is suffering due to the lack of desire to physically experience architecture. The destructive nature that technology can cause to human interaction with modern architecture is alarming and causes need for concern in how architects can encourage the public to physically engage with their designs. With technology encouraging less human interaction in society, problems such as loneliness, depression and anxiety will become somewhat of a norm. Although it is not directly based on architectural design, there is a clear opportunity for architects to take neuroarchitecture into consideration and put efforts into engaging society rather than encouraging the antisocial culture of technology.
Despite the limitations of psychological research, the study certainly adds to our understanding of the significance of neuroarchitecture through the collaboration of existing studies. Although the current study is based upon a small sample of sources, the findings suggest that modern architecture is beginning to take a positive turn in relation to the mental wellbeing of its users. This is being aided by the growing awareness of environmental issues as well as mental health issues, and the encouragement for these topics to be more openly outspoken by the public.
Figure 16 / Impact of architecture on human phsychology
(Vats 2017)
