Extended Abstract
Background and Objectives: Awareness stems from assessing the environment. Studies show that physical characteristics of space and individual differences affect environmental appraisal. However, movement through the environment and the effects of spatial sequences on evaluation are less considered. The level of brightness of a space after passing from a dark space or passing from a bright space has two different evaluations. Although studies in cognition and environmental sciences such as Gibson’s ecological approach to perception, Neisser’s perceptual cycle, Helson’s adaptation level theory, Paducci’s range-frequency theory, Berlyn’s studies on environmental preference, and research on context effects confirm the role of movement as a priming effect in two main forms: assimilation effect and contrast effect. Experimental studies to investigate the two effects of movement on environmental perception have been limited.
Methods: In this research, 10 animations were prepared using two simulated consecutive spaces. The second space was constant in terms of physical attributes. The characteristics of the first space, such as size, light, height, and visual permeability - the effects of which have been significantly evaluated in previous studies - were manipulated. To test the contrast effect, the intensity of variables was changed highly. Light and size were simulated at an average level to test the assimilation effect. The simulated animations -moving from the first space to the destination (at a normal walking speed of 5 km/h)- were shown to 92 participants, including 54 females and 38 males. Participants were asked to evaluate the size of the second space after passing from the first space on a scale ranging from very small (1) to very large (10). The simulated spaces were displayed on a 15.6-inch laptop screen in an environment with uniform lighting and no glare or darkness. We ran paired t-tests and repeated measures analysis of variance (rm-ANOVA) to analyze the data at a significance level of 0.05.
Findings: The results of the paired t-test and pairwise comparisons for “size of space”, at a significance level of 0.05, t = 7.34, df = 91, p <.001 and F(1, 91) = 53.97 with a large effect size (η2p =.37) showed that the main space appeared larger when the preceding space was small compared to when the preceding space was large. For another condition on “size”, t = 8.1, df = 91, p <.001 and F(1, 91) = 65.60 with a large effect size (η2p =.42), results showed that the main space appeared larger when preceding from an elongated space compared to a large space. As for “light”, t = -3.25, df = 91, p =.002 and F(1, 91) = 10.58 with a moderate effect size (η2p =.10) results showed that the main space appeared larger when the preceding space was dim compared to when the preceding space was bright. As for “height”, t = -1.95, df = 91, p =.055 and F(1, 91) = 3.79 with a small effect size (η2p =.04) results showed that the main space appeared larger when it preceded from a high space compared to a short space. The results for “visual permeability”, t = 2.96, df = 91, p =.004 and F(1, 91) = 8.78 with a moderate effect size (η2p =.11) showed that the main space appeared larger when it preceded from a small space compared to entering the main space from a small space without rotation. In another condition, t = 1.55, df = 91, p = 0.12 and F(1, 91) = 2.42, results showed that rotation had no effect on the size of the second space from an elongated space.
Conclusion: The results of this research showed that movement through the environment discriminates judgment in a specific direction. The extent and direction of deviation depend on the previous stimuli that the individual has received. In other words, in a spatial sequence, the characteristics received from previous spaces affect the evaluation of a specific attribute of the next space, so that discrepancies in type and intensity of the features of that sequence determine the degree of deviation in the individual’s judgment. This research aimed to investigate two significant effects of movement. It found out that the contrast effect prevailed over the assimilation effect. Based on this, one could say that with movement in space, a chain of spaces is experienced. Considering the purposeful movement of the individual in the environment, the environment can be clustered spatially and in specific time episodes. These clusters consist of first, middle, and climax spaces. Architects and designers can intensify or modify the main space features by manipulating the characteristics of previous and subsequent spaces under the contrast effect. Such an approach to diagramming the environment in the design process represents a new chapter in “meaning-oriented” design depending on specific temporal and spatial episodes and can be called “episodic architecture.