Download A note on Environmental stressors studied in domain of architectural psychology and more Summaries Environmental Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!
Architectural psychology: The impact of built up
environment
Around the late 1940s and 1950s, systematic research in everyday physical settings and psychological processes slowly increased with some pioneering studies of, for example, human factors in work performance (Mayo, 1933), the lighting of homes (Chapman & Thomas, 1944) and child behaviours in natural settings (Barker & Wright, 1955). So it was not until the late 1950s and early 1960s that human behaviour interactions slowly received more and more recognition as a full discipline. As most of the studies focused on how different environments influenced people’s perceptions and behaviours, they were labelled as studies in ‘architectural psychology’ to show the distinction with the more traditional forms of psychology (Canter, 1969; Pol, 2007; Winkel, Saegert, & Evans, 2009). In this early period of the field of environmental psychology, much attention was given to the built physical environment (i.e. architecture, technology and engineering) and how it affected human behaviour and well-being (Bonnes & Bonaiuto, 2002). This focus on the built environment was largely guided by the political and social context of the time. Modern architecture tried to address the post-war challenges of providing decent housing and facilities for the general public (Pol, 2006 ). Questions such as how homes, offices or hospitals could best be built for their potential users and how environmental stressors (e.g. extreme temperatures, humidity, crowding) would affect human performance and well-being were the focus of many environmental psychological studies (Craik, 1973; Wohlwill, 1970). Environmental psychology as a study to design buildings to facilitate behavioural functions was officially born
A note on Environmental stressors studied in domain
of architectural psychology
Crowding
Crowding is a psychological state that occurs when a person perceives the number of people in the environment to be exceeding one’s preference (Stokols 1972). The same density level may be experienced as more or less crowded because of individual differences (e.g. culture, personality, gender, age) or situational factors (e.g. temporal duration, activity, private versus public space; Stokols 1972). Crowding makes it difficult to regulate social interaction, limits behavioural options, and leads to invasions of personal space. Effects of crowding Laboratory studies show that crowding elevates physiological stress: the
longer people experience crowding, the greater the elevations (Evans 2006). For example, crowding elevates skin conductance, blood pressure, and stress hormones (Evans 2001). Studies have shown household crowding as an important source of chronic stress (Riva et al. 2014). Living in a crowded home is also negatively associated with multiple aspects of child well‐being, even after controlling for several dimensions of socioeconomic status (SES). There is a significant harmful effect of household crowding on academic achievement, on external behaviour problems and on physical health of children (Solari and Mare 2012). When people feel crowded they also experience psychological stress: they show negative affect, tension, anxiety, and nonverbal signs of nervousness such as fidgeting or playing with objects repetitively (Evans and Cohen 1987). Crowding is consistently associated with social withdrawal , a coping mechanism characterized by reduced eye contact, greater interpersonal distancing and more pronounced inhibition in initiating a conversation Social withdrawal in turn may hamper such protective factors for mental health as development and maintenance of socially supportive relationships. Evidence on crowding, social withdrawal and social support emphasizes an interesting characteristic of human reactions to suboptimal environmental conditions. Human beings are adaptable but they pay a price for these adaptations (McEwen 2002). For instance, when they cope with crowding by withdrawal, they inadvertently damage social support, thus reducing resources to deal with other stressors, which may eventually translate into increased risks for mental health (Evans and Cohen 2004). Gender can moderate crowding stressor effects. In general, men show stronger physiological reactions to crowding than women, such as elevated blood pressure (Evans et al. 1998b). Also women living in crowded homes are more likely to be depressed, while men report higher levels of withdrawal, and some males respond with both aggression and withdrawal (Regoeczi 2008). Hypothetically, gender differences in reactions to crowding could stem from men having larger personal space zones than women, or these differences could be due to men having fewer affiliative tendencies, and thus less tolerance for crowding, than women.
Poor Housing Quality
A study among low‐ and middle‐income school children in rural areas in the eastern United States showed that children living in poor housing conditions (i.e. substandard quality of the house, high density, and noise in the house) displayed higher levels of stress hormones, independent of household SES, age or gender (Evans and Marcynyszyn 2004). In this study, housing conditions were assessed by trained raters who walked through the residence, noise was measured with a decibel meter and crowding as people per room. Similar effects of poor housing conditions on physiological indicators of stress have been found among adolescents (Evans et al. 1998a, b) and adults (Schaeffer et al. 1988). Poor housing quality is also related to symptoms of subjective stress (Gillis 1997) and mental health problems such as symptoms of anxiety (Hiscock et al. 2003) and depression (Shenassa et al. 2007). A longitudinal study showed that poor housing quality was associated with children’s and adolescents’ development, including
negative affect (e.g. Kozlowsky et al. 1995). Workers who experience traffic congestion more than three times a week report significantly higher levels of stress than those subject to infrequent congestion (Haider et al. 2013). A study among automobile commuters showed that levels of traffic congestion were linked to physiological stress, negative affect, and impaired task motivation (Novaco et al. 1991). This study also found that after a more demanding commute, drivers had more negative social interactions with their family members at home. This is an example of a spillover effect , a type of cumulative fatigue produced by environmental stressors which occurs when conditions in one setting influence a person’s well‐being in another setting (Evans and Cohen 2004). Another example of spillover effect is workplace aggression and absenteeism as outcomes of high commuter stress (Hennessy 2008). Research on traffic‐related stress is becoming more relevant from both a psychological and a social standpoint because in most countries commuting times are increasing. The Broad sub-domains of Architectural Psychology: Residential Environmental Psychology – Residential satisfaction Home is the most important physical setting for most people. Environmental psychologists distinguish the physical structure (house, apartment) from its meaning structure (home). Individuals normally called homeless might more properly be called houseless, although if their last residence loses its meaning, they truly are homeless. Residential satisfaction depends on many determinants, including stage of life, socioeconomic status, personality and values, hopes for the future, norms for one ’ s peers, and relationships with neighbors. Of course, physical features of the residence — such as its form (Michelson, 1977 ), architectural style (Nasar, 1989 ), fl oor plan, colors, outdoor areas around the residence, as well as cultural background affect residential preferences, choices, and satisfaction. Poor - quality housing affects the socioemotional health of children and adults (Evans, Wells, Chan, & Saltzman, 2000 ; Gifford, 2007c ; Gifford & Lacombe, 2006 ). People arrange their residential interiors in fairly predictable patterns that are related to lifestyle, social class, and culture (e.g., Bonnes, Giuliani, Amoni, & Bernard, 1987 ). Adapting to new residences can be stressful, depending on whether a person has some choice in doing so, prefers to explore new settings in general (Stokols & Shumaker, 1982 ), or whether the change represents a downgrading.
In relation to the amount of time people spend in their residences, and their psychological importance, this aspect of environmental psychology is under - researched. This is partly because conducting research in residences usually is, understandably, seen as an intrusion of privacy. The Environmental Psychology of Neighborhoods and Cities A vast global movement to the city is underway. What happens once nearly everyone lives so close together? Environmental psychologists explore person – environment relations in cities, public places, the neighborhood, the community, and on the streets Residents ’ personal factors and the physical aspects of the city (stressors and amenities) are presumed to infl uence the way residents think about their cities and neighborhoods (whether they are satisfi ed or not, fearful or not, attached to them or not, mentally healthy or mentally unhealthy). The physical aspects of the city, personal factors, and these cognitions are presumed to affect residents ’ actual behavior in urban public places such as streets, parks, and stores. These behaviors may be pro - social, anti - social, or neither; they include everyday behaviors, such as how fast people walk, kids playing in parks, or where people choose to sit in public areas. They also include behavior in retail settings such as shoppers ’ reactions to store music and displays. These behaviors, in turn, are presumed to infl uence cognitions (just as cognitions infl uence behaviors) and the urban planning and design process. The design process, to complete the cycle, infl uences the physical shape of the city as zoning and other bylaws govern what sort of buildings, streets, and parks get built. The cycle then continues. Cities can be very stressful: noise, traffi c, density, and pollution usually are much greater than in rural places. We humans have only lived in such large agglomerations for a tiny fraction of the time we have been a species; it is reasonable to say that cities are unnatural. Personal safety is a very important urban problem. Some danger is
have become attached, with the attendant experiences of loss and grief (Norris - Baker & Scheidt, 1990 ). People do much on local and urban streets that seems close to nothing, perhaps because they do most of it automatically, without refl ecting. However, upon closer examination, this “ nothing ” turns out to be a fascinating mixture of thoughts and activities. We monitor our progress through the city in responsive, operational, or inferential modes (Appleyard, 1976 ). We walk at a speed that refl ects the pulse (or at least the size) of the city (Gifford, Ward, & Dahm, 1977 ). Our walks follow planned patterns even when we are unaware of our plans. We carefully avoid interaction with most people we meet on the street, but we try to maximize social order (Lofl and, 1973 ). Surprisingly, perhaps, elderly men hang out in malls more than teens (Brown, Sijpkes, & MacLean, 1986 ). We “ know ” some people in public places that we do not really know — familiar strangers (Milgram, 1977 ). The physical environment is not widely studied as a factor in retail behavior, but awareness of and research on its infl uence is growing (e.g., Ng, 2003 ). Well - known effects include location and store size. However, at the interior level, the way that shelves, aisles, displays, and odors affect the emotions and behavior of consumers is gradually becoming clear (Hawkins, Best, & Coney, 1983 ). Educational Environmental Psychology The physical features of schools and other learning settings as a whole affect student and teacher outcomes. For example, many learning experiences are affected by school size (e.g., Barker & Gump , 1964). Students in larger schools have an edge in the variety of things they can learn about. Yet, partly because time at school is limited, students in large schools do not actually participate in more activities than students in small schools. Students in large schools more often learn and enjoy as spectators; students in small schools more often learn and enjoy as participants. In most areas
of learning, students in small schools achieve more because they develop competence through direct involvement in activities. Interior school design has a variety of infl uences on students and teachers (e.g., Ahrentzen, 1981 ). Temporary or low walls increase distractibility. Acquisition, maintenance, and dynamic walls can be strategically used to match students ’ normal viewing patterns with current versus background educational information (Creekmore, 1987 ). When students learn in a given setting, that material is better recalled in the same setting — or when a vivid memory of that setting is evoked (e.g., Smith, 1979 ). Evidence strongly suggests that noise interferes with learning both while it occurs and, if the learner is subjected to noise for long periods, even after the noise is gone (Cohen & Weinstein, 1982 ). To combat noise, instructors have changed their methods — sometimes sacrifi cing a good pedagogical technique for a quiet one — and successfully employed behavior modifi cation techniques such as sound - activated electrical relays that control reinforcers such as music and extra recess time (e.g., Strang & George, 1975 ). Incandescent lighting is preferred by many, but it is more expensive than fl uorescent lighting, which has not been shown to have dramatic negative effects on the performance or health of most students. Despite the inadequate methodology in some studies, and the lack of signifi cant differences in others, it appears that light does affect some kinds of performance, such as basic cognitive and motor activities (Munson & Ferguson, 1985 ). Short exposures to the different kinds of light in many studies may have led to incorrect conclusions that light has no effects. As with noise, the important effects may be on specifi c subgroups of individuals; when studies of whole classes or schools are done, large effects on a few learners may be obscured by the absence of effects on most learners.
Many factors determine a person ’ s productivity, stress, and satisfaction at work but, for decades, psychologists have realized that the physical environment is an important infl uence on employee productivity and satisfaction. Environmental psychologists conduct research on the relations between the physical environment and (a) getting to work, (b) at work factors influencing performance, feelings, social behavior, health, and stress at work, and (c) trying to enjoy life after work (by traveling i.e after work factors). Throughout, the tempting but simplistic notion that changes in the physical setting will directly determine employee behavior must be rejected. a. Getting to work – how we reach workplace matters. Commuting experience: Most research on getting to work has been broadly concerned with encouraging people to choose less energy - intensive means of commuting as part of the general drive towards sustainability. Environmental psychologists have created demographic profi les of car and urban transit riders (e.g., Hartgen, 1974 ), devised models of commuter preference (Levin & Louviere, 1981 ), provided positive information about urban transit and evaluated existing transit systems (Stern, 1982 ), offered reduced fares (Studenmund & Connor, 1982 ), and promoted car sharing (Bonsall, Spencer, & Tang, 1983 ). Commuting often is stressful, but the majority still drive, suggesting that the description of it as an addiction (Reser, 1980 ) is not far wrong. However, the more promising approaches are being sorted out from the less promising ones, and progress must be made, because the worldwide growth in cars and driving is not sustainable, and certainly has very mixed effects on the quality of life (e.g., Gifford & Steg, 2007 ). b. At work factors that influence performance, feelings, social behavior, health, and stress at work
Noise Noise has many effects on work activities and feelings. In industrial settings, it can cause serious hearing loss. Loud noise is particularly dangerous when employees do not realize that deafness comes slowly and almost imperceptibly. Despite the common supposition that noise affects performance, research in natural settings shows (a) how complex the issue is and (b) that performance decrements depend on the task, the person, and the type of noise (e.g., Baker & Holding, 1993 ). Noise harms performance when certain combinations of employee, task, and type of noise co - occur, but not under some other circumstances. For certain tasks, noise may even arouse an employee enough to improve performance (e.g., Miller, 1974 ). Noise is a serious problem in modern open - plan offi ces. Employees fi nd sound a problem both coming and going: sound entering their workspace is annoying, and when their own words escape over partitions too easily their privacy is compromised (Hedge, 1982 ). Offi ce noise may even affect important interpersonal behavior, from mere impressions of others to important judgments regarding them (Sauser, Arauz, & Chambers, 1978 ). Some research suggests that long - term exposure to loud sounds has serious physiological effects beyond hearing loss, such as increased cardiovascular problems (Welch, 1979 ). Indoor climate: Temperature and air quality at workplace Indoor climate is measured by effective temperature, which includes humidity and air movement as well as temperature. Relatively extreme effective temperatures do not affect many work behaviors unless core body temperature is altered. The effects of temperature are also usually damped by access to heavier or lighter clothing. The amazing variety of temperature effects reported are partly the result of these measurement and clothing factors, as well as many others including degree of acclimatization,
arrangements (Ng & Gifford, 1984 ). Many open - plan arrangements reduce desirable communication and increase undesirable communication (Zalesny & Farace, 1987 ). Offi ce arrangements lead visitors to form impressions of the offi ce - holder ’ s character and status (Morrow & McElroy, 1981 ). Many organizations restrict the degree to which employees may arrange or personalize their offi ces and fail to adequately consult employees when offi ces are planned. Office design: Environmental psychologists have been involved in the design of many work settings, from basic noise and light consultations to complete offi ce designing. Better offi ce designs are not only a basic right of employees, but they also save money for organizations. A comprehensive study found that improved layout and enclosure in offi ces would lead to productivity increases of 15% for managers and professional - technical employees, and 17.5% for clerical workers (Brill, Margulis, & Konar, 1984 ). Similar studies report 10 to 50% increases with better workplace designs (Gifford, 1992 ). c. After work factors The environmental psychology of travel is a new but growing area. Travelers affect destinations and are affected by them. Anticipation, travel, and recollection of travel involve environmental perception and cognition (Iso - Ahola, 1983 ). Recreational travel is an environmental trade - off, but as society is able to provide employees with more disposable income and time, it is a trade - off many are pursuing. Destination selection, acquisition of knowledge about destination, and behavior along the road are a few areas of developing research. Some destinations bring relief from anxiety; others throw travelers into environment shock (Pearce, 1981 ). Travelers ruin some physical settings and enhance almost none ; romantic tourism is an undesirable luxury
because it degrades natural settings (Walter, 1982 ). More careful planning of destination sites might spread the impact of visitors, offer more authentic experiences, and educate travelers while offering them solace from the working world.
