The basis of the present study is to evaluate the process of meaningful perception of place, and to analyze the effectiveness of each factor influencing this process. It will also investigate the effects of various perceptional dimensions (including cognitive, affective, interpretative and evaluative dimensions) on the manner of perceiving different levels of place meaning. Arg Street in Mashhad city was selected as the study area and both the qualitative and quantitative methods were adopted. Techniques of semi-structured interview, and coding and hermeneutic methods were used to analyze the relation among different levels of place meaning and the effective factors and dimensions of environmental perception. Findings demonstrate that certain perceptional dimensions may have more effect on perception of particular levels of place meaning. The results indicate that ‘cognitive dimension’ is the most influential dimension in perception of the primitive level of place meaning, while ‘affective’, ‘interpretative’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions play the most significant role in perception of the extreme levels of place meaning. Moreover, this research suggests a need for further studies exploring practical methods in our contemporary urban design projects, which can involve the perception of people with the most effective dimensions.
According to theoretical approaches, the concept of place can be considered the center of human experiences based on the types of perception. These human perceptions are influenced by different factors such as personal or social imaginations, expectations, and behaviors. In addition, the effects of various perceptional dimensions would lead to perceiving particular levels of place meaning. The emphasis of this study is on the effectiveness of different perceptional factors and dimensions on the process of meaningful perception. This study will analyze the interrelations among different concepts such as place, meanings of place, and environmental perception. It focuses on the following research questions:
How do the perceptional factors and dimensions affect the process of perception?
What perceptional factors and dimensions have the largest effect on the process of meaningful perception?
The theoretical framework of this research will be investigated on Arg Street of Mashhad city, Iran. The purpose of selecting the Arg Street as the study area is because of its historical background. This area plays a significant role in creating urban identity for Mashhad city and forming the image of city and collective memories of citizens. According to the methodology of this research which is based on the both qualitative and quantitative research, semi-structured interviews will be used to explore the experiences of participants and the manner through which they perceive the meanings of place. On the basis of this methodology, the participants’ quotes will be interpreted by coding and hermeneutic techniques in order to extract the meanings which are behind them. Furthermore, all relations among different levels of place meaning, factors, and dimensions of environmental perceptions will be analyzed.
Literature Review
Defining the Concept of Place
The main conceptualization of place as a particular location that has acquired a set of meanings and attachments began in the 1970s. It was the works of Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) that proved to be particularly influential on the work of humanistic geographers who developed the notion of place in the 1970s. Heidegger (1993) believes that human existence is existence in the world. This idea of being in the world was developed in his notion of dwelling and describes the way we exist in the world and make it meaningful. Since then, different theoretical approaches associate the concept of place with human nature and existence, and the manner of this existence is very crucial in each of these approaches.
Phenomenologists such as Norberg Schulz emphasize the subject of ‘human being’s existence’ in explaining the concept of place. In Schulz’s (1975) approach, place is beyond an abstract location; it is composed of real things, and its components are materials, substances, patterns and colors. The collection of these elements defines an environmental character, which can be considered ‘the nature of place’. He believes that human beings experience the meaningful occurrences in place. Moreover, Relph (1976) introduces places as the most important focus for human being’s experiences. He argues that the main meaning of place, or, in other words, the nature of place has not originated from its ordinary environments, activities or communities. Although, all of these components are common and even essential aspects of place, the nature of places is based on the type of knowledge of place and perception which defines place.
Relying on a critical approach, Massey (1991, 1994, 2004) explains the uniqueness of place with a range of features and attributes. She defines four attributes relating to place as follows:
1)
Place as process which is absolutely not static because it is formed out of social interrelations that are dynamic.
2)
Place as defined by the outside which emphasizes that opposition of insideness and outsideness must not be considered in defining a place. This attribute expresses that place includes relations which stretch beyond and one must consider the outside as part of the inside. Therefore, the particularity of place is through the interconnection to that ‘beyond’.
3)
Place as site of multiple identities and histories which expresses that the identities of place are unfixed and multiple because places are full of contrast and internal oppositions among the past, present and future events.
4)
A uniqueness of place defined by its interactions which explains that the uniqueness of place is not because of its history, and that in fact, it is because of the attributes such as globalization, economies, cultures, relationships and social communications, which continuously regenerated.
Massey emphasizes multiplicity, diversity, and also dynamic social relations in place, which can connect the local aspects of place to the global ones (Massey, 1991, 1994, 2004). Moreover, there are other theories which have emphasized the social aspects of place (Gieryn, 2000; Halfacree, 2006; Collinge and Gibney, 2010), internal conflicts, multiplicity, diversity in relation with the concept of place and which have considered the place not as an introverted area with boundaries but as an area that can be defined by the outside (Collinge and Gibney, 2010).
Analyzing the concept of place from the positivistic approach also includes considering the nature of place. This indicates that the difference among the public evaluations of places cannot only be attributed to the difference in places, but also to the difference among people. We can conclude that public evaluation emphasizes the people’s ‘conceptual systems’ (Canter, 1977, pp. 105–113). In this approach, place is not independent of human beings; it is a constructed part of a natural space that results from interrelations among three factors: human behaviors, conceptions and physical parameters (Canter, 1977); therefore, place signifies different human conceptual structures and indicates that people can reorganize a special place in different manners by altering their concentration upon each of these mentioned factors. In this regard, Canter (1977) introduces a three-component model that consists of ‘physical attributes’, ‘activities’ and ‘conceptions’.
Classification of Place Meaning
The idea of meaning has been central to notions of place since the 1970s. This concept has derived from a mentality that produces a stimulus in the observer when he or she compares that mentality with his or her own experiences (Rapoport, 1990). Perception of place meanings establishes a mutual relation between people and place, or, in the other words, between mankind and the world’s meaning. In fact, people are not able to understand the meanings without the assistance of the world they live in. They have significant role in attributing meanings and values to place (Brown and Brabyn, 2012, p. 84) through their social and cultural backgrounds and also through their experiences in the world (Shamai and Ilatov, 2004).
In the phenomenological approach, Norberg Schulz (1988) presents a clear image that shows human identity is dependent on having meaningful places. Also based on Relph’s (1976) theory, places are the natural focus of meanings.
On the other hand, critics express social preferences for creating meanings to form active relations between human beings and the environment (Dovey, 1999). In this regard, Dovey (1999) argues that all the meanings are formed based on social relationships and it is also possible for certain meanings to be affected by other subjects like economic and commercial factors, power, and policy. The importance of social-dynamic relations in forming place meanings is also emphasized by several other theorists (for example, Massey, 1994; Fried, 2000; Moser et al, 2002; Uzzell et al, 2002; Pretty et al, 2003; Lewicka, 2005, 2010) which believe that all the efforts made to protect the identity of place are in line with protecting the meanings of social relationships.
The positivistic approach is based on identifying the effective components and factors in the process of perceiving place meanings. This approach mainly offers multi-dimensional models. Among these models, we can exemplify the ones that are based on experiential researches offered by Sixsmith and Gustafson. The model offered by Sixsmith (1986) is based on three components, namely personal, social and physical, and the one offered by Gustafson (2001) is based on three components including self, others and environment. These models demonstrate that interactions between related components affect the creation of place meanings.
Furthermore, different classifications are offered for levels and types of place meaning. One of them is proposed by Gibson (1950, 1966) and has six levels of meaning. In his opinion, levels of meaning consist of ‘ primitive concrete meaning’ (indicating obvious physical features), ‘use-meaning’ (related to satisfaction of needs), ‘meaning of instruments, devices, constructions and machines’, ‘ values or emotional meaning’, ‘ meaning exemplified in signs’ and ‘ symbolic meaning’. There is another classification for environmental meanings, featuring ‘denotative’ and ‘connotative’ levels. Through offering such a classification, Eco (1968) has considered denotative meaning as the major meaning of an object, symbol or construction, while he has viewed the connotative meaning as the secondary function with a symbolic nature beyond the denotative one. He has argued that the connotative meaning is an implication of abstract features or traits that could be associated and transferred via a denotative meaning.
Comparative analysis of these various classifications indicates that some levels and concepts are corresponding in different theories and all the mentioned classifications can be considered in two general levels, namely ‘denotative’ and ‘connotative’.
Table 1 indicates various classifications of place meaning into these two types of meanings.
Table 1 Classification of levels and types of place meanings
Thus, the fact that meaning is inside the object or place or attributed to place by people depends very much on different levels of meanings. One can consider meaning at primitive levels as being more dependent on the phenomenon than culture or values, while at extreme levels, meanings have mostly close relations with people and the ways of their interpretations.
The mentioned theories about place and meanings indicate the significant role of perception. This perception can be mentioned as ‘meaningful perception’ as it is based on the range of experiences that creates meaning in people’s minds. The meaningful perception of place offers people the opportunity for being affected by different perceptional dimensions and perceiving various levels of place meanings.
One of the main phenomenological approaches to the concept of perception is offered by Merleau-Ponty (1998). He argues that sensory and bodily experiences and perceptions have both inside and outside aspects in the human mind and there is a mutual relation between a human being and his environment. According to his approach, objects are identifiable by their sensible attributes. Thereupon, sensory and bodily experiences are the initial steps of human experience in the world, and human body is a threshold for entering the world. Merleau-Ponty (1998) denominates human body as a ‘Lived Body’ and believes that the world and human consciousness are interrelated. This makes it impossible for human beings to realize the meaning of subjects without understanding the world they live in; therefore, perception is a general structure that leads to understanding the world. Figure 1 indicates the circular structure of human being’s experience and perception in the world based on the Merleau-Ponty’s approach.
Figure 1
The circular structure of human being’s experience and perception in the world based on the Merleau-Ponty’s approach.
However, the subject of perception from a critical approach is discovering the existing meanings and trying to identify whether the meaning which is understood by a human being exists in place or in the observer’s mind. It considers the differences among messages that are sent by designers and planners, and the ones received by people. A gap can be identified between the meanings understood by designers and people (Knox-pinch, 2000).
One of the main theories about place perception demonstrates the existence of different dimensions of environmental perceptions. It is offered by Ittelson (1978) and consists of four dimensions including cognitive, affective, interpretative and evaluative dimension. Table 2 indicates these dimensions.
Table 2 Dimensions of environmental perception according to Ittelson’s theory
On the other hand, Appleyard (1976) offers three perceptional modes which consist of responsive, operational and inferential modes. Table 3 shows his classification on perceptional modes.
Table 3 Human perceptional modes according to Appleyard’s theory
According to the analysis of the two mentioned theories, the similarities and correspondence between the attributes of proposed dimensions and modes can be found out. These similarities and correspondence are indicated in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Analyzing the similarities and correspondence between Appleyard and Ittelson’s theory.
Based to the abovementioned figure, inferential mode corresponds with three dimensions including, interpretative, evaluative and cognitive dimensions (because of the similarities, in some of their attributes such as environmental recognition, perceiving and evaluating the environmental meanings). The responsive mode is in accordance with the affective dimension (because of including the emotional relations between human beings and environment). Also, the responsive mode is consistent with the cognitive dimension (based on organizing the environmental information). However, operational mode is related to the cognitive dimension due to its association with human activities and organizing the environmental information.
Similarities between these dimensions and modes indicate the special role of affective relation between human beings and environment as well as the importance of organizing the environmental information and interpreting its meanings in the process of perception.
Gifford (1997) has offered a classification of the effective factors in the environmental perceptions, which includes ‘personal’, ‘social’ and ‘physical’ factors. Personal factors (in the form of personal attributes like education, gender, culture and personal experience), social factors (in the form of social contexts) and physical factors (as basis for environmental perception) can be effective in human environmental perception.
According to the attributes and characteristics of these factors, they would be in correspondence with the perceptional dimensions and modes offered by Ittelson and Appleyard. Personal factor includes some attributes such as education, gender, culture and personal experience, which connects this factor to all of the perceptional dimensions. Physical factor is associated with the cognitive dimension based on organization of information about physical attributes, and social factor is related to evaluative and interpretative dimensions (because of the effects of social concepts upon the ways of evaluations and interpretations of environment by human beings). The results of analysis in Figure 3 shows that inferential mode, which is in correspondence with all the effective factors, plays an important role in creating meaningful perception of place.
Figure 3
Analyzing the effective factors in environmental perception and their relations with perceptional dimensions and modes offered by Appleyard and Ittelson.
The considered urban place in this article is Arg Street located in downtown Mashhad, Iran. The main reason for considering this street as the study area of this research is that it is one of the main areas with historical background that creates urban identity for Mashhad city. At the beginning of this century, the old castle of Mashhad city was located in this area. Then, during the first quarter of the current century this area faced great changes. The urban texture was formed around the old castle, and the Arg Street was constructed in front of the castle. After a few years, the old castle was replaced by a building that was used as the city bank. Gradually, many other buildings were built along this street and created a city center consisting of various urban activities and functions. This street was known as one of the liveliest urban spaces in the city. Today, all these buildings are old and represent the past architectural patterns. Indeed, because of this historical background, this area plays a significant role in creating the image of city and collective memories of citizens. However, further studies can be done in other places such as the both historical areas located in central district of Mashhad city, and new developed districts of the city in order to investigate different manners of citizens’ perceptions and experiences.
The location of study area in Mashhad city and the most significant Buildings and places on this street are indicated in Figures 4 and 5.
Location of images in Figure 5 can be distinguished by the numbers mentioned under every images. These numbers are based on the related legend.
Participant’s selection
For this study, three groups of participants, including residents, tradesfolk and passersby were considered to be interviewed. These groups of participants were selected from a wide age range and of both genders. They had different levels of education, housing status, working hours and frequency of presence in Arg Street. The main purpose for considering different groups of participants was to analyze diverse manners of perceptions among participants. There was a total sum of 90 participants who were classified into three mentioned groups with 30 participants contributing to each of them. (Table 4)
Table 4 Demographic descriptors of selected participants
The methodology of this study was based on the both qualitative and quantitative research, using semi-structured interviews in which all relations among different levels of place meaning, factors, and dimensions of environmental perceptions were taken into consideration. During the process of data collection, methodologies of several contemporary studies on this field of investigation (for example,Lynch, 1960; Gustafson, 2001; Manzo, 2005; Dovey et al, 2005; Davison, 2008; Dovey, 2009; Morgan, 2010), were used in order to analyze the images and perceptions of participants. These related studies are based on the use of qualitative methods in order to deeply explore the spectrum of place meanings or characters that participants assign to places, as well as experiences through which these meanings are created. The semi-structured interviews were used in these studies to ask the participants to describe memorable places, explain what these places mean to them and how they characterize the mentioned places. However, in this study, there was an attempt not to repeat the negligence and omissions that occurred in previous related researches. Therefore, the actual participants’ responses, dynamic nature of perception, considering the meanings of place along with the concept of identity, and considering the diverse mental images and perceptions, were taken into account in the methodology of this research.
According to the research methodology, participants were asked to mention the first and most significant places on the Arg street that came to their minds, describe the distinctive elements of mentioned places, and express main reasons for remembering them. Participants were also asked to describe their experiences, emotions, and evaluations about this street. On the basis of the theoretical framework of this study, there were several analytical criteria to test the main concepts of the study among the participants. The following criteria were considered for measuring and analyzing the results:
Different levels of place meaning (generally classified into four levels including primitive concrete meaning, use-meaning, values or emotional meaning and symbolic meaning)
Effective factors in the environmental perception (physical, personal, and socio-cultural factors)
Dimensions of environmental perception (cognitive, affective, interpretative and evaluative dimensions).
In order to have more proper interviews, questions were divided into several subdivisions (levels of place meaning, effective factors in the environmental perception, and perceptional dimensions) and each of them tested one of the main concepts of the study among the participants. The questions of interviews investigated the experiences of participants and the manner through which they perceive the meanings of place. The classified questions were as follows: (Table 5)
Questions of interview that were related general image of this street in participants’ minds: 1, 2, 9
Particular questions of interview that were related to place meaning: 3, 10, 11, 13
Particular questions of interview that were related to factors of environmental perception: 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14.
Particular questions of interview that were related to dimensions of environmental: 4, 5, 6, 7.
Table 5 Sample questions from the semi-structured interview instrument
The collected data from the quotes of participants were classified using the ‘coding’ technique typical of a grounded theory approach (Strauss and Corbin, 1990), and interpreted by the technique of hermeneutic. There are several related studies, which used the technique of interpreting the quotes of the respondents in order to explore the meanings which are behind the participants’ quotes (for example, Gustafson, 2001; Manzo, 2005; Gunderson and Watson, 2007; Davison, 2008; Dovey, 2009; Morgan, 2010).
The mentioned codes in this methodology were the three analytical criteria (i. Levels of place meaning, ii. Effective factors in environmental perception, and iii. Perceptional dimensions). The aim of this research in using the coding and hermeneutic method was to extract these three criteria and meanings which were behind the participants’ quotes as well as becoming able to analyze them. This methodology provided an opportunity to convert qualitative data to quantitative ones and prepare them for statistical analysis.
The first step was to interview participants. Each interview was tape-recorded with the permission of the participants. Tables were then created that organized the data question by question across all 90 participants, with responses from each of them in a separate table. These tables facilitated the comparison of data across participants. In this step, participants’ quotes were interpreted by hermeneutic method in order to extract the terms or phrases that represent the perceived meanings and effective perceptional factors and dimensions. These extracted terms/phrases were specified by numbers and the related analysis on each of them can also be tracked by the same specific numbers in mentioned tables. The analysis tried to explore analytical codes that could be interpreted and extracted from the specified terms or phrases. The second part of the tables indicates the process of interpreting participants’ quotes. Here is an example of mentioned analysis.
Interpreting a quote such as
I like their (1) architectural patterns and they remind me of their (2) valuable historical backgrounds
led to extracting two particular phrases ‘architectural patterns’ and ‘valuable historical backgrounds’. The former phrase focused on the physical attributes and showed some kinds of information organization about these attributes in the participant’s mind. The influence of information organization demonstrated significant role of ‘cognitive dimension’, which finally resulted in perceiving ‘primitive concrete meaning’ in the participant’s mind.
The latter phrase focused on social-historical values and showed a manner of evaluation on building’s background; Therefore, the significant role of ‘evaluative dimension’ could be recognized, which finally resulted in perceiving ‘values or emotional meaning’ in the participant’s mind.
In the second step, quantitative and statistical analyzes were done on the outputs of the previous step. Here, the percentage of those participants who perceived each of the analytical codes was calculated.
Then in the third step, which was the most important part of this research, the answers of the participants were analyzed in order to investigate the relations among the three analytical criteria (analytical codes) in the participants’ perceptions. It investigated the mutual effects of place meaning, perceptional factors and dimensions.
Owing to the large number of participants (n=90), it is not possible to fully represent the entire analysis; therefore, in order to clarify and express this methodology, three abstract samples of the analysis (from three groups of participants) are presented as follows. The following tables indicate the analysis that has been done in the first step of the research methodology. (Tables 6, 7 and 8)
Table 6 A sample of analyzing and interpreting the quotes of passersby (The first step of research methodology)
Findings of the first step of research methodology demonstrate the richness and complexity of participants’ relationship to a range of places on the Arg Street, both residential and non-residential places, and a variety of places emerged as significant. However, different groups of participants had different manners of perception and experiences about these significant places. The differences among their experiences were grounded in the manner of their relation with places. Residents had the strongest relation with both residential and non-residential places based on the longtime of their residence and strong relation with the other people, while passersby and tradesfolk had weaker relation with the mentioned places and other people on this street.
Furthermore, the second step of the research method shows statistical analysis which has been done on the outputs of the first step. The percentage of participants who perceived each of the analytical codes was calculated as follows:
The manner of passersby’s perception
Passersby mostly mentioned buildings and their physical attributes. They also referred to this street monthly or even less frequent just in order to do some activities such as shopping or financial tasks. For example a passerby explained that:
I like the architectural patterns of the old buildings and they remind me of their valuable historical backgrounds. I used to buy my requirements from the malls on this street when I was younger, but I do not like to shop here anymore, because the products do not have good quality and they are out of fashion. (Figure 6)
Such accounts indicate that 90 per cent of passersby perceived ‘primitive concrete meaning’ and all of them also perceived ‘use-meaning’. Indeed, lack of strong value related to this street led to the perception of primitive levels of meaning for passersby. Perception of all the passersby were associated with physical and socio- cultural factors. Interpretation of the quotes showed that ‘cognitive’, ‘affective’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions had the main influence on the passersby’s perception. (Table 9)
Table 9 Statistical analysis on the manner of passersby’s perception (The second step of research methodology)
The majority of tradesfolk emphasized their jobs and relationships with other people because of their similar careers. Sixty per cent of tradesfolk perceived levels of ‘values or emotional meaning’ and all of them also perceived ‘use meaning’ which were deeper levels of place meanings in comparison with the ones perceived by passersby. (Figure 7)
Their deeper perception was due to their stronger connections with the place based on their socio-economic activities. All tradesfolk perceived the mentioned levels of meaning through personal and socio-cultural factors. In conclusion, interpretation of tradesfolk’s quotes indicated the influence of ‘cognitive’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions on their perception. (Table 10)
Table 10 Statistical analysis on the manner of tradesfolk’s perception (The second step of research methodology)
Residents mostly mentioned their interpretations of the social conditions, expressed their social relationships with the other people and explained their memories, feeling and emotions. Although, the physical attributes of buildings were valuable for them, they emphasized social relationship with their neighbors. For instance a resident described that:
The old houses on this street reminds me of the difficulties of women’s lives in the past with lack of many facilities in these kinds of houses … I feel insecure whenever I pass along the Pakistan embassy, because I remember the insecurities in the political situation of this country … I have many memories of the Meli garden from when I was young. I still spend some time in this garden every day, sitting and gabbing with some of my neighbours … I know all of the tradesfolk on this street and some of them are even my family friends. Most of them inherit their jobs from their fathers and the family job is very common among them. I suppose that they consider their family jobs as their family reputation … I’ve lived in this area for about 30 years. This street is different from the other streets and very special to me, because I consider it my home. (Figure 8)
Such accounts indicate that residents mainly interpreted and evaluated their experiences; therefore, all of the residents perceived ‘values or emotional meaning’ and 90 per cent of them also perceived ‘use meaning’. Some of the residents mentioned the family job as the symbol of reputation for tradesfolk and also mentioned their neighborhood as their home. This means that 20 per cent of residents perceived ‘symbolic meaning’, while the percentage of other participants in perception of this level of meaning was less than 10 per cent.
Residents perceived extreme levels of place meaning due to their close, personal, and social connections with this street and other residents and tradesfolk. Perception of these levels of meanings was mainly achieved through personal and socio-cultural factors. Results indicated that the perception of residents was affected by ‘affective’, ‘interpretative’, and ‘evaluative’ dimensions. (Table 11)
Table 11 Statistical analysis on the manner of residents’ perception (The second step of research methodology)
The third step of the research methodology provided the opportunity to revise the theoretical framework of this study and make the proper conclusion. This step investigated the relations among the three analytical criteria (analytical codes) that were mentioned in participants’ quotes. Here, the results from all three groups of participants were put together in order to consider the mentioned relations in a major structure.
According to the analyzes, we can conclude that the perception of every level of place meaning is affected by a particular perceptional factor and dimension. The ‘primitive concrete meaning’ is mainly perceived through physical factor and this process is done by organizing information about the physical attributes. This means that ‘cognitive dimension’, which is based on organizing information about different subjects, has the most effective role in the perception of ‘primitive concrete meaning’. The level of ‘use meaning’ is mainly perceived through the socio-cultural factor. This process is done by organizing information about the activities and uses as well as evaluating different subjects and situations. According to this process, ‘cognitive’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions are the most effective ones in perception of ‘use meaning’. On the other hand, the levels of ‘Values or emotional meaning’ and ‘symbolic meaning’ are mainly perceived through personal and socio-cultural factors. The perception of these levels of meaning is achievable by the influence of emotions and feelings as well as interpreting and evaluating situations and events; therefore, ‘affective’, ‘interpretative’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions can be mentioned as the most effective perceptional dimensions in the perception of the two extreme levels of place meaning.
Figure 9 illustrates the theoretical framework of this study. It indicates relations among levels of place meaning and the most effective perceptional factors and dimensions in perceiving these levels of meaning. This theoretical framework is the revision of the relations between perceptional factors and dimensions which were analyzed in Figure 3.
Figure 9
Theoretical framework regarding to the perception of different levels of place meaning and the most effective perceptional factors and dimensions.
In conclusion, while the perception of place meaning moves from level of ‘primitive concrete meaning’ toward ‘symbolic meaning’, the most effective perceptional dimensions gradually convert from ‘cognitive’ to ‘evaluative’ dimensions. Therefore, ‘cognitive dimension’ is the most influential dimension in the perception of the primitive levels of place meaning, while ‘affective’, ‘interpretative’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions are the most effective ones in the perception of the extreme levels.
Implications
The theoretical framework of this study indicates the significant role of perceptional factors and dimensions in the process of perceiving the meanings of place. It is important to emphasize the role of these dimensions and factors in both the process and the outputs of our contemporary urban design projects. It provides an opportunity to improve the environmental perception in urban places which is one of the main objectives of urban projects. It is an opportunity to create places that can attract people and make strong relation with them.
The results of this study shows that there are different manners of relations between people and place. People who have stronger personal and social connection with place such as residents mostly interpret and evaluate the place, while the people who have weaker connection with place, such as passersby, are mainly involved with organizing the information about the place. It is necessary to find a practical method in order to involve the perception of people with the most important dimensions, particularly the ‘affective’, ‘interpretative’ and ‘evaluative’ ones. As a result of this, perception of extreme levels of place meaning will be possible for a wide range of people, even for people who do not have strong and deep personal, emotional and social connection with place. Exploring these practical methods which emphasize the role of ‘affective’, ‘interpretative’ and ‘evaluative’ dimensions requires further researches. These researches can also develop the theoretical framework of the present study in the future.
References
Appleyard, D. (1976) Planning a Pluralistic City. The MIT press.
Brown, G. and Brabyn, L. (2012) The extrapolation of social landscape values to a national level in New Zealand using landscape character classification. Applied Geography 35 (1–2): 84–94.
Cheng, A.S., Kruger, L.E. and Daniels, S.E. (2003) Place as an integrating concept in natural resource politics: Propositions for a social science research agenda. Society and Natural Resources 16 (2): 87–104.
Dovey, K., Woodcock, I. and Wood, S. (2005) What is urban character? The case of Camberwell. In: Second State of Australian Cities Conference. Brisbane: Griffith University.
Eco, U. (1968) Function and sign: Semiotics of architecture. In: M. Gottdiener and A. Lagopoulos (eds.) The City and the Sign :An Introduction to Urban Semiotics. New York: Columbia University press.
Fe’ lonneau, M.L. (2004) Love and loathing of the city: Urbanophilia and urbanophobia, topological identity and perceived incivilities. Journal of Environmental Psychology 24 (1): 43–52.
Gunderson, K. and Watson, A. (2007) Understanding place meanings on the bitterroot national forest, Montana. Society and Natural Resources 20 (8): 705–721.
Halfacree, K. (2006) Rural space: Constructing a three-fold architecture. In: P. Cloke, T. Marsden and P.H. Mooney (eds.) Handbook of Rural Studies. London: Sage, pp. 44–62.
Jorgensen, B.S. and Stedman, R.C. (2001) Sense of place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners’ attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21 (3): 233–248.
Lewicka, M. (2005) Ways to make people active: The role of place attachment, cultural capital, and neighbourhood ties. Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 (4): 381–395.
Lewicka, M. (2010) What makes neighbourhood different from home and city? Effects of place scale on place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30 (1): 35–51.
Manzo, L.C. (2003) Relationships to non-residential places: Towards a reconceptualization of attachment to place. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23 (1): 47–61.
Moser, G., Ratiu, E. and Fleury-Bahi, G. (2002) Appropriation and interpersonal relationships: From dwelling to city through the neighborhood. Environment and Behavior 34 (1): 122–136.
Pretty, G., Chipuer, H. and Bramston, P. (2003) Sense of place amongst adolescents and adults in two rural Australian towns: The discriminating features of place attachment, sense of community and place dependence in relation to place identity. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23 (3): 273–287.
Stedman, R.C. (2003) Is it really just a social construction? The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society and Natural Resources 16 (8): 671–685.
Uzzell, D., Pol, E. and Badenas, D. (2002) Place identification, social cohesion, and environmental sustainability. Environment and Behavior 34 (1): 26–53.
Kalali, P. Meaningful perception of place: The most effective dimensions and factors.
Urban Des Int20, 222–240 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2015.10
