Decoding Modern Architecture

Gifford, Robert; Hine, Donald W.; Muller-Clemm, Werner; Reynolds, D’Arcy J.; Shaw, Kelly

doi:10.1177/00139160021972487

Cited by 102 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Gifford andHine (1990-1991) relate the extreme case shared by Suedfeld (1979) of an alcohol treatment center with a high dropout rate situated just upstairs from a cocktail lounge that often diverted clients on their way in. But, the treatment site's surroundings can just as well support retention.…”

Section: Exposure To the Treatment Neighborhoodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Place and Attrition from Substance Abuse Treatment

Jacobson¹

2004

Journal of Drug Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High rates of attrition are one of the greatest problems interfering with the effectiveness of substance abuse treatment programs. Though unexamined to date, this paper argues that where a client lives, where treatment is delivered, and the relationship between these locations may influence both voluntary and involuntary dropout. The notion of a "treatment ecology" is presented, and theories of mechanisms by which location may impact attrition are developed through a review of related literature. In other fields, lack of attention to theory prior to empirical investigations of contextual effects has prompted criticism and made interpretation of empirical results difficult. Neighborhood disadvantage, drug availability, community resources, restorative qualities of the neighborhood, and travel burden are identified as promising areas for study. Current conceptual models of treatment outcomes are first reviewed to identify how they might accommodate attention to place. Policy implications and special considerations for future empirical work on this topic are discussed briefly.

show abstract

Section: Exposure To the Treatment Neighborhoodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Place and Attrition from Substance Abuse Treatment

Jacobson¹

2004

Journal of Drug Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Detailed studies about the specific features of old and modern buildings would help understand what physical features affect these evaluations. For example, Gifford et al (2000) used a lens model to associate physical attributes of modern office building with affective responses and global evaluative assessments. Third, what constitute old buildings and modern buildings change with time and place, so it is important to replicate studies in different places and times.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the 1980s, additional studies have been conducted on landscapes (see meta-analysis by Stamps, 2004), urban nature (Herzog, 1989), residential scene (Nasar, 1983); urban spaces (Herzog, 1992;Herzog Kaplan, & Kaplan, 1982); urban neighborhoods (Bonaiuto, Fornara, & Bonnes, 2003); building exterior (Herzog, & Gale, 1996;Herzog & Shier, 2000;Nasar, 1994); and building facades (Akalin, Yildirim, Wilson, & Kilicoglu, 2009;Ikemi, 2005;Stamps, 1999). More studies have been conducted on people's responses to buildings of various architectural styles and historical periods: buildings of different architectural style in Britain (Cook & Furnham, 2012); high-versus popular-style residential buildings (Devlin & Nasar, 1989;Stamps & Nasar, 1997); modern-versus post-modern buildings (Groat, 1982); high-rise buildings (Stamps, 1991); and large, modern office buildings (Gifford, Hine, Muller-Clemm, Reynolds, & Shaw, 2000). However, studies that focus on "heritage buildings" are hard to find, even though a few studies have included older buildings: old buildings (Frewald, 1989); old versus new buildings (Herzog & Gale, 1996;Herzog & Shier, 2000;Stamps, 1994); classical versus modern buildings (Mastandrea, Bartoli, & Carrus, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception and Evaluation of Buildings: The Effects of Style and Frequency of Exposure

Ng¹

2020

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perception and evaluation of environmental and architectural spaces is an important concern of environmental psychology. Various environments ranging in scope from landscapes to room interiors have been studied, but old buildings have seldom been studied. As historical buildings make way for modern buildings, preservation of historic buildings has often been a hot issue. Proponents for preservation argue for the beauty, harmony and character of these buildings and that people derive satisfaction from them. This study examined the perception and evaluation of old-style buildings (constructed in late 18 th to early 19 th century) and modern-style buildings on three dimensions: aesthetic evaluation, organization, and friendliness. In addition, the effect of frequency of exposure on the ratings of these buildings as stimuli was studied. Two hundred and thirty-six university students rated each of the three old-style and three modern-style buildings on a set of fifteen bipolar adjectives scales. The frequency of exposure of each building was manipulated within subject. Repeated-measures analyses of variance revealed significant differences between the ratings. The modern-style buildings were evaluated as more aesthetically appealing and perceived as less organized and more complex than the old-style buildings. The effect of frequency of exposure was significant on the aesthetic evaluation dimension only. The relationship was in the form of an inverted U-shape function. However, no interaction effect was found. The results could be explained by Berlyne's hypothesis (1960, 1970) and Zajonc's mere exposure hypothesis (1968). Although the study was conducted in the 1980s, the psychological effects of perception and evaluation may remain the same. Given the scarcity and paucity of research on heritage buildings in the discipline of psychology, this paper reviews current research literature in the subject area, discusses if and to what extent the results still hold true, and proposes a way forward.

show abstract

“…An extensive body of literature has investigated the impact of physical space on employees' experiences at work (e.g. : Gifford, et al, 2000;Rafaeli, & Pratt, 2005), which can be summarized as three concurrent but independent dimensions to shape the interaction between the physical space and the individual (Vilnai-Yavetz, et al, 2005). The first dimension -instrumentalitydefines the degree of usability and human factor engineering (Nielsen, 1994), and explains the extent to which physical artifacts support or hamper the performance of a desired activity (Howell, 1994).…”

Section: The Physical Space and Its Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power symbols in office workspace: impact on creativity as microfoundation of the dynamic capabilities of the firm

Amigoni¹,

Gaedicke²

2017

EJMI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – to analyse the role of artefacts in creativity as a microfoundation for dynamic capabilities. Design/Method/Approach. This conceptual study aims at identifying core aspects of the physical workspace towards power representations and power symbols and delineates impact factors on creativity and its possible implications on the dynamic capabilities of the firm. Findings. We suggest that creativity, believed to be a core aspect for innovation, is a microfoundation and one of the most critical elements of dynamic capabilities to sustain and foster the evolutionary and entrepreneurial fitness of the firm. Practical implications. While it has been shown that hierarchies and power symbols affect the creative performance within a firm, research on the role of physical space as representation of power and its effect on creativity is still limited. Focusing on artefacts might help firms to evoke creativity and, thus, increase innovativeness and dynamic capabilities of a firm. Originality/Value. In fast-paced, globally competitive business environments, sustainable advantage requires unique and difficult-to-replicate dynamic capabilities. Analysis of microfoundations of dynamic capabilities usually goes only one level deeper, e.g. to the concepts of creativity and innovativeness. We made a further step and analyzed artefacts influencing these and other microfoundations. Paper type – conceptual.

show abstract

Decoding Modern Architecture

Cited by 102 publications

References 28 publications

Place and Attrition from Substance Abuse Treatment

Place and Attrition from Substance Abuse Treatment

Perception and Evaluation of Buildings: The Effects of Style and Frequency of Exposure

Power symbols in office workspace: impact on creativity as microfoundation of the dynamic capabilities of the firm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About