2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.919
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Usability of Architectural Spaces: Objective and Subjective Qualities of Built Environment as Multidisciplinary Construction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
18
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…One tentative interpretation is that bathroom-dependent people are not differentially sensitive to the easiness of use. An alternative interpretation could be found in the users' difficulties to correctly identify usability aspects of the ease of use when assessing the architectural environments without experiencing the assessed object in real time and the relatively low salience of this feature in architectural environments [64][65][66][67]. This result highlights the fact that bathroom-dependent ill people value some of these aspects of public bathrooms more than their sane counterparts, at least in the privacy and cleanliness factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One tentative interpretation is that bathroom-dependent people are not differentially sensitive to the easiness of use. An alternative interpretation could be found in the users' difficulties to correctly identify usability aspects of the ease of use when assessing the architectural environments without experiencing the assessed object in real time and the relatively low salience of this feature in architectural environments [64][65][66][67]. This result highlights the fact that bathroom-dependent ill people value some of these aspects of public bathrooms more than their sane counterparts, at least in the privacy and cleanliness factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By exploring combination of behavioural data modelling with rule based systems from architectural social science, Jorn and Shin (2013) showed that the social psychology of spatial modification behaviours can be modelled and simulated. Another related study in social science has suggested that human behaviours are greatly impacted by elements of the surrounding built environment (Bittencourt et al, 2015). These studies indicate the prospect of how architectural parametricism may be redefined and enriched with inclusion and synthesis of spatial-social dynamics in computational design process to facilitate co-design and evidence-based design.…”
Section: Somewhat Different From the Interactive Storytelling Researcmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…To evaluate the social comfort of an architectural space, we define Social Spatial Comfort (SSC) value as a behaviour-led measurement. The SSC value is developed from three main factors influencing human spatial experiences (Sussman & Hollander, 2014;Bittencourt et al, 2015):…”
Section: Analysis and Evaluation Of Social Spatial Comfort (Ssc) Valuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In line with this, the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building Construction (CIB) developed a network to investigate the applicability of usability concepts in architecture and to identify methods that would enable a more positive user experience in different spatial scenarios (Alexander, 2008). The use of this term is justified in this discipline by the idea that usability refers to the degree to which something (a service, facility or product, not just a software system) is easy to use and suits the people who use it (Haron et al, 2012;Bittencourt et al, 2015). Finally, the term "usability of buildings" is understood as a process during which the range of experiences that users have, insofar as the adaptation between action and space is concerned (Fenker, 2008).…”
Section: Usability Of Visitor Attractionsmentioning
confidence: 99%