Preferences for Doors of Vernacular Structures: The Case Study of Kaleici

Hilmi Ekin Oktay, Hacer Mutlu Danacı, Işınsu Deniz Türk

Abstract


In the literature, coherence, legibility, complexity, and mystery are defined as predictive variables in landscape preference. At the same time, an inviting degree has used as another variable, which affects the liking. This study aims to find choices and a significant indicator which changes preferences of the doors of traditional Structures. Within the scope of this study, we investigated how the preference of entries, which is a transition interface between the urban space and structures, is affected by determined variables. As a result of the regression analysis, the results showed that the critical variables that are preferred, invite a degree of mystery by the existing literature. However, unlike the research literature, the result shows that complexity is not adversely predictive or useful in liking in the selected case study. It has been found that the preferred doors and entrance interfaces have natural materials, harmonious colors, vernacular architectural features, and common structural elements such as steps and eaves.

eISSN: 2398-4287 © 2019. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Anonymous 1(2018) https://www.antalya.bel.tr/calismalarimiz/tarihi-ve-kulturel-miras-calismalari/kaleici-koruma-amacli-imar-plani-revizyonu [Accessed in 19.03.2018]

Acar, İ (2010). Dünden Bugüne Antalya (Cilt 2). T.C. Antalya Valiliği İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü. Antalya

Akalın, A., Yıldırım, K., Wilson, C., Kılıçoğlu, Ö., (2009). Architecture and engineering students' evaluations of house façades: Preference, complexity, and impressiveness, Journal of Environmental Psychology 29. pp 124–132

Bektaş, C., (2004). Halk Yapı Sanatından Bir Örnek. Antalya. Anadolu Evleri Dizisi 2. Bileşim Yayınevi. İstanbul

Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Ends and means of experimental aesthetics. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 26, pp.303-325.

Bringslimark, T., (2009). The psychological benefits of indoor plants: A critical review of the experimental literature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, Pp.422-433

Cauwenberg, J. V. et al. (2014). Physical environmental factors that invite older adults to walk for transportation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, pp.94-103.

Cimrin, H., (2002). Yakın Geçmişe Yolculuk Bir Zamanlar Antalya : Tarih, Gözlem ve Anılar. Antalya Ticaret ve Sanayi Odası. Antalya

Cimrin, H., (2006). Bir Zamanlar Antalya “Tarih, Gözlem ve Anılar” (Cilt 1-2). (3. Baskı) Antalya Ticaret ve Sanayi Odası. Antalya

Daniel T.C., Vining J. (1983). Methodological Issues in the Assessment of Landscape Quality. In: Altman I., Wohlwill J.F. (eds) Behavior and the Natural Environment. Human Behavior and Environment (Advances in Theory and Research). Vol 6. Springer. Boston, MA

Gül, M., (2006). “Antalya Kent Merkezi Kültür ve Turizm Gelişim Bölgesinde Yer Alan Sit Alanları ve Bu Alanlarda Antalya Büyükşehir Belediyesince Başlatılan Çalışmalara İlişkin Genel Bir Değerlendirme, Planlama. (4). İstanbul. pp.121-145.

Hidayetoglu, M. L., Yildirim, K., Akalin, A. (2012). The effects of color and light on indoor wayfinding and the evaluation of the perceived environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, pp.50-58.

Ikemi, M., (2005). The effects of mystery on preference for residential facades. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, pp. 167–173.

İmamoğlu, Ç. (2000). Complexity, Liking, and Familiarity: Architecture and Non-Architecture Turkish Students' Assessments of Vernacular and Modern House Facades. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 20. pp.5-16.

İnceoğlu, M. ve Aytuğ, A. (2009). Kentsel Mekânda Kalite Kavramı, Megaron. 4(3). İstanbul. ss.131-146

İzgi, U. ve Batum Aysel, B. (2003). Kapılar – Hafif Bölmeler. YEM Yayın. İstanbul. pp.23-35.

Kaplan, S., Kaplan R., and Wendt, J. S. (1972). "Rated Preference and Complexity for Natural and Urban Visual Material," Perception & Psychophysics, 12(4),354-356.

Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., (1989). The experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Ulrich's Bookstore. Ann Arbor, Michigan. The USA.

Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., Brown, T. (1998). Environmental preference: A comparison of four domains of predictors. Environment and Behavior. 21. Pp.509-530.

Lang, J., (1988). Symbolic aesthetic in architecture: toward a research agenda, Environmental aesthetics: theory, research, and applications. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. pp.11-26.

Lothian, A., (1999). Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or the eye of the beholder? Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(4). pp.177–198

R. Pals, L. Steg, J. Dontje, F.W. Siero, K.I. Van der Zee, (2014).Physical features, coherence, and positive outcomes of person-environment interactions: A virtual reality study, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 40, Pages 108-116,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.05.004.

Porteus, J. D., (1996). Environmental Aesthetics, ideas, politics, and planning, Routledge, pp.290, England.

Rapoport, A., (1977). Human Aspects of Urban Form Towards a Man-Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design. Pergamon Press Ltd. Oxford, New York, Toronto, Sydney, Paris, Frankfurt.

Shulz, C. N., (1974). Existence, Space & Architecture. (3rd Edition) Praeger Publishers. New York. Ss .75-78.

Tveit, M. S., Sang, A. O., Hägerhäll, C. M. (2015). Bölüm 4: Doğal Güzellik: Görsel Peyzaj Değerlendirmesi ve Manzara Algısı. Steg, L., Van der Berg, E., De Groot, J. M. (Ed.). In:Çevre Psikolojisi . Tanslators: Cicerali, L. K., Cicerali E. E. Nobel Yayınevi, ss 37-46. İstanbul. Türkiye.

Uyar, M et(. 2004). Antalya kültür envanteri: Merkez, 2003. Antalya Valiliği İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü. Antalya. ss.12-27.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.