مقایسه تطبیقی پارامترهای زیباشناختی فضای شهری از دیدگاه کودکان و بزرگسالان (مطالعه موردی: شهر اصفهان)

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد طراحی شهری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان

2 استادیار و مدیرگروه شهرسازی دانشگاه هنر اصفهان

3 استادیار و مدیرگروه شهرسازی دانشگاه علم و صنعت تهران

4 استادیار، دانشکده روانشناسی، دانشگاه اصفهان

5 استادیار، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان.

چکیده

توجه به جنبه‌های زیبایی‌شناختی فضاهای عمومی شهری در طراحی شهری از این جهت اهمیت ویژه‌ای دارد که کاربران آن ادراک زیبایی‌شناختی یکسانی ندارند و فضا لزوماً پاسخگوی همه طیف‌ها از این دیدگاه نمی‌باشد. پژوهش پیشِ رو با فرض وجود تفاوت در ادراک زیباشناختی محیط در گروه‌های سنی متفاوت، به این پرسش پاسخ داده است که چه ترجیحات زیباشناختی در فضای شهری بین گروه‌های سنی مختلف وجود دارد و اولویت‌بندی متغیرهای مرتبط با آن در دو گروه سنی کودک و بزرگسال به چه صورت است. از آنجا که مطالعات زیبایی‌شناسی در دو بعد نظری و تجربی مورد بحث قرار گرفته، توجه به جنبه‌های بصری در طراحی شهری و زیبایی‌شناسی تجربی به عنوان اساس پژوهش قرار گرفت. با مبنا قرار دادن دیدگاه سانتایانا مبتنی بر دسته‌بندی زیبایی‌شناسی محیطی در سه دسته حسی، فرمی و نمادین، پژوهش حاضر میزان توجه به هر دسته را در گروه‌های مورد مطالعه بررسی نموده است. پژوهش از نوع کاربردی بوده، با بهره‌مندی از ترکیب روش کمی و کیفی و به صورت توصیفی _ تحلیلی دو گروه مورد مطالعه را مقایسه نموده است. روش یافته‌اندوزی با استفاده از مطالعات کتابخانه‌ای، میدانی و تکمیل نقاشی کودک و پرسشنامه به تعداد 750 مورد در قالب طیف لیکرت در دو گروه یاد شده بوده که در نهایت با استفاده از نرم‌افزار SPSS مورد ارزیابی و استخراج نتایج قرار گرفته که بر اساس فرمول آماری کوکران در جامعه آماری، استفاده شده است. نتایج پژوهش نشان داد در اولویت‌بندی ترجیحات متغیرهای زیباشناختی بین دو گروه سنی و اهمیت متغیرهای فرمی از دیدگاه کودکان تفاوت وجود دارد. از میان سه دسته زیبایی‌شناسی یاد شده، بیشترین ترجیحات زیباشناختی کودکان به لحاظ فراوانی در دسته متغیرهای فرمی قرار می‌گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparing the Aesthetic Parameters of Urban Space from the Viewpoint of Children and Adults: the case study of Isfahan

نویسنده [English]

  • Mina Kashani Hamedani 1
چکیده [English]

Urban space is the context in which the activities and different perception of users take place; but various users such as different age groups have dissimilar perceptions of environment. It seems that the built environment and particularly urban space as the product of work of urban planners, urban designers and architects, does not necessarily consider the real variety of users and through this fact, aesthetic aspect of urban environment does not fulfill their needs fairly. Overlapping of the two domains of environmental psychology and urban aesthetics on the one hand and the diverse psychological characteristics in different age groups on the other hand confirm the necessity of this research. The need for studying urban aesthetics is re-affirmed also from a statistical point of view. In 2010 demographics, out of seven billion of the world’s population, approximately 1.2 billion were children between the ages of 5 and 14. This figure is approximately 17.4 percent of the total world population or one-fifth. The same statistics is shown in Iran where there were roughly 11 million children (5-14 age range) from the total population of 74 million in 2010 which is approximately 15 percent and or one-sixth of the total population. These official statistics are demonstrate the importance children in different fields generally and especially in urban design and urban aesthetic. Studying urban aesthetics from the viewpoint of particular users of urban space like children with different psychological characteristics leads to an introduction to urban aesthetics which is trying to find the answer to the research question. The objective is to identify the aesthetic preferences of children in their surrounding environment, especially in urban spaces. However, there were some limits in this study; the most important limiting factor was the lack of detailed information regarding the social and cultural environment of the statistical sample which could explain differences in children’s points of views. Thus, examining urban spaces from an aesthetic perspective is important because their users have different aesthetic perceptions and urban spaces are not necessarily responsive for all kinds of users. This research answers the following questions: which environmental aesthetic preferences can be recognized in different groups of children and adults, and what are the priorities of related variables in different groups. There are two major approaches to the study of aesthetics, empirical and philosophical. This research is based on the empirical approach according to the importance of visual aspects in urban design. This research has studied the signification of three groups conforming to Santayana’s classification of environmental aesthetics which consists of three categories of emotional, formal and symbolic. The research is applied and descriptive-analytic. Data was collected from library study based on documentary research as well as field observations and children’s drawings. Based on Cochran's C test, 750 effective questionnaires were dispensed in Isfahan city which is the figure for the statistical population. The results were analyzed by Likert-Scale and SPSS software. The findings indicate certain differences exist between the various age groups in their preferences of aesthetic priority and in the importance of formal variables from the viewpoint of children. Of the three mentioned categories of environmental aesthetics, the formal category was most frequently preferred by children.  

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • urban aesthetics
  • Urban Space
  • Children
  • Adults
  • Isfahan
  • Arnhaym,, R., (2007). Art and Visual Perception.Translated by Majid Akhgar. Tehran, Publication:  The Organization for Researching and Composing University Textbooks in the Humanities (Samt).[in Persian]
  • Bell, S R., (2007). Landscape: Pattern, Perception, and Process. Translated by Behnaz Amin Zadeh. Tehran, Publication: Tehran University (Samt).[in Persian]
  • Bell, S R., (2009). Elements of Visual Design in the Landscape. Translated by Mohammad Reza Masnavi. Tehran, Publication: Tehran University .[in Persian]
  • Bently, I. (2003). Responsive Environment: A Manual for Designers. Translated by Mostafa Behzad Far, Tehran: Iran University of Science & Technology Publications. (In Persian).
  • Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc,T., Tiesdall, S. (2009). Public Places, Urban Spaces the Dimensions of Urban Design. Translated by Fariba Gharaei, Magshid Shokouhi, Zahra Ahari & Esmaeil Salehi, Tehra:, Art University of Tehran Publications. (In Persian).
  • Cowan, R. (2007). Urbanization Dictionary, (1st ed). Tehran: Azarakhsh Publications.
  • Driskell, D., (2008). Creating better cities with Children and Youth: a manual for participation. Translated by Mehrnoush Tavakoli & Navid Saidi Rezvani. Tehran, Publication: Dibayeh. [in Persian]
  • Gaut, B. & McIver Lopes, D. (2005). The Routledge Companion to Aesthetic. Translated by Manouchehr Sanei Dareh Bidi, Amir Ali Nojoumian, Shideh Ahmadzadeh, Babak Mohaghegh, Masoud Ghasemian & Farhad Sasani, Tehran: Art Academy Press. (In Persian).
  • Gruter. Y. K. (2009). Aesthetics in Architecture. Translated by Jahanshah Pakzad and Abdoreza Homayoun. Tehran: Beheshti University Press. (In Persian).
  • Isaacs, Raymond. 2000. The Urban Pictursqe: An Aesthetic Experince of Urban Pedestrain Places, No. 5(2): 145-180.
  • Kerier, R., (2004). Urban Space. Translated by Khosro Hashemi Nejad. Tehran, Publication: Khak. [in Persian]
  • L. Ross,.K &Winters, E. & Cooper, C., (2010). Understanding Space of Bases Psychological and Philosophica. Translated by Arash Arbab Jolfaei. Publication: Khak.[in Persian]
  • Lang, J., (2004). Creating Architectural Theory: the Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design. Translated by Ali Reza Eyni Far. Tehran, Publication: Tehran University. [in Persian]
  • Lynch, K., (2005). The Image of the City. Translated by Manouchehr Mozayani. Tehran, Publication: Tehran University .[in Persian]
  • Mac Andrew, F. T. (2008). Environmental Psychology. Translated by Dr. Gholamreza Mahmudi. Tehran: Zarbafasl Publications. (In Persian)
  • Pakzad, J., (2006). Theory and Process of Urban Design. Translated by Mohammad Reza Masnavi. Tehran, Publication: Shahidi. [in Persian]
  • Porteous, J. D., (2010). Environmental Aesthetics, Ideas, Politics and Planning. Translated by Mohammad Reza Masnavi. Publication: Jahad Daneshgahi Mashhad.[in Persian]
  • Tarcísio da Luz Reis, Antônio and Maria Cristina Dias Lay. 2010. Internal and External Aesthetics of Housing Estates. 42 (2): 271-294.
  • Tavasoli, M & Bonyadi, N., (1992). Urban Space Design. Tehran, Publication: Road, Housind and Urban Development Research Center. [in Persian]
  • Taylor, Nigel. 2003. The Aesthetic Experience of Traffic in the Modern City, No. 40 (8): 1609–1625.
  • Taylor, Nigel. 2009. Ligibility and Aesthetics in Urban design, No. 14 (2): 189-202.
  • Thomas. Glyn V. & Silk, A. M. J,. 2003. An introduction to the Psychology of Children ,s Drawing. Translated by Mohammad Taghi Faramarzi, Publictaion: Donyaye No, First Publication.
  • Vazirnia, S. & Ganji, T. (2001). Child’s painting: Growth, Property, Function, Subject.  Tehran: Ghatreh Publications. (In Persian).
  • World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision. (2013, 11, 1). Retrieved from United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs: http://esa.un.org