This study is to set up the appropriate range of observation time through contemplating the characteristics of observation time run for the information acquisition of space. Assuming that different spatial types involves the change of observation tim...
This study is to set up the appropriate range of observation time through contemplating the characteristics of observation time run for the information acquisition of space. Assuming that different spatial types involves the change of observation time to acquire the spatial information, this study intended to analyze the observation time by interior space types and derive the proper time for spatial evaluation.
In other words, analyzing the characteristics of time that testees spend observing spaces during the evaluation of spatial images would be the basis of knowing how much time was taken to understand space and acquire the information, thus being the time-based criterion for spatial evaluation.
Also, assuming that testees’ acquisition of spatial information differs by the design types, it targeted three kinds of interior spaces classic, modern, and natural that are highly preferred these days. That is, what amount of time should be called the ‘proper observation time’ by spatial types can be seen as one of the crucial elements in spatial evaluation.
Coming to the study method, in order to analyze the characteristics of observation time in the image evaluation of interior space by types, it looked into the observation time chosen by the testees (questionnaire respondents) during evaluation.
Since it is important to understand data acquiring characteristics through relationship between spatial types and spatial elements and apply it to spatial plans for smooth communication between designer and user of space, the conclusions gained from analysis of data acquiring characteristics of spatial elements through image evaluation by types of interior space.
The conclusions reached through this study are as the followings.
First, for the amount of acquired data by types of interior space, it shows that the acquired amount of data is to change by types and data acquiring method (phrase and image) even though the spatial elements are same. and for the data acquiring process of spatial types by gender, it shows that there is a big difference in acquiring of data according to the evaluation method by phrase and image. For the amount of acquired data of spatial types by gender, it shows that there is a difference between male and female, which is by 「classic → modern →natural」in case of male and 「classic → natural → modern」in case of female. regarding both of phrase and image. Also, for the evaluation by gender, it shows that there is a deviation in the value of difference according to the elements by which data acquiring characteristics evaluate space. Therefore it is considered that this deviation characteristic is in need of reflection in the process of spatial evaluation.
This study analyzed data acquiring characteristics of space user's spatial elements through image evaluation by types of space to understand how data acquiring would be changed of spatial elements according to type and gender. Through this study, it expects to make clear that, when a designer is planning a certain space, if the space can be a space for the user by understanding of which elements should be exposed to users by types to acquire more data.
Second, when comparing the rate of information acquisition after dividing the assessment item of types into a phrase and an image, for a classic type, a phrase(67.4%) was found to guarantee a higher rate of information acquisition than an image(49.4%). Also, for a phrase, each type had a slight difference in the rate of information acquisition, whereas for an image, classic type showed nearly 6.7% lower rate of information acquisition than modern and natural types which had a similar rate of information acquisition.
The observation time differed by genders and spatial types: men’s average time was longest for modern (93.3sec.) and natural (89.4sec.) spaces; women’s average time was longest for classic space (110.7sec.), which was the shortest for men. The intensity of observation time zone differed by spatial types: this finding can imply that different design types require different establishment of observation time for evaluation even if the spatial elements are the same. As analyzing the distribution of time zones chosen by most testees showed that men’s observation time zones were more intensely distributed than those of women.
In addition, this analysis showed the highest preference to the time '③'
However, obtaining information presented is the most highly effective time is '⑥'. Thus, the preferred time zone is different and effective, according to the results of the analysis.
Third, this study could find out that even though the evaluation elements on the three types for image evaluation were the same, the information acquisitions were different as those types varied. On the other hand, the change of the average run-time by type for the information acquisition was found not to be big, in other words, even though the run-time was alike, the information acquisitions varied depending on the type.
It is evaluation by language media showed the average value by element had the order of [shape>position>number>existence] and the range of their run-time was 94.6-102.9 seconds. The average rate of information acquisition shown at the visual media had the order of [composition>shape>material&color] and the range of run-time was 93.1-99.7 seconds.
The evaluation by language media showed that for male subjects the range of information acquisition rate was 39.1-91.4% and that of run-time 85.1-106.0 seconds and for female ones 46.0-94.6% and 96.3-112.3 seconds respectively.
In case of the visual media, male subjects showed the range of information acquisition rate was 40.3-66.7% and the range of run-time 82.4-97.9 seconds and the female ones, 42.2-71.0% and 94.0-115.1 seconds respectively, through which we could see that at the evaluation by language media and visual media both the female's range of information acquisition and that of observation time were higher than the male's.
Finally, the observation time for general space could be derived from the gender-based comparison that excluded the difference by types, but considering that different design types lead to different observation time, it could be seen as proper for evaluation of interior space to establish the difference of observation time by spatial types.