Preferencje użytkowników w zakresie typu architektury mieszkaniowej – przegląd badań

Lasiewicz-Sych, Angelika

doi:10.37705/PUA/2/2021/02

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Preferencje użytkowników w zakresie typu architektury mieszkaniowej – przegląd badań

Autorzy

Lasiewicz-Sych Angelika

Wybrane pełne teksty z tego czasopisma

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.37705/PUA/2/2021/02

Warianty tytułu

User preferences regarding the type of housing architecture – a review of the body of literature

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

Artykuł stanowi syntetyczny przegląd najważniejszych badań z zakresu problematyki mieszkaniowej satysfakcji użytkowników. We wprowadzeniu do tematu zdefiniowano problem korespondencji oczekiwań użytkowników i cech jakościowych architektury, który uzasadnia potrzebę tego rodzaju badań. Następnie przedstawiono ogólne kryteria oceny i preferencji użytkowników w zakresie rodzaju architektury mieszkaniowej oraz zmienne demograficzne, które mogą wpływać na indywidualną modyfikację tych preferencji.

This article is a small overview of the most important research in the field of residential satisfaction. The introduction to the topic defines the problem of the correspondence of user expectations and the qualitative features of housing architecture, which justifies the need for this type of research. General criteria for user assessment and preferences of the type of housing architecture and demographic variables that may affect these are then presented.

Słowa kluczowe

architektura mieszkaniowa satysfakcja mieszkańców zabudowa mieszkaniowa typ zabudowy

housing architecture type of buildings housing satisfaction of residents

Wydawca

Wydawnictwo Politechniki Krakowskiej im. Tadeusza Kościuszki

Czasopismo

PUA Przestrzeń Urbanistyka Architektura

Rocznik

2021

Tom

Vol. 2

Strony

14--25

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 50 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Lasiewicz-Sych Angelika

alasiewicz-sych@pk.edu.pl

Wydział Architektury, Politechnika Krakowska im. Tadeusza Kościuszki

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9740-2430

Bibliografia

1. Alexander, Ch. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
2. Bhatti, M., Church, A. (2014). Home, the culture of nature and meanings of gardens in late modernity. Housing Studies, 19(1), 37–51.
3. Bonnaiuto, M., Fornara, F., Bonnes, M. (2003). Indexes of perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachement in urban environments: a confirmation study on the city of Rome. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 41–52.
4. Boudon, Ph. (1969). Pessac de Le Corbusier. Paris: Dunod.
5. Brade, I., Herfert, G., Wiest, K. (2009). Recent trends and future prospects of socio-spatial differentiation in urban regions of Central and Eastern Europe: a lull before the storm. Cities, 26, 233–244.
6. Colomina, B. (1992). The split wall: Domestic voyeurism. W: B. Colomina (red.), Sexuality and Space (s. 73–128). New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
7. Cooper Marcus, C. (1995). House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring a Deeper Meaning of Home. Berkeley: Conari Press.
8. Cunha Borges, J., Marat-Mendes, T. (2019). Walking on streets-in-the-sky: structures for democratic cities. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, 11. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2019.1596520
9. Dekker, K., De Vos, S., Musterd, S., Van Kempen, R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: A multi-level research approach. Housing Studies, 26(4), 479–499.
10. Douglas, M. (1993). The idea of a home: A kind of space. W: A. Mack (red.), Home: A Place in the World (s. 261–281). New York: New York University Press.
11. Dovey, K. (1985). Home and homelessness. W: I. Altman, C.M. Werner (red.), Home Environments (s. 33–64). New York: Plenum Press.
12. Feldman, R.M. (1996). Constancy and change in attachments to types of settlements. Environment and Behavior, 28(4), 419–445.
13. Fortry, A. (2000). Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture. London: Thames & Hudson.
14. Galster, G., Hesser, G. (1981). Residential satisfaction: Compositional and contextual correlates. Environment and Behavior, 13, 735–759.
15. Galster, G. (1987). Identifying the correlates of dwelling satisfaction – an empirical critique. Environment and Behavior, 19(5), 539–568.
16. Gifford, R., Hine, D.W., Muller-Clemn, W., Shaw, K.T. (2002). Why architects and laypersons judge buildings differently: Cognitive properties and physical bases. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 19(2), 131–148.
17. Gifford, R. (2007). The consequences of living in high-rise buildings. Architectural Science Review, 50(1), 2–17.
18. Hansen, O. (2005). Ku Formie Otwartej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Zachęta.
19. Harvey, D. (1976). Labor, capital, and class struggle around the built environment in advanced capitalist societies. Politics & Society, 6(3), 265–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/003232927600600301
20. Hepworth, M. (1999). Privacy, security and respectability: The ideal Victorian home. W: T. Chapman, J. Hockey (red.), Ideal Homes? Social Change and Domestic Life (s. 17–29). London: Routledge.
21. Hertzberger, H. (1991). Lessons for Students in Architecture. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers.
22. Hillier, B. (1996). Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Hillier, B., Hanson, J. (1993). The social logic of space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Hoffman, E., Halman, J.I.M., Ion, R.A. (2006). Variation in Housing Design: Identifying Customer Preferences. Housing Studies, 21(6), 929–943.
25. Horelli, L. (1997). Autokreacja przestrzeni mieszkalnej a odtwarzanie wzorów płci i poczucia tożsamości. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 3(1), 23–27.
26. Ikemi, M. (2005). The effects of mystery on preference for residential facades. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 167–173.
27. Imamoglu, Ç. (2000). Complexity, preference and familiarity: architecture and non-architecture Turkish students’ assessments of traditional and modern house façades. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20, 5–16.
28. Jencks, Ch. (1982). Le Corbusier – tragizm współczesnej architektury. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Artystyczne i Filmowe.
29. Karsten, L. (2007). Housing as a way of life: Towards an understanding of middle-class families’ preference for an urban residential location. Housing Studies, 22(1), 83–98.
30. Kearns, A., Whitley, E., Mason, Ph., Bond, L. (2012). ‘Living the high-life’? Residential, social and psychosocial outcomes for high-rise occupants in a deprived context. Housing Studies, 27(1), 97–126.
31. Kerr, S.-M., Klocker, N., Gibson, Ch. (2019). From backyards to balconies: Cultural norms and parents’ experiences of home in higher-density housing. Housing Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2019.1709625
32. Kuoppa, J., Nieminen, N., Ruoppila, S., Laine, M. (2019). Elements of desirability: Exploring meaningful dwelling features from resident’s perspective, Housing Studies, 36(3), 421–443. https://doi.10.1080/ 02673037.2019.1680812
33. Lee, T. (1976). Psychology and the Environment. London: Methuen.
34. Lewicka, M. (2010). What makes neighbourhood different from home and city? Effects of place scale on place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 35–51.
35. Lewicka, M. (2012). Psychologia miejsca. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
36. Manzo, L.C. (2014). On uncertain ground: being at home in the content of public housing redevelopment. International Journal of Housing Policy, 14(4), 389–410.
37. Musterd, S., Van Kempen, R. (2007). Trapped or on the springboard? Housing careers in large housing estates in European cities. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(3), 311–329.
38. Newman, O. (1972). Defensible Space: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. New York: Macmillan Publishing.
39. Opit, S., Witten, K., Kearns, R. (2019). Housing pathways, aspirations and preferences of young adults within increasing urban density. Housing Studies, 35(1), 123–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2019.1584662
40. Rapoport, A. (1985). Thinking about home environment. W: I. Altman, C.M. Werner (red.), Home Environments (s. 255–286). New York: Plenum Press.
41. Ruonavaara, H. (1996). The home ideology and housing discourse in Finland 1900–1950. Housing Studies, 11(1), 89–104.
42. Tall, D. (1996). Dwelling: making peace with space and place. W: W. Jackson, W. Vitek (red.), Rooted in the Land: Essays on Community and Place (s. 104–112). New Haven: Yale University Press.
43. Tognoli, J. (1987). Residential Environments. W: D. Stokols, I. Altman, Handbook of Environmental Psychology. Vol. 1 (s. 655–690). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
44. Toruńczyk-Ruiz, S., Lewicka, M. (2017). Perceived social diversity and neighbourhood attachment: The role of intergroup ties and affective appraisals of the environment. Evidence from Poland. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 818–832.
45. Saegert, S. (1985). The Role of Housing in the Experience of Dwelling. W: I. Altman, C.M. Werner (red.), Home Environments (s. 287–309). New York: Plenum Press.
46. Sebba, R., Churchman, A. (1983). Territories and territoriality in the home. Environment and Behaviour, 15(2), 191–210.
47. Silverstein, M. (1993). The first roof: Interpreting a spatial pattern. W: D. Seamon (red.), Dwelling, seeing and designing. Toward a phenomenological ecology (s. 77–101). New York: State University of New York.
48. Smith, S.G. (1994). The essential qualities of a home. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 13–46.
49. Soaita, A.M., McKee, K. (2020). Researching home’s tangible and intangible materialities by photo-elicitation. Housing, Theory and Society, 3, 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2020.1738543
50. Szkiłądź, H., Bik, S., Pakosz, B., Szkiłądź, C. (red.). (1979). Słownik języka polskiego. T. 2 (L–P). Warszawa: PWN.

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-a75b1993-3c62-400e-a40d-3b976b440581