{"title":"EVALUATION OF URBAN PUBLIC SPACES’ LANDSCAPE DESIGN PERCEPTIONS WITH SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIATION TECHNIQUE: THE CASE OF ELAZIG CITY","authors":"Müge ÜNAL ÇİLEK, Esra ÇETİNKAYA ÖZKAN, Ruya Ardicoglu","doi":"10.17365/tmd.2022.turkey.27.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: In this study, spatial designers and design students evaluated the perception of three public spaces in Elazig City to determine the similarities and differences in perception. Method: The method of the study consists of four steps: (1) determination of public spaces to evaluate visual perception; (2) scoring the visual perceptions with the semantic differentiation technique using 18 bipolar pairs to evaluate the design characteristics of space. Each bipolar pair was scored on a 7-point Likert scale (1=Negative, 7=Positive). (3) Preparation and application of visual perception questionnaires; (4) performed the statistical analysis. At this stage, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to group the bipolar pairs that are dominant in participant perceptions. MANOVA was used to determine whether the factors changed according to socio-demographic characteristics. Results: The answers of 209 participants studying different design disciplines were evaluated in the study. As a result of the EFA, carried out separately for each public space, the bipolar pairs were classified into three groups: feelings of pleasure, excitation, and dominance. Conclusion: Excitation and dominance in area 1, excitation-dominance and satisfaction in area 2, and excitation and pleasure-dominance in area 3 were determined as factors affecting perception. According to the MANOVA results, while there was no statistical significance between the occupational disciplines and the participants who had not visited the field before (p>0.05), significant differences were found between the participants who were at different levels of design training (p<0.05).","PeriodicalId":142407,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL REFEREED JOURNAL OF DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL REFEREED JOURNAL OF DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17365/tmd.2022.turkey.27.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: In this study, spatial designers and design students evaluated the perception of three public spaces in Elazig City to determine the similarities and differences in perception. Method: The method of the study consists of four steps: (1) determination of public spaces to evaluate visual perception; (2) scoring the visual perceptions with the semantic differentiation technique using 18 bipolar pairs to evaluate the design characteristics of space. Each bipolar pair was scored on a 7-point Likert scale (1=Negative, 7=Positive). (3) Preparation and application of visual perception questionnaires; (4) performed the statistical analysis. At this stage, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to group the bipolar pairs that are dominant in participant perceptions. MANOVA was used to determine whether the factors changed according to socio-demographic characteristics. Results: The answers of 209 participants studying different design disciplines were evaluated in the study. As a result of the EFA, carried out separately for each public space, the bipolar pairs were classified into three groups: feelings of pleasure, excitation, and dominance. Conclusion: Excitation and dominance in area 1, excitation-dominance and satisfaction in area 2, and excitation and pleasure-dominance in area 3 were determined as factors affecting perception. According to the MANOVA results, while there was no statistical significance between the occupational disciplines and the participants who had not visited the field before (p>0.05), significant differences were found between the participants who were at different levels of design training (p<0.05).