Volume 11, Issue 1 (Semi-Annual 2026)
CIAUJ 2026, 11(1): 257-284 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Makani V, Einifar A. (2026). The Factors Influencing the Cognition of Mass-Space Configuration in Residential Complexes (Case Study: Shahid Beheshti Residential Complex, Sari). , CIAUJ. 11(1), 257-284. doi:10.66224/ciauj.11.1.674
URL: http://ciauj-tabriziau.ir/article-1-674-en.html
URL: http://ciauj-tabriziau.ir/article-1-674-en.html
1- Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran , makani@umz.ac.ir
2- School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (1146 Views)
Cognition of configuration, as one of the most advanced mental processes in humans, is a complex and multidimensional activity. The formation of this process in environments where spatial understanding requires movement and interaction with surroundings raises issues that are both challenging and thought-provoking. The aim of this study is to explain which factors influence the cognition of configuration in residential complexes. The research was conducted using a qualitative approach within the framework of critical realism, and the study population consists of the residents of the Shahid Beheshti residential complex in Sari. To achieve a comprehensive understanding of configuration, the selected complex was analyzed at both the macro and micro scales and across three levels: “individual places,” “pairs of places,” and “adjacent spaces of each place.” The sampling method was theoretical, and data were collected through semi-structured interviews, cognitive maps, and sketch maps, then analyzed using open and axial coding techniques. The findings revealed that cognition of spatial configuration, at both macro and micro scales, is based on three fundamental dimensions: environmental, human, and temporal. During the research, after identifying the components of each dimension and constructing a matrix of bidirectional relationships between environmental factors and configurational elements, the results from the three levels were presented in a conceptual model. Ultimately, the study concludes that in the open spaces of residential complexes, while environmental dimensions play a dominant role in recognizing the configuration of mass and space, a precise and stable mental image is achieved only when the environmental, human, and temporal dimensions interact in an integrative and synergistic manner.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Conceptualization of theorizing in Islamic architecture and urban ism
Received: 2025/11/3 | Accepted: 2026/02/21 | ePublished: 2026/06/28
Received: 2025/11/3 | Accepted: 2026/02/21 | ePublished: 2026/06/28
References
1. Abdelbaseer, M. A. (2012). Evaluating Way-Finding Ability Within Urban Environment. Eight International Space syntax Symposium, (pp. 1-39). Santiago de chile.
2. Alawadhi, A., Chandrasekera, T., & Yang, C. (2011). The Effect of Spatial Knowledge on Sense of Belonging in University/Academic Environments. Considering Research: Reflecting upon current themes in Architecture Research (pp. 337-344). Detroit: Association of Collegiate School of Architecture. [DOI:10.17831/rep:arcc%25y344]
3. Appleyard, D. (1970). Styles and Methods of Structuring a City. Environment And Behavior, 2, 100-117. doi.org/10.1177/001391657000200106 [DOI:10.1177/001391657000200106]
4. Asadpour,A. , Faizi,M. , Mozaaffar,F. and Behzadfar,M. (2015). Typology of models and comparative study of methods in recording mental images and cognitive maps from the environment. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 12(33), 13-22. [In Persian]
5. Devlin, A. S. (1973). The "Small Town" Cognitive Map: Adjusting To A New Environment. In G. T. Moore, & R. G. Golledge, Environmental:Theories, Research, and Methods (pp. 58-67). Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.
6. Didehban, M. , Purdeihimi, S. and rismanchian, O. (2022). Relation between Cognitive Properties and Spatial Configuration of the Built Environment, Experience in Dezful. Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies, 2(4), 37-64. [In Persian]
7. Downs, R. M. (1976). Cognitive Mapping and Information Processing: A Commentary. In G. T. Moore, & R. G. Golledge, Environmental Knowing (pp. 67-71). Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.
8. Eals, M., & Silverman, I. (1994). The hunter-gatherer theory of spatial sex differences: Proximate factors mediating the female advantage in recall of object. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15(2), 95-105. [DOI:10.1016/0162-3095(94)90020-5]
9. Friedenberg, J., & Silverman, G. (2019). Cognitive Science: An Introduction to the Study of Mind, (M. Oftadehal, Trans.). Tehran: Defense Industries Educational and Research Institute. [In Persian]
10. Garling, T., & Evans, G. w. (1991). Environment, Cognition and Action. Oxford: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS. [DOI:10.1093/oso/9780195062205.001.0001]
11. Garling, T., & Golledge, R. G. (1989). Environmental Perception and Cognition. In E. H. Zube, & G. T. Moore, Advances in Environment, Behavior, and Design (Vol. 2, pp. 203-239). New York: PLENUM PRESS. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4613-0717-4_7]
12. Garling, T., Book, A., & Ergezen, N. (1982). Memory for the spatial layout of the everyday physical environment: Differential rates of acquisition of different types of information. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 23, 23-35. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9450.1982.tb00410.x]
13. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
14. Golledge, R. G., & Moore, G. T. (1976). Environmental Knowing: Theories, Research, and Methods. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.
15. Golledge, R. G., Smith, T. R., Pellegrino, J. W., Doherty, S., & Marshall, S. P. (1985). A Conceptual Model and Empirical Analysis of Children's Acquisition of Spatial Knowledge. Journal of EnviFonmental Psychology, 125-152. [DOI:10.1016/S0272-4944(85)80014-1]
16. Heidari, A. A., Ghasemian Asl, E., & Kiaei, M. (2017). Analysis of the spatial structure of traditional Iranian houses using the space syntax method. Studies on the Iranian-Islamic City, 7 (28), 21-33. [In Persian]
17. Hillier, B. (2007). Space is the Machine, A configurational theory of architcture. London: University of Cambridge.
18. Jamshidi, S., & Pati, D. (2020). A Narrative Review of Theories of Wayfinding Within the Interior Environment. Health Environments Research & Design , 1-14. [DOI:10.1177/1937586720932276]
19. Jamshidi, M. (2003). Considerations on the theory of "space syntax". Journal of Jostarha-ye Shahrsazi, 6, 20-25. [In Persian]
20. Khatibi, M. R. (2013). Mutual influence of behavioral patterns in revitalizing the environmental identity of the city (case study: Sanandaj entrance area). Journal of Hoviat-e Shahr, 13, 63-73. [In Persian]
21. Kim, Y. 0. (1999). Spatial Configuration, Spatial Cognition:The Role of Architectural Intelligibility in Shaping Spatial Experience. London: A Thesis in Architecture, University College London.
22. Klett , R. F., & Alpaugh, D. (1976). Environmental Learning and Large-Scale Environments. In G. T. Moore, & R. G. Golledge, Environmntal knowing (pp. 121-131). Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
23. Lang, J. (2016). Creating architectural theory: The role of behavioral sciences in environmental design (A. Eini Far, Trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran. [In Persian]
24. Lynch, K. (1995). The image of the city (M. Mazini, Trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran Press. [In Persian]
25. McAndrew, F. T. (2015). Environmental psychology (G. Mahmoudi, Trans.). Tehran: Vania. [In Persian]
26. Mark, D. M. (1993). Human spatial cognition. In D. Medyckyj-Scott, & H. M. Hearnshaw, Human Factors in Geographical Information Systems (pp. 51-60). Belhaven Press.
27. Montello, D. R. (1993). Scale and multiple psychologies of spac. Spatial Information Theory A Theoretical Basis for GIS (pp. 19-22). Italy: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. doi:doi.org/10.1007/3-540-57207-4_21 [DOI:10.1007/3-540-57207-4_21]
28. Montello, D. R. (1998). A New Framework for Understanding the Acquisition of Spatial Knowledge in Large-Scale Environments. In M. J. Egenhofer, & R. G. Golledge, Spatial and Temporal Reasoning in Geographic information Systems (pp. 143-154). New York: Oxford University Press. [DOI:10.1093/oso/9780195103427.003.0011]
29. Montello, D. R., & Raubal, M. (2013). Functions and Applications of Spatial Cognition. In D. Waller, & L. Nadel, Handbook of Spatial Cognition (pp. 249-264). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. [DOI:10.1037/13936-014]
30. Montello, D. R. (2014). Spatial Cognition and Architectural Space: Research Perspectives. Architectural Design, 84(5), 74-79. [DOI:10.1002/ad.1811]
31. Montello, D. R. (2016). Behavioral methods in the field of spatial cognition research. In R. Gifford, Research methods for environmental psychology. (M. Gharehbaglou, M. Pirbabaei, & Z. AliNam, Trans., pp. 149-170). Tabriz: Islamic Art University of Tabriz. [In Persian] [DOI:10.1002/9781119162124.ch9]
32. Moore, G. T., & Golledge, R. G. (1976). Environmental Knowing: Theories, Research, and Methods. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.
33. Nadel, L. (2013). Cognitive Maps. In D. Waller , & L. Nadel, Handbook of Spatial Cognition (pp. 155-173). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. [DOI:10.1037/13936-009]
34. Nazif,H. and Motalebi,G. (2019). Developing a Conceptual Model of Legibility Relying on Mental Imagination. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 16(78), 69-76. doi: 10.22034/bagh.2019.187359.4156 [In Persian]
35. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall.
36. Ostad ghafari, S. (2016). Legibility- based urban regeneration, an approach toward both physical and contentual revival of the main structure. Motaleate Shahri, 5(17), 29-40. [In Persian]
37. Peponis, J., Bafna, S., Dahabreh, M. S., & Dogan, F. (2015). Configurational meaning and conceptual shifts in design. Journal of Architecture, 20, 215-243. [DOI:10.1080/13602365.2015.1025814]
38. Richardson, G. D. (1982). Spatial Cognition. Santa Barbara: University of California.
39. Rismanchian, O. and Bell, S. (2010). The application of space Syntax in studying the structure of the cities. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 2(43), 49-56. [In Persian]
40. Sarli, Z., & Manafzadeh, M. (2015).The effect of Gestalt psychology on learning theories. The 2nd International Conference on Behavioral Sciences and Social Studies, Istanbul. [In Persian]
41. Shafiei, M., & Eslami, G. R. (2017). Explaining the impact of epistemology in the fields of art and architecture. Hoviat-e Shahr, 32 (11), 67-78. [In Persian]
42. Shokouhi Dolatabadi, M., Masoud, M., & Ghalehnoei, M. (2019). A study on the Effect of Urban Blocks Order on the Environmental Meaning in Historical Texture (Chahar-Bagh Street) Compared with the Renewed One (Foulad-Shahr City Center). Maremat & Me'mari-e Iran, 9(18), 18-31. [In Persian]
43. Smelser, N. J., & Baltes, P. B. (2001). Encyclopedia of Social &Behavioral Sciences. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/04687-8 [DOI:10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/04694-5]
44. Stea, D. (1976). Program Notes on a Spatial Fugue. In G. T. Moore, & R. G. Golledge, Environmental Knowing- Theories, Research, and Methods (pp. 105-120). Pennsylvania: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.
45. Sternberg, R., Sternberg, K (2016). Cognitive Psychology. (S. Kharazi & A. Hejazi, Trans.). Tehran: SAMT Publications. [In Persian]
46. Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review. Psychological Review, 55(4), 189-208. [DOI:10.1037/h0061626]
47. Waller, D., & Nadel, L. (2013). Handbook of Spatial Cognition. Washington,DC: American Psychological Association. [DOI:10.1037/13936-000]
48. Weisberg, S. M., & Newcombe, N. S. (2016). How Do (Some) People Make a Cognitive Map? Routes, Places,and Working Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(5), 768-785. [DOI:10.1037/xlm0000200]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
