Architecture in Shaping Child Psychology

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY ANALYSING OPEN AND INFORMAL RECREATIONAL SPACES FOR 6-12 YEAR OLD CHILDREN AS PER THE DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY

27/3/2012

DISSERTATION DONE BY: SOMREETA DAS BA07ARC016 UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF: DR ALPANA DONGRE

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page a

Department of Architecture and Planning, VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NAGPUR-440011

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY By

Somreeta Das Roll No: BA07ARC016 Tenth Semester, B.Arch.

Under the guidance of

Dr. Alpana Dongre

Dr. Alpana Dongre

Sarika Bahadure

Head of Department

Dissertation Coordinator

2011-2012

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my profound gratitude to my Thesis Guide and Head of Department, Dr. Alpana Dongre for constantly motivating me to utilize the principle of “follow thy heart” but with an impeccable theory of architecture supporting the topic. Her enthusiasm and dynamism constantly inspires to carry on with the topic without losing track of the final goal to be achieved. I’m indebted to her for her invaluable guidance and the successful completion of my dissertation. I would also like to thank my Dissertation Coordinator, Sarika Bahadure for her constant active support, to complete my dissertation. My deepest gratitude to my family & parents, for their fathomless concern, support and encouragement, particularly for being the perennial source of creative inspiration & also for being the merciless critic to bring out the best in me. I hope to live up to their expectations.

I think “Thank You” is too small of an expression to express my gratitude to my most cherished friends: Shraddha and Maitreyi. If not for their patience to bear my insanity and invaluable inputs given by them in the form of meticulous thoughts & critical suggestions, my dissertation couldn’t have been satisfactorily completed.

Last but not the least, my most sincere thanks and best wishes to my friends and classmates for being there to provide a wide and balanced spectrum of positive and negative vibes, which became quintessentially instrumental in shaping me and my dissertation.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page ii

Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………

1–3

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND INTERPRETATION…………………………...

3–6

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

Preamble…………………………………………………………………………. Need Identification…………………………………………………………….. Aim………………………………………………………………………………… Objectives……………………………………………………………………….. Scope and Limitations…………………………………………………………. Methodology...............................................................................................

1 1 1 1 2 2

2.1

Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per psychoanalytical literature review) to generate Emotional Variables…………………………………………………………….. 3 2.1.1. Sense of Cognition of a Place…………………………………………… 4 2.1.2. Sense of Security…………………………………………………………… 4 2.1.3. Sense of Attachment/ Belongingness…………………………………. 5 2.1.4. Sense of Social Interaction/ Mingling…………………………………. 5 2.2 Summary of Inferences from Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per Psychoanalytical Literature)…………………………………….……........................................... 6

3. THE DUAL MODE OF SURVEY AND ITS INFERENCES………………… 3.1 3.2 3.3

7 – 17

The Primary Mode of Survey and Inferences……………………………… 7 The Secondary Mode of Survey: Observations, Recordings and Interpretations ……………………………………………………………………………………… 13 Summary of Inferences from the Second Mode of Survey: Observations, Recordings and Interpretations.........……………………………………………........................ 17

4. SUMMARY OF COMPILED INFERENCES…………………………..........

18 – 19

References and Bibliography…………………………………………..

20

Appendices………………………………………………………………...

21

Appendix – I: Appendix – II:

Summary of Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development Summary of Edward. T. Hall’s Theory of Proxemics

Tables: Table – 1:

Summary of Inferences from Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per Psychoanalytical Literature)………………………………..

6

Table – 2:

Summary of Inferences from the Second Mode of Survey: Observations, Recordings and Interpretations. …………………………………. 17

Table – 3:

Summary of cumulative inferences from the literature review based analysis, the dual mode survey of interviews and observations and their correlation in shaping an open and informal recreational space for children of age group 6 – 12 yrs……. .…………………………………………………………………………….. 18 – 19

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page iii

List of Illustrations:

Figure 1:

Methodology (as adopted for this dissertation topic)……………………………………………….

Figure 2:

Emotional Parameters and selection of the relevant and tangible ones as per the requirement to demarcate elements conducive to the open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children……………………………………………………………………………..................... 4

Figure 3:

Relativity diagram for the identified Emotional Parameters and analysis as per elements theorized by child psychologists and entities demarcated by architectural theorists/ architects (worked/working on similar themed projects)…………………………………………………………… 5

Figure 4:

The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview (LANDMARKS AND MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS)…………………………………………………….......................................... 7

Figure 5:

The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview (ENCLOSURES AND PROXEMICS OF BUILT – UNBUILT FABRIC)……………………………………………………………………….

10

Figure 6:

The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview (BELONGINGNESS)……

11

Figure 7:

The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview (SPACE DEFINITIONS)…

12

Figure 8:

LANDMARKS…...................................................................................................................

13

Figure 9:

MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS…………………………………………………………………………….

14

Figure 10:

ENCLOSURES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

14

Figure 11:

PROXEMICS OF BUILT – UNBUILT FABRIC………………………………………………………………………..

15

Figure 12:

BELONGINGNESS…………………….....................................................................................

15

Figure 13:

SPACE DEFINITIONS……………………..................................................................................

16

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

3

Page iv

ABSTRACT The human mind always endeavours to analyze architectural spaces from the point of view of tangible parameters such as anthropometrics, scales, proportions, etc. The due consideration of intangible aspects (that form emotional parameters of the deeper realms of the human psychology) is often interpreted on an individual level (subjective) by the architect / designer. Though this method works out invariably in case of adults, the ultimate challenge comes in when the space to be designed is an open and informal recreational space for 6 – 12 yr old children. The understanding of how a child perceives such spaces and what he/ she experiences while using that space is often misinterpreted; as “children” if taken to be the sole user type, then they fail to express their opinions (based on perceptions and experiences) of such spaces. Hence, the requirements, the elements – those that are to be provided by an architect / designer to such spaces need to be investigated so as to render them as avenues for adding “positive reinforcements” to the developmental child psychology, that otherwise remain unexplored. The research carried out includes two stages: Stage – 1: The analysis of emotional parameters (based on the psychoanalytical literature reviews) and deriving six emotional variables that affect the child psychology in an open and informal recreational space. The inferences derived are essentially qualitative in nature. Stage – 2: The examining of the emotional variables as per the interviews (verbal questionnaires) and observations. This aids in adding a quantitative aspect to the analysis done earlier (in Stage – 1) and helps in establishing the role of the identified emotional variables as the “guidepost” for designing open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page v

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1

Preamble “Psychology is the underlying principle for the way a structure is planned, a form is developed, architectural vocabulary is framed and ideas are expressed.” Jafar Tukan (Architect) The need of psychology is not limited to overall understanding alone. An architect / designer needs to address psychology as an analytical tool for understanding the basic behavioural pattern, i.e. how a person behaves, why does he behave in that manner and as per the answers obtained for the two previous questions, what are the elements of design that could be designed for his use. When child psychology is under question, then additional care needs to be taken to study the behavioural pattern as emotional traits differ in the different stages of the socio – cognitive development of a human being. Hence, in this dissertation, adequate emphasis has been paid to determine, analyze, draw intangible inferences, further analysis of intangible inferences based on a measurable format, deriving emotional variables, a detailed analysis of the emotional variables and establishing of the variables as the guiding elements while designing open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children on a contextual basis. But Psychology being a “Science without a Definition” and child psychology being a “Science still at its Infancy”, the analysis concludes with highly intangible inferences. Hence, if it is to be related to architectural spaces or forms, then the former needs to be addressed on a tangible basis – at least partially, even if not fully. Hence, the utilization of survey as means for cumulative analysis for quantitative (tangible) aspects and qualitative (intangible) aspects and coalescence of them to formulate hypothesis of design criteria for open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children.

1.2

Need Identification The need to study child psychology, relate to architecture by analytical morphogenesis of intangible emotional parameters to tangible design elements commences a process of linking two virtually impossible and opposing factors by means of rational thinking and practical methods. The basic need to translate psychology and its intangible traits into the tangible elements was to obtain the following: To have a better understanding of the underlying principle that has shaped architecture for open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children so far and Taking the process in a reverse direction, i.e. which architectural spaces/elements could shape the child psychology by providing “positive reinforcement” to the developmental child psychology.

1.3

Aim To analyze the tangible emotional variables of children (in general, for the age group of 6-12 yrs) and derive the elements of open & informal recreational spaces for children of that particular age group (namely, 6-12 yrs), which add positive reinforcement to the developmental psychology of the late childhood phase(6 – 12 yrs).

1.4

Objectives  To analyze the emotional variables as per the associative developmental child psychology and psychoanalytical literature.  To formulate relevant tangible emotional parameters that can be translated into elements that are essential for the designing of recreational open spaces for children.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 1

 To conduct surveys to gain an insight into the quantitative aspect that can be imparted to the analysis.  To draw parallels between the inferences gained from surveys (quantitative) and literature review based emotional parameter analysis (qualitative) in order to promote a set of guideposts for designing open & informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children for a contextual surrounding. 1.5

Scope and Limitation Scope: The opportunity to relate architectural spaces for children and the impact of such a space on the developmental psychology of a child / children using that space relegates a broad spectrum of analysis, observations, theories, surveys their respective correlation that helps gain an insight to the following:  The assessment of tangible and quantitative aspects governing the design of architectural spaces for children,  The effect of the aforementioned on the developmental child psychology,  The intangible and qualitative aspects required (if any) to be further infused to it,  Assessment of interrelationship between architectural spaces for children and the relative behavioural child psychology. Limitation: The deduced conclusions of the numerous studies and extensive research can be theorized based on only qualitative factors as developmental child psychology itself functions completely on a qualitative database derived from “intangible clauses of deductions”. Hence, attempt could be made to instill quantitative aspects only as a part. Complete quantitative parameters couldn’t be appended to it for obtaining a measurable end – product.

1.6

Methodology Stage – I: Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per psychoanalytical literature review) to generate Emotional Variables  Formulation of emotional parameters as per the literature review.  Determining the tangible parameters that are additive to the designing of elements comprising the open and informal recreational spaces for children in the age group 6 – 12 yrs.  To examine the emotional parameters from two different points of view: i.e.  As per the child psychologists; and  As per the architectural theorists/ architects (working on similar lines)  Determining interrelationship between the emotional parameters.  The inferences derived from the comparative analysis of the emotional parameters are purely qualitative in nature. The inferences are formulated in the form of emotional variables that may be analyzed with respect to quantitative measures. Stage – II: The dual mode survey to impart a quantitative aspect to the emotional variables as generated in Stage – 1 and establishes the variables as elements required for designing the open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children.  The survey was carried out in two modes:  The primary mode: interviews/ verbal questionnaires (purely quantitative outcomes)  The secondary mode: observations, recordings and interpretations (partly quantitative and partly qualitative)  Interviews: To determine on individual level the developmental stage of the child and put together as a whole to gain a statistical data, which shall add a tangible factor to it.  Observations: Partly quantitative and partly qualitative, these observations promote an insight into designing a space meant for kids on a contextual basis. Elements contributing to the creation of such spaces get highlighted in the process.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 2

 On the whole, the survey promotes a supplementary quantitative aspect to a study that is usually qualitative in nature. The survey provides an opportunity to analyze the emotional variables derived earlier from the literature review and hence promote a specific dimension to them to be utilized as the variables defining the design of open and informal recreational spaces. The inferences derived from the observations (secondary mode of survey) is responsible for “bridging the gap” between the inferences derived from the comparative analysis of emotional parameters and the inferences derived from the interviews / verbal questionnaires(primary mode of survey).

Figure 1: Methodology (as adopted for this dissertation topic)

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND INTERPRETATION 2.1

Stage – I: Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per psychoanalytical literature review) to generate Emotional Variables “Emotions are like the branches of a large oak tree. Though differences exist in their length, girth and bearing; they manifest their imagibility in innumerable manners and at countless times. Sometimes they may be tangible, sometimes they’re intangible; but often intangibility could find a way to express in measurable terms too…” Urie Bronfenbrenner. (Transcept from Ecological Systems Theory) As per the Theory of Social Development (Erik Erikson) The emotions in a human being are innumerable, but a few are only recognized in the spectrum, namely – fear, anger, anxiety, trauma, obstinacy, freedom, aggression, humour, playfulness, curiosity, self – obsession, cognition of place, security, attachment/ belongingness and social interaction/ mingling. The emotional parameters were further narrowed down to those that impart a tangible aspect with context of an open and informal recreational space. Hence, those derived out of the earlier list of emotional spectrum are as follows:

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 3

Sense of Cognition of a Place. Sense of Security. Sense of Attachment/ Belongingness. Sense of Social Interaction/ Mingling.

Figure 2: Emotional Parameters and selection of the relevant and tangible ones as per the requirement to demarcate elements conducive to the open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children.

The analysis of the tangible emotional parameters identified and delineated (in the figure 2) proceeded in the following manner: A.

SENSE OF COGNITION OF A PLACE: i. The Acquaintance comes from memory and memories are formed on viewing an object / place for more than once. ii. Landmarks are structures that don’t go unnoticed in an urban setting and hence, unintentionally all occasional/ regular users of that part of city become acquainted with them. Hence, landmarks form an integral part of the acquaintance – memory theory. iii. Mapped road networks only induce an additional reinforcement to the acquaintance – memory theory by generating interest in a space and get extended to form a covalent bond with the SENSE OF SECURITY.

B.

SENSE OF SECURITY: i. The Enclosures define Boundaries and boundaries delineate a specific dimension to it. A fixed dimension, as per their anthropometrics, ensures enhanced Comfort Levels in kids and hence the psychological security complex sets in. ii. A close – knit (built and unbuilt) fabric takes the concept of fixed dimensions of enclosures to the level of optimum positive – negative space creation. A space that is often demarcated as negative (in adult spaces) may add to the psychosocial development of kids in children spaces.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 4

iii.

All the aforementioned factors, if implemented with adequately careful planning, generate interest and this in turn, adds to the SENSE OF ATTACHMENT in children.

C.

SENSE OF ATTACHMENT/ BELONGINGNESS: i. Recognition and acceptance: They are the twin elements to form sense of cognition. ii. Cognition generates interest; and security, when added to it, evolves a SENSE OF ATTACHMENT, by inducing a feeling of belongingness in a child. iii. Belongingness comes into the picture when the child commences to identify himself / herself as a part of the surrounding animate as well as inanimate objects.

D.

SENSE OF SOCIAL INTERACTION/ MINGLING: The factors of Cognition, Security and Attachment signify that the child has perceived, recognized and accepted the space which in turn means that he has experienced the place on his/ her own terms. Also the above three criteria when gets instilled in a child on a cumulative basis, then it is instrumental in infusing confidence and elevating self esteem in the particular child to negate the emotions of insecurity and unseemliness that exists in the child of age group 6 – 8 yrs (i.e. the a section of the children being addressed in this dissertation) This implies: SENSE OF COGNITION OF A PLACE, SENSE OF SECURITY, & SENSE OF ATTACHMENT/ BELONGINGNESS are additive to the SENSE OF SOCIAL INTERACTION/ MINGLING in the children as social interaction implies perception, recognition, acceptance and experience of the place by the subject in context.

Figure 3: Relativity diagram for the identified Emotional Parameters and analysis as per elements theorized by child psychologists and entities demarcated by architectural theorists/ architects (worked/working on similar themed projects) ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 5

2.2 Summary of Inferences from Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per Psychoanalytical Literature)

Table 1: Summary of Inferences from Analysis of Emotional Parameters (as per Psychoanalytical Literature)

Hence, when the data from the analysis of the flow chart (Figure 3)gets documented after detailed analysis as discussed above, the six Emotional Variables are derived (which are the most important elements that are additive to the different emotional parameters) and the tabulated format of this initial analytical stage is as follows:

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 6

3. THE DUAL MODE OF SURVEY AND ITS INFERENCES: 3.1

The primary mode of survey: interviews/ verbal questionnaires Analysis of the six emotional variables: An analysis of the emotional variables (derived in Stage – 1) appends a measurable identity to the inferences as derived with complete qualitative inputs in the previous stage. Here, the survey format was planned and survey was taken for: Total no. of people surveyed: 37 Total no. of active responders: 34 No. of children who actively responded: (detailed division)  6 - 8 yrs: 14  9 -10 yrs: 9  11 -12 yrs: 11

Figure 4: The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview. a) The questions asked for identifying perception of LANDMARKS as a variable and subsequent statistical data analysis. b) The questions asked for identifying perception of MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS as a variable and subsequent statistical data analysis.

INFERENCES FROM THE PRIMARY MODE OF SURVEY: i.

LANDMARKS:

[Refer Figure 4 (a)]

When the children in question were asked about the prominent symbols or elements that they identified and connected with easily, the answers were varied. The pie-chart (as shown in the figure5) above depicts the percentage of children within the 6 – 12 yr age group with their identification of most prominent symbol/ element that they connected with at ease. ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 7

Apart from that, the fact worth noticing, at the qualitative point of view, was that maximum kids who voted for tangible elements such as temples, sculptures, supermarkets, etc were within the range of 9 – 12 yrs whereas those within the range of 6 – 8 yrs were vague with the denoting of the elements/ symbols. The children in the later childhood realm, i.e. 10-12yrs responded in a more formal manner by being able to pinpoint specific & relevant landmarks. Those who were below the age of 9yrs gave general answers and landmarks were vaguely described. Landmarks were mostly symbols that formed a conventional format for recognition. For eg. A symbol of ice-cream on the sign-board of an ice cream parlour was more noticed than the actual shop itself. This also reinforces the fact that the former group, due to being in the “Concrete Operational Stage” is capable of operating individually but with a reduced amount of independence of coherent thought pattern and devoid of freedom of decision making. However the latter group, in the “Formal Operational Stage”, have larger domain for decision making and freedom of independent thought process. (Jean Piaget’s Cognitive Social Development Theory) ii.

MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS:

[Refer Figure 4 (b)]

Mapping of road networks is usually done by determining “landmarks” and delineating specific loci for movement as per the landmarks. This was found to be true for the children in the age group of 6 – 12 yrs. The initial stage of cognitive abilities to map road networks by means of symbols/ landmarks in a child commences at the age beyond 2 yrs as that is when the “Pre – Operational Stage” commences. (Jean Piaget’s Cognitive Social Development Theory). This fact gets auto – analyzed in this section of survey as the larger section of children who are well aware of their way to the regular spaces that they access are within the age group of 9 – 12 yrs. The children in the later childhood realm, i.e. 10-12yrs portrayed a more independent outlook to problem solving. They preferred to deal with issues without any inputs from an adult and could map roads well to reach a destination without much hassle. Those who were below the age of 9yrs portrayed a more repressed outlook and more dependency on parents/ acquaintances. They depicted a more unsurely nature in mapping road networks. Usually children of or above 8yrs of age, delineated mapping elements by forming mental images or designating landmarks. For eg. 3-4 children termed pavilions with hexagonal roofing as “umbrellas”. To them, the “umbrellas” were located in spaces where there were sharp turns or curved excessively. The pie chart, which is the cumulative analysis of purely statistical data, signifies the overall 6- 12yr age group and their percentile preference of action in a contextual situation. Nonetheless, another important viewpoint noticed is the portrayal of the traits (as discussed in the previous point no i.) such as the constrained movement, incoherent thought pattern and insecurity aspects in 6 – 8 yrs old children during the “Concrete Operational Stage” versus freedom of thought pattern, curiosity to explore and independence to movement in 9 – 12 yrs old children during “Formal Operational Stage” are verified too. The latter point is mostly inferences drawn out after analysis of the statistical data on an individual level. iii.

ENCLOSURES:

[Refer Figure 5 (a)]

The enclosures define boundaries to imbibe sense of security in children. This is obliterate from the data gathered and the pie chart formulated on a comparative basis, pronounces that majority of the children in the age group of 6 – 12 yrs have opted for Fences (partial enclosures) and Hedges (natural enclosures) as the most desired ones. However, the observational data specifies that a considerate population of children within ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 8

the range of 9 – 12 yrs have precisely pinpointed the need of enclosures as panoptic with reference to the entire group. They added that if the space was meant for only their age group, then even complete absence of enclosures would do. The children in the later childhood realm, i.e. 10-12yrs have a greater developed personal space definition as per proxemics. This fact is depicted by the major section (about 58%) of them demanded their own play space which they would like to share with only their same age contemporaries. Those who were below the age of 9yrs aren’t satisfied with closed conditions on a majority basis (about 97%). They have a higher penchant for open spaces/ semi-open spaces. Also, those in the range of 9 – 12 yrs demanded lesser closed spaces and more open spaces (about 85%). The children preferred defining particular elements than in general enclosure types. The same fact is depicted in the pie chart. The younger range (6 – 8 yrs) preferred an enclosure than complete absence of it as the enclosure introduced a feeling of security. Whereas, the older range (9 – 12 yrs) preferred a partial or even the complete absence of enclosures. This imparted sense of independence in them and announced the commencement of freedom of thought process in them. The last statement is an insignia of the onset of the “Formal Operational Stage” in them. (Jean Piaget’s Cognitive Social Development Theory) iv.

PROXEMICS OF BUILT – UNBUILT FABRIC:

[Refer Figure 5 (b)]

The proxemics of built – unbuilt fabric here refers to the distances between the built spaces that the kids use/ access such as schools, residences, etc and the relative distance at which the open and informal recreational spaces are located. It was observed that the quality of playground determined their interest to play regularly and nearness was pretty subjectively graded. Hence, a relative conclusion had to be drawn from the verbal inputs given by the children, which directed that the open and informal recreational spaces in an urban scenario are spaces that are scarce, rarely found and remotely appreciated by even parents. Parents prefer to enroll children into structured sports and activities such as cricket, football, swimming, etc. that has a larger scope for development in the later future. However, this was a fact that was much contradictory to the famous child psychologists and child counselors such as Dr. Harish Shetty, Dr. Anu Rajgarhia, Dr. Upasana Saraf – all of who have a common opinion that preaches the emphasis of unstructured activities on overall psychological health and runs as follows: “The unstructured activities are what the kids need for better mental health. child learns to make friends and even deal with arguments and fights - thus learning to develop interpersonal relationships - when he or she engages in unstructured play. In such situations, children can learn to become team players and resolve issues, instead of keeping negative feelings within themselves. When children play in an open space, they develop a greater sense of 'self'. Apart from keeping children mentally and physically sane, unstructured play also satisfies a child, thus calming the mind and making him or her concentrate better on studies.” The majority of kids in the range of 8 – 11 yrs wanted their playgrounds to have more play structures such as slides, jungle gyms, etc. They felt more belongingness to a space that is equipped with more of such play structures and those features being put in an innovative manner, enhanced their attachment to the place. Many children also complained of play lots being situated much farther away from the residences – the reason why a major section of them could go to play there occasionally. This portrays their overall interest in the play spaces.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 9

Figure 5: The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview. a) The questions asked for identifying perception of ENCLOSURES as a variable and subsequent statistical data analysis. b) The questions asked for identifying perception of PROXEMICS OF BUILT-UNBUILT FABRIC as a variable and subsequent statistical data analysis.

v.

BELONGINGNESS:

[Refer Figure 6]

Belongingness is a highly subjective trait and depends solely on the user’s ability to feel connected to the space that they use/ access. As of in case of children, this trait varied even more. Hence, to approach this intangible variable, the modus operandi adopted was that of identification of those features in the open and informal recreational spaces for 6 – 12 yr old children with which they relate themselves well and how they would like to passively interpret the role of those features in making them feel connected to the spaces. The features rated were: play structures (swings, slides, etc), softscape and hardscape. The statistical data analysis showed that the children didn’t consider the hardscape “up to the mark” whereas the play structures and softscape were demarcated by them as of in dilapidated conditions. They demanded that the play structures be more realistic in nature than mere concoctions of computer simulated artificial, gigantic and abstract contraptions. This was probably due to the reason that children of the age group of 6 – 12 yrs harbor a very short span of voluntary attention and hence need to keep their interest captured in whatever actions they perform. The artificial play structures, with all of their elements of surprise being exhausted; soon fail to capture the child’s interest. Also the features in popular demand were as follows: Softscape: Water bodies such as small trenches, streams, fountains with adequate safety features, etc. More hedges and shrubs only as enclosures. Hardscape: Sand pits, areas with only consolidated earth for playpens and tiny play lots. ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 10

Figure 6: The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview. The questions asked for identifying perception of BELONGINGNESS as a variable and subsequent statistical data analysis.

vi.

SPACE DEFINITIONS:

[Refer Figure 7]

Space is well defined as a measurable parameter. However when the distances and spatial parameters from the point of view of psychology has to be approached, its similar to defining measurable with the immeasurable. So the method adopted was to analyse that if there exists any classification of relationships in the 6 – 12 yrs age group and was found that: When the relationships were grouped, there was a predominant tendency within the group to rate the entire set of relations within the domain of 0.45m – 0.90 m. Since according to sociologist Edward T Hall, “Whenever there is clubbing of relationships, it falls under the domain of either social space or personal space or both”; this depicts the fact that a socio-personal space for a child of that age might be deducted to be within the range of 0.45m – 0.90 m, which is about 2/3rd that of the normal adult human being (as per the Theory of Proxemics; E.T Hall; 1966) However, the passive interviews and informal questions put to the children of 6 – 12 yrs age and the subsequent analysis of those points drew a tangent to the fact that personal space is much flexible in the late childhood phase (6 – 12yrs) than the early childhood phase (36yrs) or adolescent phase (13-18 yrs). This was depicted by the comparative pie charts of space definitions put up that concludes that the journey from 6-8 yrs to 9-12 yrs witnesses a increase in social space and with the other spaces being constant, personal space is the one that is compromised upon and moulded accordingly to accommodate the social space.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 11

Figure 7: The Analysis of identified Emotional Variables as per the Interview. The questions asked for identifying perception of SPACE DEFINITIONS as a variable and subsequent statistical data analysis.

In the above figure,  Intimate space definition for both 6-8 yr olds and 9-12 yr olds are comparatively constant. This depicts that there is no change in the definition across the “Concrete Operational Stage” to the “Formal Operational Stage of their developmental psychology. However, the intimate space definition when observed in an adolescent/ adult, it will be found that the former (i.e. the children of 6-12yr age group) have a larger denomination of this space which passively investigates the close bound relationship patterns with the peers, contemporaries and friends.  The personal space undergoes a decreased prioritization from the age of 6-8 yrs to the age of 9-12 yrs. Also there is an increase in the prioritization of the social space. This portrays the flexibility in the personal space definitions that emerges in the transition and the enhanced thresholds of patience in the tolerance of encroachment of social space on personal space.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 12

3.2

The secondary mode of survey: Observations, Recordings and Interpretations

[Refer Figure 8 - 13]

The formulation of secondary analysis: To investigate the inferences derived from the primary mode of the survey and create a base of observational study which extends both – quantitative and qualitative nature to the inferences that can be derived of it. Hence, this mode of survey for stage – 2 of the study “bridges the gap” between the qualitative inferences derived from Stage – 1 (Analytical study of Emotional Parameters to derive Emotional Variables) and quantitative inferences from the primary mode of survey (Investigative Interviews/ Verbal Questionnaires) of Stage – 2.

Figure 8: LANDMARKS (Clockwise from the bottom left) (a) Elements that constitute landmarks are often appended a symbolization. In this case, the open pavilion is viewed by most kids as “chhattri” or “umbrella”. (b) The bridge here signifies an element of connect and imbibes greater interest of exploration in children. (c) The tunnel is yet another of the niches of interest, akin to the bridge. (d) The mound formed of stone masonry signifies a mountain. This depicts that elements are often related to some other animate / inanimate object to implement cognition and comprehendible behaviour. (e) The traffic light is one of the informal landmarks (in 6-8yr olds) as there may be various traffic signals available which makes it difficult to pinpoint which one the child in question is actually referring to. (f) Also the sculpture derived out of steel gears and steel bearings is an item of informal landmark. Though it is one of its kinds and can be specifically described, however, any specific denotation marking the exact point of its location is missing.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 13

Figure 9: MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS (From left to right) (a) Majority of the children visiting the Bal Jagat on a regular basis noticed an interesting pattern that wherever the winding road took a turn, an “umbrella” / pavilion (chhattri as per their terminology) was present. So they related the no. of the umbrellas to lead them to the pavilion to which they desired to go. (b) In the Traffic Park, the 6-8 yr old children related to the traffic signal poles as the landmarks. However, the 9-12 yr old children even connected to the particular play structures, eatery zone as well as play lots as the landmarks. The transition in freedom of thinking process gets reflected clearly by the aforementioned.

Figure 10: ENCLOSURES (From left side top to left side bottom) (a) The partial enclosure in the tot-lot area for the younger kids (6-8yrs) portrayed the presence of the insecurity in their outwearing personality due to the “Concrete Personality Stage” of their Developmental Psychology. (b) The majority of the children in the age group of 6-12 yrs liked the partial enclosures (like shrubs & hedges, fences of steel, timber, etc –as per their anthropometric proportions) as opposed to the complete enclosures (like the compound walls). Also some kids in the age group of 9-12 yrs mentioned about nonenclosed area being the best play spaces. The statement made by this group depicts the effect of freedom of thought, expression and belief in the “Formal Operational Stage” of their Developmental Psychology.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 14

Figure 11: PROXEMICS OF BUILT – UNBUILT FABRIC (Clockwise from the left bottom corner) (a) Though the traffic park itself is an entire recreational area and there are no built forms (save a few such as the eatery zone –as seen in the horizon in this photograph); when recreational zones are created within the residential campus or away from it, care should be taken to provide shaded pathways (for children to access it in harsh climatic conditions prevailing in the afternoon – early evening period in most Indian towns). Also organic layout of roads and elements such as mini-trains, trams, etc make accessibility to that space easier and imbibes interest in kids to involve in unstructured plays. (b) Though the children of 6-12yr age group appreciated the colourful ambience of the OAT, they played in this particular space often when they were present there in larger clusters/ groups. This portrays the fact that the children view this space as a social space exclusive of their personal space. (c) However, the adolescents/ adults perceive the OAT as an area for even oneto-one conversation. This portrays the fact that adolescents/ adults view this space as a social space inclusive of their personal space. (d) The proximity of play structures inside the tot lot area for the 6-8 yr old children is quite large so as to infuse the feeling of security in them. (e) The toy train largely captures the attention of the 6-12 yr old children as it symbolizes a dynamic traffic element and moving entity conforming to their scale of play structures.

Figure 12: BELONGINGNESS (From left to right) (a) Belongingness in the age-group of 6-12 yrs was found to be associated with play structures and their quality. Even a space with a single play structure could be identified as a space that the 6-12 yr old children connected to due to the realistic approach/ outlook it provides and enhanced level of interest it promotes. (b) A space with more no. of quality play structures definitely arrests the attention of children. Since, children of 6-12 yrs age group have a tendency to form natural groups as per factors such as selection of friends, compatibility, etc; the aforementioned space is instrumental in promoting interaction between the “natural groups” as formed by 6-12 yr old children. (c) Even a space that provides “n” no. of play structures but of a degraded quality/ in a dilapidated state fails to draw children to engage in unstructured play in such a space.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 15

Figure 13: SPACE DEFINITIONS (From right top corner) (a) The definition of space and distances as per the psychological aspects was first given by Edward. T. Hall in his book “The Hidden Dimension” (1966) It was represented by him as a basic target diagram of concentric circular areas with outermost circle representing public space and innermost circle representing intimate space. A particular dimension to each space was delineated. (please refer Appendix – II) (b) In his theory, Hall mentions that every human being has a personalized definition of intimate space and personal space. Though he appended certain values to those spaces, he additionally mentions the values to be invalid in case of personal definitions of those spaces being more dominant. (c) However, when the personal spaces of two different human beings comes into conflict( due to spaces of interaction being constrained such as a transport hub – bus stops, railway station, airports or other congested areas such as a market or exposition) there sets in a feeling of discomfort and insecurity. This alienates a person from that space and he experiences a loss in attachment with that space. (d) In case of children however, the designated values of the space relation diagram itself differs due to the difference in anthropometrics. If Timesaver Standards are duly considered, then an approximation could pronounce values rd allotted to all spaces by Hall to be scaled to 1/3 of the original values to relate it to the 6-12 yr old children. Here, the photograph depicts the intangible fact that when ample space is available, the children also form their own psychosocial definitions of space at that particular point of time. (e) However, when space availability is constrained, the children offer more flexibility of personal space as opposed to the infants(0-3yrs)/ children of early childhood phase (3-6yrs)/ adolescents(13-18yrs)/ adults (above 18 yrs). The photograph here depicts the same and also delineates that the Indian children are more flexible with their personal space and possess more threshold of patience pertaining to the encroachments on their personal space.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 16

3.3 SUMMARY OF INFERENCES FROM THE SECONDARY MODE OF SURVEY: OBSERVATIONS, RECORDING AND INTERPRETATIONS. The overall observational inferences derived from the regular visits to the open and informal recreational spaces in Nagpur are tabulated as follows: EMOTIONAL VARIABLES

OBSERVATIONAL INFERENCES

LANDMARKS

Since it was deduced in the interviews (primary mode of survey) that the children from 6 – 8 yrs and the 9 – 12 yrs differ in expression of elements of a landmark/ elements that could be termed as landmark. Hence, elements denoting landmark could be: • About 50% formal: namely sign boards, milestones, specific tree bounds, planters, etc • About 50% informal: namely innovative waste bins, differently coloured fences, bridges, Victorian direction markers, sculptures, etc

MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS

Elements to map road networks: • Formal landmarks and informal landmarks (please refer above) • Elementary entities with symbolic interpretation such as pavilions, kiosks, garden ornaments, etc (based on resembling something like the fruits, flowers, birds, etc – that captivates the attention of the children)

ENCLOSURES

Assessing secure and cognized spaces, elements may be: • Fences – timber, steel, etc (as per scale) • Hedges or shrubs (natural enclosure / barrier) • Compound wall (though not appreciated, used for plot bounding; also the most secure and complete enclosure)

PROXEMICS OF BUILT – UNBUILT FABRIC

In case of recreational spaces being considerably away from residences or educational zones, elements could be: • Shaded pathways, • Organic layout, • Public transportation (specifically for children): trams, mini-trains, etc.

BELONGINGNESS

Elements are as follows: • Realistic play structures (as per scale), • Garden furniture (as per scale), • Innovative corners / niches of interest such as small caves, tunnels, alcoves, interstices between the waterbodies and the bridges, etc.

SPACE DEFINITIONS

Intimate space denomination witnesses no major differences as the adolescence stage has not set in yet. However, intimate space across the concrete operational stage to formal operational stage remains balanced. The later stage witnesses an upsurge in social space denominations ≈ (5-7%). To accommodate the same, certain flexibility in personal spaces emerges within the age group of 6 – 12 yrs old children. This flexibility depends upon the cultural backgrounds, family backgrounds, space availability and personal boundary definitions.

Table 2: Summary of Inferences from the Second Mode of Survey: Observations, Recordings and Interpretations. This Table tries to put together elements that supplement the Emotional Variables that were derived from the Analysis of the Emotional Parameters as per Literature Reviews. The elements as mentioned in the above statement were also derived out of the Primary Mode of Survey: the Interviews/ Verbal Questionnaires. ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 17

4 SUMMARY OF COMPILED INFERENCES: The conclusions from the dual mode of survey (Stage – II) to substantiate the emotional variables derived from the literature studies (Stage – I) are compiled as a whole set of “guideposts” in the following tabular format:

GENERAL VIEWS

INFERENCES FROM INTERVIEWS (6 – 12 yrs)

6 – 8 yrs Informal and vague. (intangible)

9 – 12 yrs Formal and specific. (tangible)

MAPPING ROAD NETWORKS

With reference to symbolic interpretation of landmarks and their location. A major section of the population (≈97%) is able to map road networks.

With reference to formal names of roads, streets, prominent structures, etc. All (100%) can map road networks.

ENCLOSURES

Partial enclosures preferred by about 85% of the children. Approx. 15% of the population preferred non – enclosed spaces.

About 96 % of the population preferred non – enclosed spaces. Enclosed spaces were desired by a diminished no. (≈4%) for the insecurity complex.

LANDMARKS

INFERENCES FROM OBSERVATIONS (My Interpretation)

Commencement of Landmarks are the images formed formal operational after analyzing a new space, forming stage of developmental memory and later on viewing the psychology observed. same, form cognitive connection Partly formal and with it. Elements denoting landmark partly informal (1:1) could be: landmarks. • 50% formal: namely sign boards, milestones, specific tree rounds, etc • 50% informal: namely innovative waste bins, differently coloured fences, bridges, Victorian place markers, sculptures, etc On an average, about 98% of the children possess developed mapping techniques either by interpretation of landmarks or mental imagibility resulting into symbolization of prominent structures or even significantly • insignificant elements.

Mapping takes place by identification, subsequent memorizing and consequent recalling of elements marked into the subconscious realms by means of unique system of symbolization of animate/ inanimate objects by every individual child. However, in general, the elements to map road networks: Formal landmarks and informal landmarks (please refer above) • Elementary entities with symbolic interpretation such as pavilions, kiosks, garden ornaments, etc (based on resembling something like the fruits, flowers, birds, etc – that captivates the attention of the children) • Partial enclosures are A large population of the children, preferred to an passively denied enclosures as an average of about 25% element due to the overtly active of the children in the sense of freedom shaping up their age group of 6 – 12 yrs. emotional traits at that age-group. Whereas, the children Nonetheless, assessment is made prefer non – enclosed keeping in mind the above factor spaces on a larger basis and analyzing secure and cognized (≈75%). The entire spaces that were identified by the concept of the children, the elements may be: enclosure is however, • Fences – timber, steel, etc (as per conducive to two scale) major factors: • Hedges or shrubs (natural enclosure cognition of the place / barrier) and security. • Compound wall (though not appreciated, used for plot bounding; also the most secure and complete enclosure) •

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 18

PROXEMICS OF BUILT – UNBUILT FABRIC

The nearness of a residence/ school to an open & informal recreational space is mostly irrelevant in a significant no. of children (≈ 98%).

The nearness of such a space near the residence (specifically) is desired by about 92% of the children of this age group.

BELONGINGNESS

Though pretty subjective for this section of children, could be related to play structures as elements deciding the acceptance of the major section (94%) of the children.

Scale specific realistic play structures are preferred over artificially crafted abstract play structures by the majority (87%) of the population.

SPACE DEFINITIONS

Has no basic distinguishing ability to segregate personal and intimate space. Both spaces are designated as top priority with equivalent proportions ≈(1:1)

Can distinguish between personal and intimate space. Social space increases. Personal space decreases. But both are of equivalent proportions ≈(1: 1)

According to the 9 – 12 yrs old children (≈92%), for their age group, when they’re increasingly falling into a phase of increasing social space and academic engagements, its necessary to promote • open and informal • recreational spaces • within a range of near moderately near. Though the major factor deciding the • interest engaging elements could be play • structures for the 6 – 8 • yrs old children, the presence of same age contemporaries is a major driving force behind the attention capturing quality of an open and informal recreational space for children of 9 – 12 yrs age group. Majority of children (about 89%) preferred realistic play structures, better hardscape: structured sandpits, proper pavings, etc and well managed softscape: namely fountains, shallow pools, etc. There is a significant reduction in personal space (by about 5%) after stepping into the formal operational stage of developmental psychology. It is governed by a major transition into a phase that witnesses the largest infusion of social activities in a child’s life.

Here the proxemics refers to the distance between an open and informal open space and the residence of a particular child in question. Though, here, the analysis made is completely based on compiled overall data assembled into a comparative pie chart. The elements could be: Shaded pathways, Organic layout, Public transportation specifically for children: trams, mini-trains, etc. Elements are as follows: Realistic play structures (as per scale), Garden furniture (as per scale), Innovative corners / niches of interest such as small caves, tunnels, alcoves, interstices between the water bodies and the bridges, etc.

The relative intimate space denomination witnesses no major differences as the adolescence stage has not set in yet. However, intimate space across the concrete operational stage to formal operational stage remains balanced. The later stage witnesses an upsurge in social space denominations ≈ (57%)

Table 3: This table encompasses the cumulative inferences from the literature review based analysis, the dual mode survey of interviews and observations and their correlation in shaping a space. Survey based elements of Emotional Variables are derived in the later stage that conform to the Emotional Parameters that contribute to the formulation of the Emotional Variables in the earlier stage. This analysis, on the whole, determines as to how the elements of the Emotional Variables shape the open and informal recreational space which in turn adds positive reinforcement to the developmental psychology of 6-12 yr old children.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 19

References and Bibliography: Dudek, M. (2005). Children's Spaces. Architectural Press. G. Kyle, A. Graefe, R. Manning, J. Bacon. (2004, June). Effects of Place Attachment on User's Perceptions of Social and Environmental Conditions in a Natural Setting. Journal of Environmental Psychology , pp. 213-225. Hall, E. T. (1966). Proxemics: The Psychological Spaces. In E. T. Hall, The Hidden Dimension. Hay, R. (1998, March). Sense of Place in Developmental Context. Journal of Environmental Psychology , pp. 5-29. Josien Caris, Roger Voncken. (2005). Personal Space: Furniture Proxemics in Conversation. Kim, D. D. (2006). Georg Simmel in Translation: Interdisciplinary Border-Crossings in Culture and Modernity. Cambridge Scholars Press. Lawson, B. (2001). The Language of Space. Architectural Press. Masand, P. (2001, May). Recreational Spaces can be Learning Grounds too: Experts. Times of India . Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. Peters, U. H. (1985). Anna Freud: The Dream of Psychoanalysis. Schocken Books. Piaget, J. (1953). The Various Stages of Cognitive Social Development. In J. Piaget, The Origin of Intellligence in the Child. Routledge & Kegar Paul. R. C. Moore, D. Young. (1978). Childhood Outdoors: Towards a Social Ecology of the Landscape. Children and the Environment . Said, D. I. (2006). Architecture for Children: Understanding Children Perception towards Built Environment. Simmel, G. (1908). The Sociology of Space. In G. Simmel, Sociology: Investigations on the Forms of Sociation. Sommer, R. (1959). Studies in Personal Space. Sociometry . Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between Learning and Development. In L. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The development of Higher Psychological Processes (pp. 79-91). Havard University Press. Yair bar-haim, Ora Avezier, Yair Berson, Abraham Sagi. (2002). Attachment in Infancy and Personal Space Regulation in Early Adolescence. In Attachment and Human Development (pp. 68-83). Taylor & Francis.

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 20

Appendices Appendix – I:

Summary of Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development

STAGE Sensori-motor (Birth-2 yrs)

CHARACTERISED BY  

 Pre-operational (2-7 years)

  

Concrete operational (7-11 years)

  

Formal  operational (11 years and up) 

Appendix – II:

Differentiates self from objects Recognizes self as agent of action and begins to act intentionally: e.g. pulls a string to set mobile in motion or shakes a rattle to make a noise Achieves object permanence: realizes that things continue to exist even when no longer present to the sense (pace Bishop Berkeley) Learns to use language and to represent objects by images and words Thinking is still egocentric: has difficulty taking the viewpoint of others Classifies objects by a single feature: e.g. groups together all the red blocks regardless of shape or all the square blocks regardless of colour Can think logically about objects and events Achieves conservation of number (age 6), mass (age 7), and weight (age 9) Classifies objects according to several features and can order them in series along a single dimension such as size. Can think logically about abstract propositions and test hypotheses systematically. Becomes concerned with the hypothetical, the future, and ideological problems

Summary of Edward. T. Hall’s Theory of Proxemics

Zones of Interpersonal Space

Ranges at about

Relations considered for interaction under the space

Intimate Space

18 inches (46 cm)

Reserved for children, close family members, close friends and pet animals.

Personal Space

18 inches (46 cm) – 4 feet (122 cm)

Reserved for conversations with friends, to chat with associates, and in group discussions.

Social Space

4 feet to 8 feet (1.2 m - 2.4 m)

Reserved for strangers, newly formed groups, and new acquaintances.

Public Space

More than 8 feet (2.4 m)

Reserved for larger audiences

ARCHITECTURE IN SHAPING CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; Somreeta Das (BA07ARC016)

Page 21