A Methodology approach for the comparison of cases in space syntax and morphology studies

Mehmet Emin Şalgamcıoğlu

doi:10.47818/DRArch.2021.v2i1013

A Methodology approach for the comparison of cases in space syntax and morphology studies

Authors

Mehmet Emin Şalgamcıoğlu Short Bio Assoc. Prof. Dr. Istanbul Technical University, Turkey

Mehmet (BSc. MSc. PhD., ITU) is an Architect and Associate Professor of Architectural Design in Istanbul Technical University. He was a visiting scholar in University of Michigan in 2010 and worked on several professional design projects previously. He is currently Vice Head of Architecture Department in Istanbul Technical University and his current research areas are Architectural Design and Morphology, Space Syntax, Gentrification, Housing, and Domestic Space Organisation. He also has international and national architectural design competition awards as well as published design critics, book chapters, conference papers, and journal articles. He is one of the founding members of “National Architecture Accreditation Association” (former Architecture Accreditation Board - MİAK), in 2019 and a proud member of International Association for People-Environment Studies, IAPS Network.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2021.v2i1013

Keywords:

domestic space, research methodology, spatial morphology, space syntax

Abstract

The aim of this paper is examining a research design methodology approach. This methodology approach is mainly focusing on investigating the comparison of consistent cases within a research structure. The comparison is carried out through the 2D drawing layouts such as plans in the selected study. Although the main concern is examining the methodology covering the comparison of low-rise apartments’ domestic space plan layouts, the exemplar study is also introduced briefly within the paper for a better understanding of the introduced comparison structure and the part of the methodology scrutinized. Comparison of plan layouts related cases in space syntax and morphology studies is the starting point. Afterwards, the discussion on the selection of similar plan types (2D drawings) in meaning and sizes made the methodology introduced possible. Focusing on an architectural design related research study is a crucial part of this paper supporting the core discussion. For this reason, focusing on a former research based on architectural design related domestic space investigation with its context related to low-rise apartment plans’ in Istanbul was needed. Other than domestic space investigations, this approach may also be applied to similar investigations covering building design morphology and spatial syntax related researches focusing on the comparison of cases depending on a systematic selection. The selection of the analyzed cases in this design methodology approach is crucial with their similar extent of plan sizes and semantic coherence in relation with their use of spaces. Environment-Behavior Studies related research context is also crucial for this methodology approach. Behavioral circuits, behavior setting, and culture-ecology perspective within the building scale should be primarily discussed in order to use this paper’s methodological approach.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Alexander, C. (1966). A city is not a tree. Design magazine, 206, 46-55.
Alexander. C., Ishikawa. S., Silverstein. M. (1977). A pattern language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Monterey, CA.: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Batty, M. (2001). Exploring isovist fields: space and shape in architectural and urban morphology. Environment and planning b: planning and design, 28, 123‐150.
Benedikt, M. (1979). To take the hold of space: isovists and isovist fields. Environment and planning b: planning and design, 6, 47‐65.
Colonas, V. (1999). 19. Yüzyıl dönüm noktasında istanbul’daki Rum mimarlar ve yönlendirici öğeler. (çeviren: D. N. Özer) Yapı, 217, 84-88. İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.
Conroy Dalton, R. (2001). Omnivista: An Application for İsovist Field and Path Analysis. Proceedings of The 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.
Cezar, M. (1977). Anadolu öncesi türklerde şehir ve mimarlık (City and architecture in turkish society before anatolia). Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları 176.
Çorlu, V. (1999). Bir anatomi dersi: ev. Cogito, 18. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
Edgü, E., Ünlü, A., Salgamcioglu, M. E., Mansouri, A. (2012) Traditional Shopping: A Syntactic Comparison of Commercial Spaces in Iran and Turkey. In M. Greene, J. Reyes and A. Castro (Eds.), Proceedings: Eighth International Space Syntax Symposium, Chile: Santiago de Chile, January 3-6
Eruzun, C. (1980). Konutlarda mekan özelleştirme düzeyinin saptanmasına ilişkin bir yöntem (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). İstanbul Devlet Güzel Sanatlar Akademisi, Mimarlık Fakültesi, İstanbul.
Franz G., Wiener, J. M. (2008). From space syntax to space semantics: a behaviorally and perceptually oriented methodology for the efficient description of the geometry and topology of environments. Environment and planning b: planning and design, 35, 574-592.
Hanson, J. (1994). Deconstructing architects’ houses. Environment and planning b: planning and design, 21 (6), 675-704.
Hanson, J. (1999). Decoding homes and houses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B. ve Leaman, A. (1973) The man-environment paradigm and its paradoxes. Architectural design. August Issue.
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Peponis, J., Hudson, J., Burdett, R. (1983). Space syntax: a different urban perspective. The architects journal. 178 (48), 47-63.
Hillier, B. ve Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B., Burdett, R., Peponis, J., Penn, A. (1987). Creating life, or, does architecture determine anything? Architecture and behavior/Architecture et comportement, 3, 233-250.
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Peponis, J. (1987). Syntactic analysis of settlements. Architecture et Comportement/Architecture and Behavior, 3 (3), 217-231.
Hillier, B., Penn, A., Hanson, J., Grajewski, T., Xu, J. (1993). Natural movement; or, configuration and attraction in urban space use. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 20, 29-66.
Hillier, B. (2007). Space is the machine: a configurational theory of architecture. [UCL Discovery Version]. Erişim adresi http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk /3848/1/SpaceIsTheMachine_Part1.pdf
Kaplan, S. (1987). Aesthetics, affect, and cognition: environmental preference from an evolutionary perspective. Environment and behavior, 19 (1), 3-32.
Keyder, Ç. (1999). İstanbul küresel ile yerel arasında. İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
Kim, Y.O. (1999). Spatial configuration, spatial cognition and spatial behaviour: the role of architectural ıntelligibility in shaping spatial experience (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). University College London, Londra.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1967). Structural anthropology, (Vol. 1). Garden City, New York: Anchor Books.
Lösch, A. (1954). The economics of location. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
Montello, D. R. (1993). Scale and multiple psychologies of space. Spatial ınformation theory: a theoretical basis for GIS içerisinde, (pp.312-321). Berlin: Springer.
Newman, O. (1972) Defensible space, New York: Mac Millan.
Nişanyan, S. (2009). Sözlerin soyağacı: çağdaş türkçe’nin etimolojik sözlüğü. Cağaloğlu, İstanbul: Everest Yayınları.
Penn, A. (2003). Space syntax and spatial cognition, or why the axial line? Environment and behavior, 35 (1), 30 - 65.
Peponis, J., Hadjinikolaou, E., Livieratos, C., Fatouros, D. A. (1989). The spatial core of urban culture. Ekistics, 334/335, 43-55.
Piggott, S. (1965). Ancient europe, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Proshansky, H. M., Ittelson, W. H., Rivlin, L.G. (1970). Environmental psychology: man and his physical setting. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Proshansky, H. M., Ittelson, W. H., Rivlin, L. G. (1976). Environmental psychology: people and their physical settings. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Read, S. (1999). Space syntax and dutch city. Environment and planning b: planning and design, 26, 251-264.
Stiny, G. ve Gips, J. (1978). Algorithmic aesthetics. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press.
Thünen, J. H. ve Hall, P. (1966). Von thünen's ısolated state: an english edition of: der isolierte staat. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Turner, A., Doxa, M., O’Sullivan, D., Penn, A. (2001). From isovist to visibility graphs: a methodology for the analysis of architectural space. Environment and planning b: planning and design, 28, 103-121.
Ünlü, A., Edgü, E., Özden, T., Özener, O. (2001a). Axial Lines and Crime Relationship in Central Neighbourhoods. In J.Peponis, J.Wineman, S.Bafna (Eds.), Proceedings of 3rd International Symposium on Space Syntax. Atlanta, USA: College of Architecture, Georgia Institute of Technology.
Ünlü, A., Özener, O., Özden, T., Edgü, E. (2001b). An Evaluation of Social Interactive Spaces in A University Building. In J.Peponis, J.Wineman, S.Bafna (Eds.), Proceedings of 3rd International Symposium on Space Syntax, (pp.46.1-46.8). Atlanta, USA: College of Architecture, Georgia Institute of Technology.
Ünlü, A., Ülken, G., Edgü, E. (2005). A Space Syntax Based Model in Evacuation of Hospitals. In Akkelies van Nes (Ed.), Proceedings of 5th International Space Syntax Symposium, (pp.161-173). Netherlands: Delft University of Technology.
Ünlü, A., Edgü, E. (2007). Comparative Space Syntax Analysis of Design Strategies for Istanbul Underground System. In Ayse Sema Kubat (Ed.), Proceedings of 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, (Vol.2, p.74, 01-10). Istanbul: Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture.
Ünlü, A., Edgü, E., Cimşit, F., Salgamcioglu, M. E., Garip, E., Mansouri, A. (2009). Interface of Indoor And Outdoor Spaces in Buildings: A Syntactic Comparison of Architectural Schools in Istanbul. In D. Koch, L. Marcus, J. Steen (Eds.), Proceedings of 7th International Space Syntax Symposium, (p.132). Stockholm, Sweden: KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

Downloads

PDF

866

589

Published

2021-04-29

How to Cite

Şalgamcıoğlu, M. E. (2021). A Methodology approach for the comparison of cases in space syntax and morphology studies. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 2(1), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2021.v2i1013