When Buildings Don’t Work: the Role of Architecture in Human Health

We spend upwards of 90% of our lives within buildings, yet we know much more about the effects of ambient environmental conditions on human health than we do about how buildings affect our health. This article employs the heuristic of psychological stress to generate a taxonomy of architectural dimensions that may affect human health. Specific interior design elements illustrating each of these architectural dimensions are provided. There is little existing evidence that specific design features directly impact human health. The aim of this article is to provoke further thinking and research on this possibility.  1998 Academic Press Introduction that stress significantly contributes to physical health is well established (Cohen et al., 1995). Most research on stress and ill health has focused on perPeople spend more than 90% of their lives within buildings. Yet we know much more about how ambisonal variables (e.g. Type A behavior) or social conditions (e.g. social support) (Kiritz & Moos, 1974; ent environmental conditions affect human health than we know about how the built environment Taylor, Repetti, & Seeman, 1997). With the exception of ambient environmental stressors such as influences health. There is very little direct evidence that characteristics of the built environment noise, traffic, crowding, and air pollution (Evans, in press; Evans & Cohen, 1987), very little attention can affect human health. The aim of this paper is to provoke additional thinking and research on properhas been paid to the potential role of the built environment in human health. In the next section ties of the built environment that can adversely affect human health. A heuristic that may provide five architectural dimensions are defined and linked to stress. For each dimension, ideas are presented some insight is the concept of stress (Saegert, 1976; Zimring, 1982). about specific interior design elements that constitute that particular dimension. Stress occurs when there is an imbalance of environmental demands and human resources (Evans & Cohen, 1987). This article develops a preliminary taxonomy of design characteristics that Linking Architectural Dimensions to Stress have the potential to challenge human adaptive coping resources. We acknowledge that stress is a Stimulation dynamic process that depends heavily upon individual coping resources. However, until we understand Stimulation describes the amount of information in a setting or object that impinges upon the human more about how salient properties of typical, everyday interiors challenge human coping capacities, user. Intensity, variety, complexity, mystery and novelty are specific design qualities pertinent to our understanding of environment and human health will remain incomplete. stimulation. Human beings function optimally with moderate levels of stimulation. Lack of stimulation Below we describe five dimensions of the designed environment that potentially could affect human leads to boredom or, if extreme, sensory deprivation. Insufficient stimulation may also deprive health by altering stress levels. The proposition 86 G. W. Evans and J. Mitchell McCoy FIGURE 2. Mystery, the promise of further information, invites the user to explore the scene further. Partially occluded spaces and views, embedded spaces, and the suggestion of additional interesting spaces foster mystery. and orientation of an interior space directly influence stimulation levels. Adjacencies to sources of FIGURE 1. High levels of complexity created by variety and stimulation and proximity to circulation paths can intensity lead to an overabundance of stimulation. The sheer diversity of elements and size of the space combine to overload directly affect stimulation levels. Location in space the senses. The space lacks any strong unifying theme or and room shape can both affect visual pattern. exposure—the extent to which others can see a person in a room (Archea, 1977). The visual and acoustic properties of barriers can obviously affect stimuthe human organism of practice in successfully accommodating environmental challenges. Too lation levels in terms of the degree of shielding they provide. much stimulation causes distraction and overload which interfere with cognitive processes that People like small amounts of change but do not adapt well to large amounts of variation. Thus, famdemand effort or concentration. Overstimulation makes it difficult to focus attention and interrupts iliarity and routine will influence reactions to stimulation levels. Over time we gain coherence ongoing, planned action patterns (Wohlwill, 1974). Levels of stimulation are influenced by properties with a setting but lose our sense of involvement and interest since the challenges of exploration and disof interior settings such as intensity, complexity, and novelty of stimulus characteristics. Loud noise, covery diminish (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1982). People need enough complexity and mystery to provide bright light, unusual or strong smells, and bright colors, particularly at the red end of the spectrum, challenging opportunities so that meaningful problem solving can happen. Complexity refers to the all appear to increase stimulation (Berlyne, 1971; Mehrabian & Russell, 1974). Crowding and inapdegree of variety and diversity in a setting. Mystery indicates the promise of further information with propriately close interpersonal distances increase stimulation (Aiello, 1987; Baum & Paulus, 1987). continued exploration. Partial vistas, spaces that are not fully comprehensible without exploration, Extremes of stimulus intensity and very complex or incoherent patterns of stimulation are potentially and building layout configurations that portend but not restrict what is ahead contribute to mystery. stress-inducing. A typical example of such an environment is shown in Figure 1. Too much complexity or mystery makes interiors confusing and unanalyzable; too little renders preExposure to visual and acoustic stimulation is strongly influenced by layout, circulation systems, diction trivial (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1982). This is illustrated in Figure 2. and the individual’s location in space. The shape 87 When Buildings Don’t Work: The Role of Architecture in Human Health