Comment

Comment by 陳老頭 on February 11, 2024 at 3:23pm

One is addressed to the eyes, the other to the ears.” (Varga,  1996,p.114).Moreover, inhis laterwork(e.g.,Polytopes),  Xenakis pursued the idea of creating a total dissociation be tween visual and aural perception in large abstract sound and light installations (Sterken, 2007, p. 33).

 At several points throughout his book Pérez-Gómez (2016), stresses the importance of “synaesthesia” to architecture, without, unfortunately, ever really quite defining what he means by the term. All one finds are quotes such as the following: “primordial synesthetic perception”,  p. 11;  “perception is primordially  synesthetic”, p. 20; “synaesthesia as the primary modality  of human perception”, p. 71. Pérez-Gómez (2016, p.  149) draws heavily on Merleau-Ponty’s (1962, p. 235) Phenomenology of Perception, quoting lines such as:

 “The senses translate each other without any need of an interpreter, they are mutually comprehensible without the intervention of any idea.” A few pages later he cites Heidegger “truths as correspondence” (Pérez-Gómez,  2016, p. 162). This does, though, sound more like a de scription of the ubiquitous crossmodal correspondences  (Marks, 1978; Spence, 2011) than necessarily fitting with  contemporary definitions of synaesthesia, though the distinction between the two phenomena admittedly remains fiercely contested (e.g., Deroy & Spence, 2013; Sathian & Ramachandran, 2020). Abath (2017) has done a great job of highlighting the confusion linked to Merleau-Ponty’s incoherent use of the term synaesthesia, that has, in turn, gone on to “infect” the writings of other architectural theorists, such as Pérez-Gómez (2016).

Talking of synaesthetic design may then be something  of a misnomer (Spence, 2015), the fundamental idea here is to base one’s design decisions on the sometimes surprising connections between the senses that we all share, such as, for example, between high-pitched sounds and small, light, fast-moving objects (e.g.,  Spence, 2011, 2012a). It is important to highlight the fact  that while these crossmodal correspondences are often confused with synaesthesia, they actually constitute a superficially similar, but fundamentally quite different empirical phenomenon (see Deroy & Spence, 2013).

We have already come across a number of examples of crossmodal correspondences being incorporated,  knowingly or otherwise, in design decisions. Just think about the use of temperature-hue correspondences  (Tsushima et al., 2020; see Spence, 2020a, for a review).

The lightness-elevation mapping (crossmodal correspondence) might also prove useful from a design perspective (Sunaga, Park, & Spence, 2016). And colour taste and sound-taste correspondences have already been incorporated into the design of multisensory experiential spaces (e.g., Spence et al., 2014; see also Adams &  Doucé, 2017; Adams & Vanrie, 2018). Once one accepts  the importance of crossmodal correspondences to environmental design, then this represents an additional level  at which sensory atmospheric cues may be judged as  congruent (e.g., see Spence et al., 2014). One of the important questions that remains for future research,  though, is to determine whether there may be a priority of one kind of cross modal congruency over others when they are manipulated simultaneously.

Comment by 陳老頭 on February 8, 2024 at 5:53pm

Conclusions

While it would seem unrealistic that the dominance, or hegemony (Levin, 1993), of the visual will be overturned any time soon, that does not mean that we should not do our best to challenge it. As critic David Michael Levin puts it: “I think it is appropriate to challenge the hegemony of vision– the ocular-centrism of our culture.

And I think we need to examine very critically the character of vision that predominates today in our world. We urgently need a diagnosis of the psychosocial path ology of everyday seeing– and a critical understanding of ourselves as visionary beings.” (Levin, 1993, p. 205).

While not specifically talking about architecture, what we can all do is to adopt a more multisensory perspective and be more sensitive to the way in which the senses interact, be it in architecture or in any other as pect of our everyday experiences.

By designing experiences that congruently engage more of the senses we may be better able to enhance the quality of life while at the same time also creating more immersive, engaging, and memorable multisensory experiences (Bloomer & Moore, 1977; Gallace & Spence, 2014; Garg, 2019; Spence, 2021; Ward, 2014). Stein and Meredith (1993, p. xi), two of the foremost multisensory
neuroscientists of the last quarter century, summarized this idea when they suggesting in the preface to their in fluential volume The merging of the senses that: “The in tegration of inputs from different sensory modalities not only transforms some of their individual characteristics, but does so in ways that can enhance the quality of life.

Integrated sensory inputs produce far richer experiences than would be predicted from their simple coexistence or the linear sum of their individual products.” There is growing interest across many fields of endeavour in design that moves beyond this one dominant, or perhaps even overpowering, sense (Lupton & Lipps, 2018). The aim is increasingly to design for experience rather than merely for appearance. At the same time, however, it is also important to note that progress has been slow in translating the insights from the academic field of multisensory research to the world of architec
tural design practice, as noted by licensed architect Joy Monice Malnar when writing about her disappointment with the entries at the 2015 Chicago Architecture Biennial.

Comment by 陳老頭 on February 8, 2024 at 5:52pm

There, she writes: “So, where are we? What is the current state of the art? Sadly, the current research on multisensory environments appearing in journals such as The Senses & Society does not appear to be impacting artists and architects participating in the Chicago Biennial. Nor are the discoveries in neuroscience offering new information about how the brain relates to the physical environment.” (Malnar, 2017, p. 153).19 At the same time, however, the adverts for at least one new residential development in Barcelona promising residents the benefits of “Sensory living” (The New York Times International Edition in 2019, August 31–Septem ber 1, p. 13), suggests that at least some architects/de signers are starting to realize the benefits of engaging their clients’/customers’ senses. The advert promised that the newly purchased apartment would “provoke their senses”.

Ultimately, it is to be hoped that as the growing awareness of the multisensory nature of human perception continues to spread beyond the academic community, those working in the field of architectural design practice will increasingly start to incorporate the multisensory perspective into their work; and, by so doing, promote the development of buildings and urban spaces that do a better job of promoting our social, cognitive, and emotional well-being.

(Source: Senses of place: architectural design for the multisensory mind by Charles Spence; in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications (2020) 5:46 Keywords: Multisensory perception, Architecture, The senses, Crossmodal correspondences)

Related:

札哈哈蒂：房子能浮起來嗎？11

沙巴丹南～保佛鐵路遊

The Light of City: Freedom by Thai Hoa Pham

地方感性

愛懇雲端藝廊：設計故事館

Comment by 陳老頭 on February 7, 2024 at 3:24pm

Senses of place: architectural design for the multisensory mind

Abstract: Traditionally, architectural practice has been dominated by the eye/sight. In recent decades, though, architects and designers have increasingly started to consider the other senses, namely sound, touch (including proprioception, kinesthesis, and the vestibular sense), smell, and on rare occasions, even taste in their work. As yet, there has been little recognition of the growing understanding of the multisensory nature of the human mind that has emerged from the field of cognitive neuroscience research. This review therefore provides a summary of the role of the human senses in architectural design practice, both when considered individually and, more importantly, when studied collectively. For it is
only by recognizing the fundamentally multisensory nature of perception that one can really hope to explain a number of surprising crossmodal environmental or atmospheric interactions, such as between lighting colour and thermal comfort and between sound and the perceived safety of public space. At the same time, however, the contemporary focus on synaesthetic design needs to be reframed in terms of the crossmodal correspondences and multisensory integration, at least if the most is to be made of multisensory interactions and synergies that have been uncovered in recent years. Looking to the future, the hope is that architectural design practice will increasingly incorporate our growing understanding of the human senses, and how they influence one another. Such a multisensory approach will hopefully lead to the development of buildings and urban spaces that do a better job of promoting our social, cognitive, and emotional development, rather than hindering it, as has too often been the case previously. (Source: Senses of place: architectural design for the multisensory mind by Charles Spence; in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications (2020) 5:46 Keywords: Multisensory perception, Architecture, The senses, Crossmodal correspondences)

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 22, 2022 at 11:59pm

TYPOLOGY OF TOURISTS AND THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL by Dr Renata Grzywacz，Dr Patrycja Żegleń，Wydział Wychowania Fizycznego & Uniwersytet Rzeszowski

The paper concerns various types of tourists according to different typologies and their influence on choosing destinations. The main aim of the article is to show the process of making decisions by different tourists as well as to present the most important factors influeincing the length and kind of holidays. The authors also showed tourists’ preferences and satisfaction levels of various types of travellers.

INTRODUCTION

There are many types of tourists who have different demands of a destination. Tourist typologies are descriptors of distinctive forms of tourist consumer behaviour. They reflect different motivations, interests and styles of travel on the part of tourists. Most of the typologies attempt to group tourists according to their preferences in terms of destinations, activities while on holiday, independent travel versus package holidays. The purpose of these typologies is to divide the tourists into the different groups in order to find out what the specific tourist want.

The increase of number and specifity of typologies started by the end of the Second World War, as a result of the scientification of tourism progressed. First of all, Plog [1964] classified tourists according to destinations they prefer. He argued that there was a continuum between types of tourists from the allocentric to the psychocentric tourist. The allocentric tourists seek new destinations, and are prepared to take risks in searching for new cultures and places. On the other hand psychocentric tourists seek the familiar, and are happier in an environment where there are many likeminded tourists. They are not risk takers and adhere to the proven product, being conservative in choice. During the 1970s typologies based on age and economy dominated led by Cohen [1972] whose initial typology established two non-intitutionalized roles as drifter and Explorer, and two intitutionalized types, organized mass tourists and individual mass tourists.

1. Organized mass tourist: these are the least adventurous tourists. On buying their package holiday they remain encapsulated in an ‘environmental bubble’, divorced from the host community as they remain primarily in the hotel complex. They adhere to an itinenary fixed by the tour operators, and even their trips out of the complex are organised tours. They make few decisions about their holiday.
2. Individual mass tourist: they are similar to organised mass tourists in that they utilise the facilities made available by touroperator, but they have some control over their own itinarary. They may use the hotel as a base and hire a car for thier own trips. However, many will tend to visit the same places as the mass organised tourist in that they will visit the ‘sights’.(TYPOLOGY OF TOURISTS AND THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL，by Dr Renata Grzywacz，Dr Patrycja Żegleń，Wydział Wychowania Fizycznego & Uniwersytet Rzeszowski Source: https://www.researchgate.net)

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 22, 2022 at 11:56pm

1. Explorer: the explorer arranges his or her trip alone, and attempts to get off the beaten track. Yet such tourists will still have recourse to comfortable tourist accomodation. However, much of their travel will be associated with a motivation to associate with the local people, and they will often speak the language of the host community. Nonetheless, the explorer retains many of the basic routines of his or own lifestyle.
2. Drifter: the drifter will shun contact with the tourist and tourist establishments, and identifiy with the host community. Drifters will live with the locals and adopt many of the practices of that community. Income is generated by working with the community, but often through low-skilled work, which creates a tendency to mix with the lower socioeconomic groups.

Cohen [1979] also summarised five modes of touristic experience: recreational, diversionary, experiental, experimental and existential.

Furthermore, Valene Smith [1977] described the demographic aspects of tourism, in several levels as:

• explorer: very limited numbers looking for discovery and involvement with local people,
• elite: special individually tailored visits to exotic places,
• off-beat: the desire to get away from the crowds,
• unusual: the visit with peculiar objectives such as physical danger or isolation,
• incipient mass: a steady flow travelling alone or in small organized groups using some shared services,
• mass: the general packaged tour market leading to tourist enclaves overseas,
• charter: mass travel to relaxion destinations which incorparate as many standardized western faclilities as possible.

Further, the author mentioned defined five destination interests and motivations: ethnic, cultural, historical, environmental and recreational.

During 1980s typologied extended and included historic types such as the Grand Tour, north-south tourism, and long-term youth and budget travel, some of which is selftesting [Riley 1988: 111]. Graburn [1983] differentiated two types of contemprory tourism, as the annual vacation or holiday break and the rites of passage tourism associated with major changes in status such as adulthood or career changes.

In decade of 1990, the importance of the links between lifestyle and consumption patterns was increasingly recognized through the construction of broader sets of typologies. Because of this, Gratton [1990], Cooper et al. [1998], Shaw and Williams [2002] and Schott [2002] have all rewieved or applied value and lifestyle typologies to understanding of tourism trends. Environmental concerns generated numerous new tourist types related to ‘appropriate’ or alternative tourism, such as ecotourists or green tourists [Smith and Eadington 1992]. Postmodernism has dominated the 1990s with renewed interests in levels of reality [Urry, 1990], concerns with levels of carrying capacity and sustainability, and types of tourist lifestyle and behaviour experiences [Mazanec et al. 1998].

Despite their limitations, tourist typology models are useful because of the fact that they highlight the broad diversity of tourists, in addition they provide an insight into the motivations of tourists and their behaviour and it is a way to segment tourists into different groups.

As a result of higher levels of disposable income, greater leisure time, improved opportunities for mobility, better education, having more sophisticated tastes and flow of information easily people’ attitudes about their holidays start to change.

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 20, 2022 at 10:20pm

However potential tourists are lost in options due to the fact that there are variety of destinations in many countries, huge number of holiday types, flexibility of travel, accomodations and timing arrangements. Tourists most possibly favour those holidays which offers the fullest realisations of their expectations between these so many choice. Chon [1990] explains decision-making process as a complex process consisting of the following stages: 1-) the recognition of needs. The tourist believes that a holiday purchase will satisfy his or her needs. The tourist has now tentatively decided to go on holiday. Now she/he must decide where to go. 2-) deciding where to go. This process involves: information searches, the evaluation of alternatives, the choice of a product and post-purchase evaluation

The decision-making process has been conceived in a variety of ways. Buying a holiday is for many individuals and families high-risk decision, the planning stage assumes a major role [Gitelson, Crompton 1983: 222]. On the contrary of retail purchases, a holiday purchase is a highly risky because there is no chance for tourists to observe directly what is being bought nor try it. Also previous experience of holiday-maker does not gurantee the future satisfaction. The degree of planning varies between different types of tourists. The planning of holiday incuding decisions whether to go and where to go generally takes place over a long time as a result of systematic process. Systematic information search of external sources is used much more frequently in making holiday and travel-related decisions to purchase most of other types of product [Gitelson, Crompton 1983: 155].

It should be emphasized the factors that lead an individual to decide on a holiday, variables that may suppress or heighten such factors, and the roles that family members or others may play in the holiday decision process [Hall and Page, 1999]. Howard and Sheth [1969] also drew attention to the infuence of socio-environmental variables, on the other hand Crompton [1993] explored the importance of imagery and marketing. Ryan [1997] has attempted to conceptualize the whole decision- making process in terms of a model of ‘the tourist experience’. In addition, a linear model of tourism decision-making process which is adapted from Wahab, Crampton and Rothfield [1976] suggested that all decision making goes through the same process and goes through the same steps.

The theory of perceived risk assumes that consumer perceive risk in their purchasing behaviour and generally they tend to utilize risk reduction strategies. Perceived risk is defined as ‘a consumer’s perception of the overall negativitiy of a course of action based upon an assessment of the possible negative outcomes and the likelihood that those outcomes will occur’ [Mowen, Minor 1998: 176]. As soon as consumers have experienced a certain level of risk, their behaviour changes, from delaying the purchase to using strategies designed to reduce the risk level to a ‘tolerable’ one [Mowen, Minor 1998, Roselius 1971].

Perceived risk also could be used in part as a variable in explaining decision-making processes of tourists [Maser, Weiermair 1998: 195]: the higher the perceived risk, the more information tourists seem to seek and the more rational the decision process becomes. Researchs supports correlation between the sensation-seeking personality trait and perceptions of risk. Some individuals, namely high sensation seekers, engage in risky experiences fort the stimulation involved in the experience [Zuckerman 1994: 98].

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 20, 2022 at 9:36pm

Tourism products are highly risky because of their intangible characteristics. Intangibility makes it difficult to evaluate the product before purchase since tourism products are essentially produced and consumed simultaneously [Mitchell, Greatorex 1993: 147]. Tourism products are therefore assumed to be associated with a higher risk when purchasing than tangible products. In high risk situations, consumers’ need to search for external information is higher than in low-risk situations [Dowling, Staelin 1994, Beatty, Smith 1987].

Moutinho [1987] refers to five risk components for tourism services. They are:

1) functional risk-the risk that the product will not perform as expected,

2) physical risk-the risk that the product will be harmful,

3) financial risk-the risk that the product will not be worth its cost, either in time or money,

4) social risk-the risk that a poor product choice may result in embarressment before others, and

5) psychological risk-the risk that a poor product choice will harm the consumers’ ego.

In tourism context, Roehl and Fesenmaier [1992] also identified three basic dimensions of perceived risks: physical-equipment risk, vacation risk and destination risk. Tsaur, Tzeng, and Wang [1997] focused on two main types of risk: which refers to the possibility that an individual’s health is likely to be exposed to injury and sickness because of conditions such as law and order, weather and hygiene, as well as equipment risk, which refers to the dangers arising from the malfunctioning of equipment, such as insufficient telecommunication facilities, unsafe transportation and breakdown of vehicles.

Furthermore, Sönmez and Graefe [1998] examined types of risks associated with international travel and the overall degree of safety felt by the tourists. They identify several types of risk such as equipment/functional risk, financial risk, health risk, physical risk, political instability risk, psychological risk, satisfaction risk, social risk, terrorism and time risk. The results revealed that perceived risks were found to be strong predictors of the likelihood of avoiding destinations. The higher the perceived risk of the foreign destinations, the higher the likelihood that consumers will decide to avoid visiting it [Sönmez, Graefe 1998].

Tourist satisfaction is a critical issue for marketing. First of all, it should be identified the elements that influence the satisfaction experienced by the tourist. Satisfaction is the tourist’s sense that consumption provides outcomes against expectations and a standard of pleasure versus displeasure. Satisfaction has both cognitive nature and, on the other, affective nature. Oliver [1981] defines satisfaction from the cognitive perspective as a consumer’s comparison between performance and expectations. Oliver [1997, 1999] also made definition has an affective nature that ‘satisfaction is defined as pleasurable fulfilment”. In the case of tourism, satisfaction is a function of pre-travel expectations and post-travel experiences. Satisfaction has a one-dimensional construct, which varies along a continuum from dissatisfaction to satisfaction. When experiences compared to expactations results in feelings of gratification, the tourist is satisfied; when they result in feelings of displeasure, the tourist is dissatisfied [Pizam et al. 1978: 125]. Similarly, Hughes [1991] suggested that the tourists whose expectations are fulfilled by their experiences report satisfaction, on the other hand those whose expactations are not fulfilled report dissatisfaction.

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 19, 2022 at 8:18pm

The tourist satisfaction can also be affected by a positive or negative image. Previous experience must be taken into consideration because it causes tourist to have a different perception from those who have never visited it [Baloglu 2001: 45]. Since the image of the tourism destination influences the satisfaction experienced by the tourist. It has been found that the image is associated positively with consumer satisfaction in luxury hotels [Mazanec 1995: 65]. It is therefore necessary to generate studies of image and its relation to the satisfaction obtained in order to know the visitors’ intentions to return and to recommend the destination [Bigne´ et al. 2001: 145]. If the tourists are satisfied with the destination, it is difficult to affect the attraction felt for a place for holiday-making [Vogt, Andereck 2003: 126]. An aspect related to satisfaction is when an attempt is made to establish an emotional bond with tourists through the image of the destination, projecting ‘emotional satisfaction’ [Ekinci 2003: 96] and not only through the basic needs, such as food, rest or enjoyment [Chaudhary 2000, Kandampully and Suartanto 2000: 75].
Satisfaction and Revisit Intention: there is a general consensus that satisfaction brings positive behavioral outcomes and the understanding of satisfaction provides managerial guidance in the tourism industry. Oliver [1997] defined satisfaction as customer judgment about product or servicefulfillment. Similarly, Engel, Blackwell, and Miniard [1990] proposed a definition that satisfaction is the outcome of the subjective evaluation about whether or not the chosenalternative meets or exceeds the expectation.
Many theories are developed to explain satisfaction. The expectation-disconfirmation paradigm and the equity theories are two of these theories. Engel, et al. [1990] defined satisfaction as the most frequently cited one in accounting for satisfaction is expectation-disconfirmation paradigm (EDP) that suggests a comparison between expectation and performance. According to Oliver [1980], EDP suggests confirmation, positive disconfirmation, and negative disconfirmation. If service or product perceptions exactly meet expectations customers’ expectations are confirmed. When performance exceeds expectations positive disconfirmation occurs, on the other hand, if expectations exceed performance negative disconfirmation occurs. Thus, confirmation and positive disconfirmation result in satisfaction, while negative disconfirmation leads to dissatisfaction. Another theory on customer satisfaction is based on the equity theory [Oliver and Swan 1989: 100]. Satisfaction occurs when customers receive more value than what they spent in terms of price, time, and effort. According to Grewal, Monroe, and Krishnan [1998], perceived value is ‘‘the perception of psychological satisfaction obtained from taking advantage of the financial terms of the price deal.’’ The equity theory suggests that value is an appropriate measure to evaluate satisfaction [Heskett, et al. 1994, Kumar 2002, Oliver and Swan 1989, Su 2004].
In addition to satisfaction theories, the relationship between satisfaction and repurchase intention has been explored in various product and service markets. By proposing the existence of manifest satisfaction and latent satisfaction, Bloemer and Kasper [1995] argued that the relationship between consumer satisfaction and repurchase intention is not monotonic because of the disparity of customers’ motivation and capability to evaluate the purchased product/service brand relative to the reference point. Manifest satisfaction occurs when an explicit comparison is made between expectation and performance and when the customers can be conscious of the outcome of their own evaluation and satisfaction.

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 19, 2022 at 8:17pm

When there is no explicit comparison made because of a lack of motivation and/or capability of the customers to evaluate their own choice, customers cannot be fully aware of their own satisfaction, which is called latent satisfaction.

An empirical test by Bloemer and Kasper [1995] indicated that the positive influence of manifest satisfaction on repurchase intention is greater than that of latent satisfaction, so the general idea that satisfaction has a positive relationship with repurchase intention is still valid. Similarly, many researches show that the positive relationship between satisfaction and revisit intention has been found in tourism destination choice settings.
Loyalty is also critical issue for tourism as many sectors. Rundle-Thiele and Lockshin [2000] defines loyalty as the future behaviour commitment to purchase a product or service, or the link with a provider on all occasions when other alternatives are possible. Equivalencely, customer loyalty is defined by Backman and Compton [1991] thus involves a positive attitude towards the firm’s product or service, followed by favourable behavior that leads to purchasing it and reccomending to others. Gaining the loyalty of customers today takes place in both product and services markets and is identified frequently with the retention of customers because both concepts refer to the repetition of the purchase of products or services from a single firm by customers over a prolonged period of time [Petrick 2004, Tsaur et al. 2002: 233]. Reid and Reid [1993] also pointed out the importance of customer loyalty because it is also a stable source of revenue for firms, serving at the same time as an information channel that acts informally by recommending the product or service to family and friends.
In addition, Yim and Kannan [1999] argued that the definition of loyalty should include both exclusive and reinforcing loyalties. Exclusive loyalty was further termed as hardcore loyalty, for those consumers who have been won over by a particular alternative over time. Reinforcing loyalties are potential switchers that tend to purchase more than one alternative, exhibit divided loyalties among a few alternatives, and have an increased tendency to repurchase the alternative after their initial purchase. Yim and Kannan’s study [1999] pointed out that the reinforcing loyalty was associated with variety seeking, which is similarly based on the optimum levels of stimulation [Zuckerman 1971: 66].
Enlightened by the findings of Gyte and Phelps [1989] and the reinforcing loyalty of Yim and Kannan [1999], Feng and Jang [2004] argued a trichotomous TDRI tourist segmentation with a 5-year time frame: continuous repeater (travelers with consistently high revisit intentions over time), deferred repeater (travelers with low revisit intentions in the short-term but high revisit intentions in the long- term), and continuous switcher (travelers with consistently low revisit intentions over time). Among the three segments, deferred repeaters tend to reinforce visit intentions. Thus, they are also potential switchers who tend to visit more than one destination, showing divided loyalties and displaying an increased tendency to revisit the destination after their initial visit. Therefore, focusing on the deferred repeaters, this study is based on the idea that tourists’ visit intentions vary depending on time and that the intention could be split from a temporal perspective into short-term, mid-term, and long-term revisit intentions.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page