Comments on: Building on brain clich√©s

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:19:57 +0000

‘ There’s no evidence that we are genetically predisposed to feel relaxed around “flowers, the hearth, food and water” ‘.
It might not be genetic, but there is a lot of experimental evidence suggesting that we do feel more relaxed around natural features (flowers and water definitely being identified as major factors), and that exposure to such featuers can help reduce subsequent or concurrent stress events. Check out the Journal of Environmental Psychology. Good article to start with is:
Ulrich et al. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments, J. Env Psych 11, 201‚Äì230.

By: Mark L.

Mark L. — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:52:18 +0000

While the explanation of the mechanism seems dubious, the observation that certain architectural forms are universally pleasing is a very old one.
My favorite example is the golden ratio, which has graced the finest architecture (and art) since its first known use in ancient Greece.
There is even an Academy of Neuroscience for Architecture (www.anfarch.org)…

By: Anibal

Anibal — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:12:27 +0000

Ok, Dr. Vaughan, you clarify me and the point as well. But that kind of work from the general to specific is attainable, although not yet attained.

By: Vaughan

Vaughan — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:49:12 +0000

Hi Anibal,
Neither do I and I’m sure the field has much to offer. Unfortunately, the quotes in the FT article promote it with clich√©s and ‘neurobabble’.
This is what I object to, rather than trying to understand how we can use neuroscience to design better buildings. Which seems like an excellent idea.
I have to say though, the examples you give are general studies on neuroscience. Going from the general to the specific in neuroscience without further research is dodgy because of the huge amount of complexity in the brain and environment.
We need specific studies on the brain’s response to different architectural features. So far, there are few, if any. Hopefully though, there will be some interesting findings in the future.

By: Anibal

Anibal — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:20:28 +0000

I regret to disagree but neuroarchitecture or Envroment-Behavioural research, as John Zeisel in his book “Inquiry by Design” prefer to use, could be and important branch of the neural sciences with many things to offer to society and people in general, essentially to those suffering from disabilities such as Alzheimer.
We can summarize neuroarchitecture using the words of Fred H. Gage: the enviroment modify the brain thanks to plasticity and the brain¬¥s decision processes can change the enviroment throught design choices.
It is known that the hippocampus harbour neurons that fire when the organism is in a particular place (hippocampal place cells, see O¬¥Keffe).
Also, other cells fires when the head is directed to a particular direction irrespective of the orientation (J.S. Taube and head direction cells)
Many experiments have been made demonstrating that colored walls impact on physiology and specially in stress mechanisms (Nicholas Humphrey,Colour and brightness preferences in monkeys. Nature, 229, 615-617, 1971.)
And the neurogenesis happening in the adult brain, a process rediscovered by Gage, that if particular neurons are stimulated throught enviroment enrichement and exercise promote the growth of nerve cells, and memory traces of past events and even places with emotionally laden valence ( Daniel L. Schacter)seem sufficient evidence for the articulation of the discipline called neuroarchitecture.
I think neuroarchitecture is not another pseudoscience.

By: michael webster

michael webster — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:23:52 +0000

We are going to see a lot more of this type of circular reasoning, and also cruder forms of reductionism; why the mind is nothing but the brain.