Dissertation - Emma Hastie by IA_UNSW

Affording Experience: Connecting the Built Environment with Psychological Impact through the lens of Contemporary Exhibition Design Emma Hastie

Bachelor of Interior Architecture Dissertation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; INTA2411 UNSW Built Environment University of New South Wales Sydney 2019

Table of Contents Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………2 Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………3 Introduction...……………………………………………………………………………4 Chapter One……………………………………………………………………………6 1.0 Affordances in the Built Environment 1.1 Affordance-Based Design 1.2 Positive and Negative Affordances 1.3 Psychological Response to Affordance-Based Design Chapter Two……………………………………………………………………………11 2.0 Affordance-Based Exhibition Design 2.1 Affording Learning in Contemporary Exhibition Design 2.2 Psychological Reaction to Contemporary Exhibition Design Chapter Three………………………………………………………………………….16 3.0 Te Papa Tongarewa, New Zealand’s National Museum 3.1 Sociocultural Context 3.2 Personal Context 3.3 ‘Between the Lines’ Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin 3.4 Visceral Processing 3.5 Behavioural Processing 3.6 Reflective Processing Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….23 References……………………………………………………………………………….24 List of Illustrations……………………………………………………………………….26

Abstract This dissertation seeks to investigate the role that theories of behavioural science play within the broader context of the built environment. This role is analysed through the more specific context of contemporary exhibition design and aims to investigate the connection that the built environment can have with the psychological impact on the user. This analysis promotes a ‘shift in design thinking’ (Maier & Fadel, 2008) towards affordance-based design theory and provides a framework that encourages contextual analysis of the built environment through the lens of behavioural science. This dissertation focuses on theories of behavioural science within the context of exhibition design; however, the framework outlined can be applied to any typology within the built environment experienced by a user. The framework provided focuses around psychologist James J. Gibson’s Theory of Affordances and the application of affordance-based design theory in contemporary exhibition spaces through the supporting frameworks of Falk and Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework and Donald Norman’s Three Levels of Processing. Through the presented framework, case studies of two culturally significant exhibition spaces are compared and contrasted. The case studies focus on the National Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa, and the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Germany, and analyse how these case studies respond to cultural contexts through the architect’s application of affordance-based design theory. The analysis of the two case studies provides a deeper understanding of applied affordance-based design through the framework presented and demonstrates the significance of the connection between theories of behavioural science and the built environment.

Acknowledgements I would like to extend my gratitude to Dr Alanya Drummond for her excellent mentorship, encouragement, and unwavering support throughout this project. To Sing Dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;arcy for his wisdom, positivity and advice on topic choice. And to my mother, Carolyn, for her patience, care, and time spent proofreading this dissertation.

Introduction This dissertation offers a comprehensive overview of theories related to behavioural science and an exploration into the connection between psychology and the built environment. The aim is to provide a meaningful framework to analyse the psychological impact that the built environment can have on a user. The built environment is broadly defined as ‘human creation’, the ‘spatial organisation’ of elements (Rapport, 2002). In the context of this dissertation, the ‘built environment’ refers to manmade architectural structures. ‘Psychological impact’ will be defined as a cognitive and emotional response experienced by a user as a result of a spatial interaction. Behavioural science refers to the study of human behaviour (Banerjee, 1995), and is a highly developed field of psychology. This dissertation focuses on the Theory of Affordances, a branch of the field that refers to the visual perception of objects and resulting human behaviour (Gibson, 1979). The Theory of Affordances relates to the study of behavioural science within the built environment as it relies on visual stimuli and user experience (Maier, 2008). Affordance-based design contextualises the Theory of Affordances and perceives Gibson’s theory from a design viewpoint, pertaining to the relationship that occurs between the designer, the object, and the user in contemporary design practice (Maier & Fadel, 2008). Affordance-based design is closely related to the field of social design, as both ‘design environments to best fit the users’ (Bitgood, 2002). The analysis of contemporary affordance-based exhibition design in this dissertation provides context for a deeper understanding of the theories introduced. In this context, ‘exhibition design’ refers to the contemporary design of public civil spaces that display information. Museums, art galleries, and some libraries are considered exhibition spaces, as they are institutions that ‘acquire, conserve, research, communicate, and exhibit for the purpose of study, education, and enjoyment’ (Ahmad et al, 2014). Exhibition spaces are important to analyse within the context of behavioural science as they are accessible public spaces that reach a range of users. Additionally, user interest and experience can be collected through qualitative and quantitative measures (Bitgood, 2002). The first chapter outlines the selected theories of behavioural science and analyses the role that affordance-based design can have on user experience. Outlining psychologist James J. Gibson’s Theory of Affordances and contextualising it within the built environment, this chapter provides an insight into how methods of behavioural science can be utilised by architects and designers. Additionally, this chapter discusses affordance-based design and pursues a deeper understanding of this concept through further examination of positive and negative affordances and the impact of these on user experience. Lastly, the psychological response to affordance-based design is discussed, introducing Donald Norman’s Three Levels of Processing theory within the context of the built environment. The second chapter aims to connect the psychological theories outlined in Chapter One with contemporary exhibition design in order to contextualise the theories. Affordance-based exhibition design is examined, explaining the cultural shift of user perceptions towards exhibition spaces over the last two centuries, reinforcing a contemporary movement towards user-centred design. It is argued that contemporary exhibition spaces afford learning, and this argument is reinforced

through the analysis of John Falk and Diane Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework. The final chapter delivers an exploration into the theories outlined in Chapters One and Two through the case studies of two affordance-based exhibition spaces. Chapter Three compares and contrasts the two case studies through the architect’s response to the cultural context of the design and their curation of emotional response through architectural form. The National Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa, is evaluated through the Contextual Model of Learning Framework, and examines how the physical, sociocultural, and personal contexts of a user impact their psychological response to affordance-based design. The second case study is the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Germany. Similar to Te Papa, the connection and history of two cultures heavily impacts the physical design of the space, therefore impacting the user’s experience and psychological response. This psychological response is analysed through Norman’s Three Levels of Processing and explores how architectural features can impact a user’s visceral, behavioural, and reflective processing, thus drawing connections between the built environment and psychological impact.

Chapter One: Affordance Theory and the Built Environment In Chapter One, this dissertation seeks to explore the connection between physical space and psychological impact through current theories of behavioural science. It determines a possibility for architects and designers to use behavioural science to curate emotional responses to the built environment. Through the lens of psychologist James J. Gibson’s Theory of Affordances, behavioural science theories of affordance-based design, contextual learning, and levels of processing will be analysed. To allow a deeper understanding of affordances in the built environment, affordance-based design, positive and negative affordances, and psychological reactions to affordance-based design, this dissertation creates a framework that encourages contextual analysis. Introducing these theories into the context of the built environment, this dissertation argues the importance of an understanding of behavioural science for designers to approach a potential shift in design thinking towards affordance-based design. In Chapters Two and Three, the framework explored in Chapter One will be used to analyse the role of affordance-based design in the built environment through the lens of contemporary exhibition design. 1.0 Affordances in the Built Environment In this dissertation, ‘space’ is defined as interior elements of the built environment and will be referred to as such. The use of ‘experience’ is defined as the time in which the user is in the space, the user’s previous experiences of built space, and the impact that these have on their memory and perception of future spaces. The ‘physical relationship to space’ refers to user responsiveness to objects in a space, where ‘objects’ are artefacts that users interact with, whether physically, visually, mentally, or emotionally. The field of behavioural science is the study of ‘human behaviour by scientific means as a preliminary approximation to the finding out of the various stimuli – internal or mental and external or physical that cause such behaviour’ (Banerjee,1995). Affordance theory analyses the link between human behaviour and physical objects (Gibson,1979). Affordances are defined as the assumed purpose of an object based on visual clues. These clues are both real and perceivable and often stem from logical reasoning and cultural tradition. Gibson uses the example of a surface that is ‘horizontal, flat, extended, rigid, and knee-high relative to a perceiver’; the majority of people would assume, often correctly, that the object is ‘sit-on-able’ (Gibson 1979: 128). Regardless of shape, size, colour, length, material and so forth, if the object can be identified with these characteristics, then in most cases it is interpreted correctly to be a seat. An affordance is relational in the way that it measures what one object or system provides to another object or system, in many cases a user. The two systems interact, and their relationship is dependent on the other. Affordance-based design is affordance theory applied in the context of the built environment. It refers to the relationship between designers, objects, and users in design (Maier & Fadel, 2008). The affordances of an object determine how, where, and when it can be used. Gibson states, ‘to perceive an affordance is not to classify an object’ (1979). By curating affordances, designers can generate a shift in thinking around these objects and change how users perceive themselves in a space, thus altering their interaction with the space. Each object is assessed with conscious thought and decision-making, rather than with the subconscious ‘autopilot’ used for everyday life. Through this, memorable spaces are created. 6

1.1 Affordance-Based Design The relationship between the user and the physical space is a key aspect of affordance-based design. Affordance-based design ‘does not offer a radical new approach to doing design, but rather a shift in design thinking’ (Maier & Fadel, 2008). This shift in thinking refers to the movement away from design and architecture as a purely aesthetic or functional tool towards a user-centred built environment. Social design is the ‘scientific study of how environments can be designed or improved from the perspective of their user’ (Bitgood, 2002). The physical space that a user interacts with can include, but is not limited to, the built environment and the objects within it. An artefact-user affordance is an ‘interaction between artefact and user in which properties of the artefact offer a potential use to the user. The artefact is then said to afford those uses to the user’ (Maier & Fadel, 2008). When a user enters a physical space, they are met with multiple affordances. By challenging typical affordances, designers can create varying levels of physical and mental interaction with a space. When designing affordance-based spaces, it is important to note that each user will enter a space with individual contexts and past experiences. Falk and Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework organises individual methods of learning when applied to a museum context (Falk & Dierking, 2000). The framework is divided into three key contexts that impact how a space is experienced: personal, sociocultural, and physical, and the relationship between the three is detailed in Figure 1.01. Falk then breaks down the contexts into eight key factors to further explain what these include: Personal Context 1. Motivation and experiences 2. Prior knowledge, interests, and beliefs 3. Choice and cultural Sociocultural Context 4. Within group sociocultural mediation 5. Facilitated mediation by others Physical Context 6. Advance organisers and orientation 7. Design 8. Reinforcing events and experiences outside the museum (Falk & Dierking, 2000). While Falk and Dierking’s contextual framework refers to methods of learning, it can be argued that learning is closely related to affordances, as human behaviour is shaped through the development of affordances. (Gibson, 1979). Gibson states, ‘the affordance of an object is what the infant begins by noticing. The meaning is observed before the substance and surface, colour and form are seen as such’

(1979). Thus, user experience is shaped by contextual reactions to affordances within physical space.

Figure 1.01. Diagram of the Contextual Model of Learning Framework, Falk and Dierking, 2008, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/1-InteractiveMuseum-Experience-Model-Falk-Dierking2008_fig1_298299762/actions#reference]

1.2 Positive and Negative Affordances Affordance-based design can be used to curate emotional reactions to physical space. Objects can hold positive or negative affordances, defined as ‘properties of things taken with reference to an observer, but not properties of the experiences of the observer. They are not subjective values; they are not feelings of pleasure or pain added to neutral perceptions’ (Gibson, 1979: 137). It can be argued that it is the designer’s role to control the balance of positive and negative affordances, skewing them in one way or another to curate an emotional reaction. This dissertation looks at the impact that positive and negative affordances have on exhibition spaces, and how designers can use affordances to curate emotional reactions. Emotional reactions are an essential part of affordance-based design, as they directly relate to user experience and reaction. Emotions are inseparable from and a necessary part of cognition. Everything we do, everything we think is tinged with emotion, much of it subconscious. In turn, our emotions change the way we think, and serve as constant guides to appropriate behaviour, steering us away from the bad, guiding us toward the good (Norman, 2004: 7). Positive and negative affordances also relate to the quality of the affordance that the object provides. For example, the quality of an object’s design over time reflects how affordances can change while functionality stays relatively similar. Maier uses the example of automobiles. Positive affordances such as ‘ride comfort’ and ‘navigation systems’ have been improved and introduced, and negative affordances such as ‘noise and pollution emitted’ have been reduced; however, the basic function of the automobile has remained the same (Maier, 2008). Another example is a door. The function of a door is to be opened and closed. The positive affordances of the door include privacy and access to a space, while the negative affordances involve the

door as a barrier, locking the user out. The ‘Norman Door’, named after designer Donald Norman is an example of a door that is user-unfriendly and poorly signposted. The doors push rather than pull, or slide, or open from an unexpected angle (Norman, 2013). The affordances that the doors are designed to do have not align with the commonly-accepted affordances that the user understands. For example, a flat plate affords to push the door, and a raised bar affords to pull. This, in turn, creates emotions of frustration and confusion in the user and creates a strong emotional reaction. Thus, positive and negative affordances are not emotional as of themselves but can be used to curate emotional reactions from a user. 1.3 Psychological Response to Affordance-Based Design The theory of Three Levels of Processing refers to the psychological reactions that a user experiences in everyday life. As can be seen in Figure 1.02, the levels are visceral, behavioural, and reflective, ‘interwoven through any design. It is not possible to have design without all three’ (Norman, 2004). The levels are a link between emotion and cognitive function and range from subconscious human behaviour to deeper thinking and problem-solving. The visceral level refers to the immediate subconscious reaction, the ‘basic protective mechanisms of the human affective system’, an evolutionary response to dangers in the perceived environment that all humans possess (Norman, 2004). The behavioural level of processing is similarly subconscious but stems from ‘learned patterns of activity. It refers to the actions that the body performs, formed through the process of planning, expectation, and learning’ (Lim et al, 2008). These actions are responsive to the personal experiences and context of a user. Links can be made between behavioural reactions and positive and negative affordances as Norman explains: For designers, the most critical aspect of the behavioral level is that every action is associated with an expectation. Expect a positive outcome and the result is a positive affective response. Expect a negative outcome and the result is a negative affective response: dread and hope, anxiety and anticipation. The information in the feedback loop of evaluation confirms or disconfirms the expectations, resulting in satisfaction or relief, disappointment or frustration (Norman, 2013: 54). The subconscious expectations of space are essential to consider in affordancebased design. The relationship between the user and the space relies on the positive and negative affordances of objects and physical features, thus creating experiences based on behavioural expectations. Reflective processing is the most complex of the Three Levels of Processing. It requires the user to create a deep understanding of the affordance, using reasoning and decision-making to react and understand a situation. ‘The highest levels of emotions come from the reflective level, for it is here that causes are assigned and where predictions of the future take place’ (Norman, 2013). Spaces that afford reflective processing, therefore, evoke the highest level of emotion. This is essential to the overall experience of a space as ‘emotion is what makes experience possible’ (Lim et al, 2008). Integrating the Three Levels of

Processing into affordance-based design allows designers to curate experiences that respond to each level and connect emotional and cognitive reactions to space. The connection between the built environment and affordance-based design is further explored in Chapter Two, within the specific context of contemporary exhibition design. Through the framework of Gibsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Theory of Affordances, affordance-based design, contextual learning, and levels of processing introduced in Chapter One, a deeper understanding of the connection between physical space and emotional impact can be achieved. Affordances in the built environment, affordancebased design, positive and negative affordances, and psychological reactions to affordance-based design will be studied within the context of contemporary exhibition design. Chapter Three will provide a further exploration into the framework outlined in Chapter One through a case study of two culturally significant contemporary exhibition spaces, the National Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa, and the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Germany.

Figure 1.02. Diagram of the Three Levels of Processing, Norman, 2004, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Three-levels-ofprocessing-Visceral-Behavioral-and-Reflective-4_fig1_311833541/actions#caption]

Chapter Two In Chapter Two, this dissertation argues that contemporary exhibition spaces are closely linked to affordance-based design, and an analysis of contemporary exhibition design through the lens of behavioural science theories provides a deeper understanding of the connection between psychological impact and the built environment. Following the behavioural science theories of affordances, contextual learning, and levels of processing introduced in Chapter One, Chapter Two analyses affordance-based design within the context of contemporary exhibition design. Within the framework, affordance-based exhibition design will be explored, and it is argued that exhibition spaces can afford learning and emotional responses. 2.0 Affordance-Based Exhibition Design Exhibition spaces play a key role in the analysis of affordance-based design in the built environment as ‘no building can match the museum for symbolic or architectural importance’ (Giebelhausen, 2003). Exhibition spaces are significant to examine as they encapsulate a range of aspects of public space, from ‘civic ambition’, ‘aesthetic contemplation’, demonstrations of ‘internationalism and commitment to the avantgarde’ (Saumarez-Smith, 1995). Exhibition spaces are often accessible public spaces, oriented to reach a wide range of users. Thus, as affordance-based design is heavily reliant on the user, the study of its connection with exhibition design provides a deeper understanding and analysis of the psychological impact of the built environment. This dissertation examines exhibition spaces through the lens of affordance-based design and analyses their ability to afford learning and provoke emotional responses through their physical environment. This dissertation unpacks the sociocultural meaning and symbolism of exhibition spaces throughout the previous two centuries to determine the changing role that the contemporary exhibition space affords to the user. In the early history of exhibition spaces, collections were private and exclusive. Museologist Kenneth Hudson explains: Museums and art galleries began at a time when the people who owned and ran them had a contempt for the mass. Collections were formed by men who wished to display them to others with the same tastes and level of knowledge as them, for connoisseurs and scholars. Any idea that there might be a duty to make this material attractive or intelligible to a broader range of people would be ludicrous (Hudson, 1975:3). The architectural scale and typology of exhibition spaces took ‘design cues from European palaces and other monumental forms, reinforcing the museum as a place of gravitas’ (Forrest, 2014). Later, when exhibition spaces became commonly accessible to the public around the 18th century onwards, the spaces were exclusive and elitist, with users admitted ‘as a privilege, not a right’ (Hudson, 1975). Throughout the last two centuries, there has been a demand for the ‘democratisation of institutionalised knowledge in response to charges of elitism’ (Hammond & Waite, 2010), that requires exhibition spaces to be responsive to the sociocultural context of 11

their surroundings, and accessible for every user. Contemporary exhibition spaces aim to ‘assess, define, and display the value of culture for the changing demands of contemporary society’ (Giebelhausen, 2003). As the user is at the forefront of affordance-based design decisions, to curate and facilitate specific emotions or patterns of behaviour, designers must respond to the physical, sociocultural, and personal context of the user. 2.1 Affording Learning in Contemporary Exhibition Design This dissertation argues that contemporary exhibition spaces afford learning. This is due to the aforementioned ‘shift in design thinking’ regarding exhibition design and the role that exhibition spaces play in educating the community (Maier & Fadel, 2008). Introduced in Chapter One, Falk and Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework provides an overview regarding the physical, sociocultural, and personal contexts of a user and how these contexts impact learning and experience in an exhibition space. Learning is facilitated in an exhibition context through formal and informal teaching styles. Formal learning refers to the ‘highly structured’ learning and teaching style typically employed in traditional education contexts such as schools or universities (Bitgood, 2002). Formal learning in an exhibition setting can include separate ‘classroom’ settings where verbal stimuli, such as a lecture, are prescribed to users. Behaviour is ‘teacher-paced’, and learning is ‘prescribed by the system’ (Bitgood, 2002). The benefits of formal learning include the structured absorption of information, and the quality of the content learned. Most learning in exhibition spaces, however, is informal. Informal learning is based around visual stimuli, and information is placed for the user to discover by themselves. Behaviour is ‘userpaced’, and ‘considerably more variable’ (Bitgood, 2002). While informal learning arguably reduces the quality of learning, it increases the quantity. Museum Director Frank Oppenheimer states: People will learn what they want and when they want, and what visitors learn is less important than the fact that they learn something (Oppenheimer cited in Bitgood, 2002). The Contextual Model of Learning Framework addresses the importance of learning in an affordance-based exhibition space by ‘virtue of the unique nature of the museum context’ (Falk & Dierking, 2000). The framework breaks down the contexts of a user that are fundamental to the cultivation of learning in an exhibition context. The physical context of an exhibition space refers to the architectural design and the objects within. Users visit exhibition spaces to ‘see and experience real objects, placed within appropriate environments’ (Falk & Dierking, 2000). The physical context impacts the affordances placed on the exhibition space and users behave accordingly. For example, a children’s museum will have a completely different physical context for users than a traditional gallery would, therefore changing the user’s affordances and behaviour towards the space (Bitgood, 2002). The change in affordances and behaviour then impacts how a user will approach and respond to learning in the space. The sociocultural context outlined in Falk and Dierking’s frameworks is representative of the external sources that impact a user’s learning experience, such as social influence from friends, family, other users, or the cultural 12

background of the community (Falk & Dierking, 2000). Falk and Dierking state ‘the public come to museums with understanding, leave with (hopefully) more, and then make sense of this understanding as events in the world facilitate and demand’ (Falk & Dierking, 2000). This level of understanding is shaped by a user’s sociocultural context and plays a key role in the shaping of affordances through individual past experiences, history, personality, and memory. The acknowledgement of personal context, ‘what users bring to the museum’, is closely related to increased levels of motivation, interest, and attention (Bitgood, 2002). Chapter Three further exemplifies how the Contextual Model of Learning Framework relates to the quality of learning through a case study of New Zealand’s national museum, Te Papa. Therefore, it can be argued that contemporary exhibition spaces afford learning. 2.2 Psychological Reaction to Contemporary Exhibition Design This dissertation argues that user experience is a critical aspect of affordance-based design. As a primary focus of contemporary exhibition design is the user and their interpretation of a space (Bitgood, 2002), there has been a significant focus on methods of affording emotional responses to exhibition design. The International Council of Museums states the purpose of an exhibition space as being for the ‘pleasure and education of the public’ (International Council of Museums cited in Hudson, 1975). Therefore, it can be argued that an aim of contemporary exhibition spaces is to afford learning and emotional responses. Donald Norman’s Three Levels of Processing provides a framework for emotional responses, delivering psychological reasoning to user experience. The Three Levels of Processing referred to are visceral, behavioural and reflective. Explored in Chapter One, the levels of processing are exemplified when analysed through the lens of exhibition design. In brief, visceral processing is made up of subconscious reactions. It ‘makes rapid judgments of what is good or bad, safe or dangerous, and sends appropriate signals to the muscles (the motor system) and alerts the rest of the brain’ (Norman, 2004). An architectural example that provokes this immediate reaction is the Yad Vashem Holocaust History Museum in Jerusalem. Designed by architect Moshe Safdie, the ‘spatial layout and circulation, spatial form and symbolization, and the spatial qualities of lighting and material throughout’ are utilized to ‘evoke visitors’ empathy’ (Lu, 2017). Figure 2.01 illustrates the circulation of the user, dictated through a zigzagging path through a long tunnel-like triangular shape interrupted by objects that users cannot divert from, controlling the circulation and order the objects are viewed in. Circulation is an important tool used for producing psychological reactions, as ‘perception is inextricably bound to movement’ (Merleau-Ponty cited in Lu, 2017). By dictating the subconscious movement of the user and curating the order in which objects are seen, a visceral reaction to the subject matter is prompted. Behavioural processing is similarly subconscious. It refers to the learned patterns of human behaviour and can be ‘enhanced or inhibited by the reflective layer and, in turn, it can enhance or inhibit the visceral layer’ (Norman, 2004). An example of a contemporary space that alters behavioural processing is artist Thomas Heatherwick’s installation Vessel at Hudson Yards, an exhibition space located in New York City. Figure 2.02 portrays how Heatherwick has created layers of interconnecting flights of stairs climbing amongst the skyline, with vantage points at 13

each landing (Heatherwick, 2019). Generally, stairs will afford climbing to reach a destination as they are transition spaces, used by the user as a tool to move from one space to another. Vessel subverts these affordances as the stairs are now affording sculpture – they are the destination as well as the journey. The behavioural act of climbing the staircases ‘creates a personal rhythm in each visitor’ (Heatherwick, 2019). The stairs do not simply have one point that the user must reach to experience the sculpture but multiple on each level, each their own unique destination with individual viewpoints and perspectives of the city. Therefore, by altering typical behavioural affordances associated with everyday objects, Heatherwick breaks the user out of their subconscious and creates a ‘powerful effect’ and emotional response (Heatherwick, 2019). The reflective level is the highest and most complex level of processing. Reflective processing ‘does not have direct access either to sensory input or to the control of behavior. Instead it watches over, reflects upon, and tries to bias the behavioral level’ (Norman, 2004). It can be argued that the act of reflection is desired when evoking an emotional response in affordance-based exhibition design, as reflective processing facilitates a deeper understanding of the exhibition’s subject matter and creates lasting memories of the experience. The formation of memory in affordancebased exhibition design is crucial, as ‘memories last far longer than the immediate experience or the period of usage, which are the domains of the visceral and behavioral levels’ (Norman, 2013). Therefore, to achieve the deepest psychological reaction, a reflective level of processing is required. The visceral and behavioural levels are essential to producing reflective processing and can be altered through architectural features. Chapter Three provides a detailed contextual insight into the role of architecture and processing in contemporary exhibition design to create psychological reactions through a case study of the Jewish Museum in Berlin.

Figure 2.01. Interior of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum, Hursley, 2005, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/179679/yad-vashemholocaust-museum-safdiearchitects/50163bae28ba0d1598001252-yadvashem-holocaust-museum-safdie-architectsphoto]

Figure 2.02. Interior view of Vessel, Moran, 2019, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://static.designboom.com/wpcontent/uploads/2019/03/thomas-heatherwickstudio-vessel-hudson-yards-new-york-filmdesignboom-02.jpg]

Chapter Three The third chapter of this dissertation aims to further exemplify the relationship between affordance-based design and the built environment. Two case studies will be examined in relation to their use of physical space and how this can be used to curate affordance-based emotional reactions. The National Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa, will be examined through the lens of Falk and Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework, introduced in Chapter One. Designed by New Zealand architectural firm Jasmax, the museum is a physical representation of the personal and sociocultural context of New Zealand’s bicultural landscape (Hammond & Waite, 2010). The Jewish Museum in Berlin, Germany designed by architect Daniel Libeskind similarly focuses on the architectural representation of biculturalism, with a focus on the history of Jewish-German citizens and their experience of the Holocaust (Libeskind, 2001). The design of the Jewish Museum will be analysed through its response to Donald Norman’s Three Levels of Processing. The two museums were designed and constructed in the late 20th century and are representative of a wider shift in design thinking towards a more affordance-based, ‘user-oriented’ design approach of the time period (Bitgood, 2002). The analysis of the case studies compares and contrasts two contemporary approaches to affordance-based exhibition design. 3.0 Te Papa Tongarewa, New Zealand’s National Museum Case studies of specific affordance-based contemporary exhibition spaces can provide a deeper understanding of user context. Te Papa Tongarewa (Te Papa), is the national museum of New Zealand, opening to the public in 1992. The previous national museum was built in 1936, its grandiose architecture, locally referred to as the ‘temple on the hill’, was a physical representation of New Zealand’s colonial past and signified a need for a new space that exemplified the shifting national identity (Tramposch, 1998). The New Zealand architecture firm Jasmax was chosen for the new design through a competition that addressed the complex local culture and looked for conceptual ability rather than a finished design. The space needed to be flexible for future redesign with clearly defined internal parameters, but most importantly it needed to address New Zealand’s unique biculturalism (Hammond & Waite, 2010). This case study will be examined through the lens of Falk and Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework, within the sociocultural and personal contexts of the design. 3.1 Sociocultural Context The sociocultural context of an exhibition space refers to methods of learning via external sources, primarily social influence, such as with whom the user visits, and the cultural context of the surrounding community. In a similar way as the personal context of a user, the physical context of an exhibition space plays a large role in shaping a user’s sociocultural learning experience and emotional reaction, as ‘learning is influenced by design’ (Falk and Dierking, 2000). The entrance of Te Papa leads users into a central ‘wedge space’, a physical representation of the division between the two cultures. Jasmax’s architectural statement describes how the wedge ‘cleaves’ the two halves of the building, echoing the natural fault line the building sits on (Jasmax, 1998). This is echoed in Figure 3.01, the architectural 16

concept drawing detailing the placement of the wedge space. Within the wedge is a meeting space that represents the ‘separating and drawing together of two cultures’ (Hammond & Waite, 2010). This distinctive division is echoed through the use of form and materiality. Figure 3.02 illustrates how the curved form of the north-facing half of the building looks over the sea and is clad with locally sourced materials of ‘sandstone and natural woods’, representing the Maori people’s relationship with the land (Tramposch, 1998). The south-facing half of the building represents the manmade and European prescence in New Zealand. This side of the building is gridlike and angular, looking over the city, clad with metals and granite (Tramposch, 1998). By physically representing biculturalism as a prominent theme in the architecture, the museum is responsive to the sociocultural context of the user and thus affords a deeper level of interaction and emotional response. The sociocultural context of an exhibition space is directly relational to the quality of learning as ‘learning is a dialogue between the individual and his or her environment’ (Falk & Dierking, 2000). Additionally, physical representations of sociocultural contexts generate a shift in affordances. In this example, the physical redesign of the new museum was instrumental in changing user affordances of exhibition spaces, away from being the ‘exclusive keeper of knowledge’, and towards ‘active engagement with the people and living cultures’ of a community (Hammond & Waite, 2010). This change in affordances is essential to the sociocultural context of a user as physical representation of culture provides ‘those represented with control of their own cultural heritage’ (Marstine, 2008). Therefore, the inclusivity of New Zealand’s biculturalism through physical representation in Te Papa is integral to a user’s learning experience and emotional response to the space. The approach by architectural firm Jasmax is a clear example of affordance-based design that integrates sociocultural context to facilitate user experience. 3.2 Personal Context The personal context described in Falk and Dierking’s Contextural Model of Learning Framework refers to a user’s learned behaviour through personal history and memory (Falk & Dierking, 2000), which, in turn, impacts learning style and how the user perceives affordances. This is relevant in the context of exhibition design as learning is ‘emotion-driven and motivated by pleasure’ (Wallace-Casey, 2013). As argued in Chapter Two, the purpose of an exhibition space can be to afford learning. Personal context plays a large role in understanding the connection between psychological impact and the built environment. Te Papa addresses personal context through the architectural acknowledgement of the three categories of users that will enter the space. Users are divided into categories of Tangata Whenua, those belonging to the land by first discovery, Tangata Tirity, those belonging to the land by treaty, and Papatuanuku ‘common land’, thus welcoming all users (Hammond & Waite, 2010). This acknowledgement of personal culture is reflected architecturally through the inclusivity of three distinct zones in the space. The Maori history-focused half of the building incorporates traditional Maori architectural form, materiality, and methodology. The European, or Pakeha, history-focused half of the building makes use of classical materiality such as granite, and modern form. The uncovered central meeting space is open and accessible, welcoming multicultural users to the space (Hammond & Waite, 2010). The fault line running through the building acts as a wayfinding cue for users, creating flow of movement between the three zones, both

literally and symbolically connecting the spaces (Jasmax, 1998). Architectural theorist, Michaela Giebelhausen, states: The architecture is the museum, it is precisely the architectural configuration that gives the museum meaning. The architecture determines the viewing conditions both conceptually and physically. It not only frames the exhibits but shapes our visitor experience (Giebelhausen, 2008: 42). Therefore, the strong architectural form of Te Papa clearly communicates the merging of culture, regardless of the objects contained within. By acknowledging the personal context of the user, exhibition spaces facilitate learning by increasing motivation and personal interest (Falkd & Dierking, 2000). By contrast, the previous ‘temple on the hill’ national museum reflected traditional European affordances of exhibition design through classical materiality of marble and stone, grandiose columns, and its placement ‘both figuratively and literally up many stairs… no longer seemed necessary’ (Tramposch, 1998). The museum, constructed in 1936, was a reflection of not only traditional European architecture, but cultural traditions and values, and did not represent the personal context of the bicultural nation. The movement of New Zealand’s national identity away from Britain, coupled with a growing interest in Maori culture and history in the 1980’s (Tramposch, 1998), was a driving force behind the construction of Te Papa, and is exemplary of how personal context can play a role in the psychological impact of the built environment.

Figure 3.01. Architectural Concept Plan for Te Papa, Jasmax Design Director Peter Bossley, 1998, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://media.springernature.com/original/springerstatic/image/chp%3A10.1007%2F978-981-1069048_4/MediaObjects/427597_1_En_4_Fig1_HTML.gif]

Figure 3.02. Exterior view of Te Papa, New Zealand Institute of Architects, date unknown, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.nzia.co.nz/practice/Jasmax/1304/projects/tepapatongarewa/1923#]

3.3 ‘Between the Lines’, Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin: The second case study discussed will be Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin. The museum will be analysed through Donald Norman’s theory of the Three Levels of Processing: visceral, behavioural, and reflective. Libeskind won an anonymously-funded design competition for a new Jewish Museum in 1989, one year before the fall of the Berlin wall. The need for a specific museum focused on Jewish history reflects the cultural context of Berlin in the late 19th century, as there was growing demand for recognition of ‘the role Jews had once played as cocreators of Berlin’s history and culture’ and the recognition that the city was ‘fundamentally haunted by its Jewish absence’ (Young, 2000). Constructed in 1999, the museum sat empty for two years before opening in 2001. Popularity spiked with users interested in the architecture wanting to see the building even before the exhibits were installed. The layout of the building is of an abstracted Star of David, ‘a straight line broken into pieces by the Holocaust, and a torturous line continuing indefinitely’ (Libeskind, 2001). The museum is similar to Te Papa in the sense that the museums relate to the connection between two cultures in one country, as the Jewish Museum is focused on integrating and remembering the impact Jewish people have on German culture and the continuous relationship between the two, ‘whose fates had been inexplicably mingled for centuries in Berlin’ (Young, 2000). 3.4 Visceral Processing Norman describes the visceral processing level as the lowest of the three. It refers to the immediate, subconscious, reflective reaction that a user experiences when confronted (Norman, 2013). This level of processing can be triggered through physical space and create a change in affordances for the user. The architecture of Libeskind’s Jewish Museum uses form and materiality to subvert typical visceral assumptions. Figure 3.03 exemplifies a particularly notable space in the Jewish

Museum is the Holocaust void, a 24-metre high, solid concrete asymmetrical space, with one underground entry point and a single window near the ceiling. The space is not artificially lit or heated, and changes based on the exterior climate. When entering the space, the user is met with bare walls and harsh materiality, the emptiness of the space confronting and uncomfortable. It is an ‘architectural model for absence’ (Young, 2000). The visceral reaction is strong and powerful, and often provokes the reflective level of processing, causing users to think more deeply about the exhibition and the designer’s intent. The large, full-height voids running through the entire space intersect exhibitions and create interruptions in the narrative, representative of the voids in Jewish history caused by the Holocaust. The voids ‘make palpable a sense that much more is missing here than can ever be shown’ (Young, 2000). By interrupting the subconscious movement of the user, the architecture creates a shift in the rhythm of how the user experiences museums, creating a visceral reaction, breaking the immersion of the exhibit. Visceral reactions are intricately linked to reflective processing in the Jewish Museum, visceral reactions prompt users to reflect on the content. 3.5 Behavioural Processing Behavioural processing is the second level of processing. It describes learned actions of everyday human behaviour. Behavioural processing ‘can be enhanced or inhibited by the reflective layer and, in turn, it can enhance or inhibit the visceral layer’ (Norman, 2004). In the context of exhibition design, behavioural processing refers to the subconscious decisions that drive a user through the space. There is no formal exterior entrance to the Jewish Museum. The Jewish Museum is accessed through an underground corridor via the original Berlin Museum. Libeskind’s architectural statement describes how ‘a visitor must endure the anxiety of hiding and losing the sense of direction before coming to a cross roads of three routes’ (Libeskind, 2001). The lack of a formal entrance subverts the classical paradigm of museums, trading the grand temple-like columned entrance architecture for a small, unobtrusive corridor. This causes users to change their behaviour even before entering the museum, as the physical architecture challenges the typical affordances of a museum visit. The three routes from the entrance that users must choose lead to sections focused on the Jewish experience in Germany throughout history, their emigration, and the Holocaust. The aim of the architecture is to ‘disorient and destabilize users, somatically inducing feelings of displacement, emptiness, and loss’ (Chametzky, 2015). This creates a strong behavioural reaction from the user, as the wayfinding cues of the building are deliberately confusing. Norman theorises that the behavioural level of processing ‘is about expectations, so it is sensitive to the expectations of the action sequence and then the interpretations of the feedback’ (Norman 2013). When the expectations are not met, or the action sequence is changed, the space provokes a behavioural reaction. The physical layout of the building facilitates this theory, as the jagged lines of the architecture lead users down alternating routes. Some of these routes are expected gallery spaces, but others lead to empty spaces and dead ends (Chametzky, 2015). The voids that run through the whole building connect and disconnect spaces, challenging affordances of wayfinding and pushing users to change subconscious behavioural patterns. Thus, the physicality of the building evokes a higher level of behavioural processing in the user.

3.6 Reflective Processing Reflective processing refers to the third and most complex level of Norman’s trio. The aim of reflective processing in an exhibition setting is to encourage users to think deeply about the meaning of the exhibit and interpret and understand the intent of the designer. The ideal level of processing is referred to as the ‘flow’ state, where the task is at ‘just the proper level of difficulty: difficult enough to provide a challenge and require continued attention, but not so difficult that it invokes frustration and anxiety’ (Norman, 2013). When the flow state is achieved, reflective processing can occur. For exhibition spaces with culturally important content such as the Jewish Museum, it is essential that the physical space is conducive to this level of reflective processing in order for the message of the exhibition to be fully appreciated. A significant space in the museum that accomplishes this is the Garden of Exile, an exhibit located at the very end of the journey through the museum. To exit the museum each user must pass through the garden, a series of forty-nine concrete columns, seven metres high and filled with earth sourced from Berlin and Jerusalem. Growing from the earth are willow oaks, providing a canopy and shelter from the outside world, as illustrated in Figure 3.04. The floor plates are tilted at varying angles, ‘so that one stumbles about as if in the dark, at sea without sea legs’ (Young, 2000). The physical experience of the garden is one of disorientation and fear, insisting the users put aside logic and experience strong emotions, creating a sense of fellowship with the Jewish history presented. The impact of having such a poignant exiting exhibit is that it leaves a powerful memory of the space and ensures that users will continue to deeply process the experience long after they have left the museum. In conclusion, both Te Papa and the Jewish museum curate emotional reactions to contemporary exhibition space through the use of affordance-based design. By analysing the two case studies through the lens of behavioural science and affordance theory, a deeper understanding of the relationship between psychological reaction and physical exhibition space can be achieved. The two case studies compare and contrast approaches to biculturalism in a contemporary exhibition setting. The analysis of Te Papa within the Contextual Model of Learning Framework allows an understanding of the effect that architecture can have on a country’s sociocultural identity. Similarly, the focus on the Three Levels of Processing within the architecture of the Jewish Museum allows an understanding of the emotional impact that physical space can create.

Figure 3.03. The Holocaust void inside the Jewish Museum, Hufton + Crow, 2001, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://libeskind.com/wpcontent/uploads/SDL_JewishMuseum_%C2%A9HuftonCrow_033rs.jpg]

Figure 3.04. The view from within the Garden of Exile, Michele Nastasi, 2001, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://libeskind.com/wp-content/uploads/exteriorview-garden-of-exile-cmichele-nastasi2280x2874.jpg]

Conclusion Through this dissertation, theories of behavioural science have been outlined and analysed to argue the importance of a connection between the built environment psychological impact of a user. Utilising James J. Gibson’s Theory of Affordances, this dissertation explored and investigated aspects of affordance-based design within the context of contemporary exhibition design. Through the psychological framework established in the first chapter, this dissertation argued the role that behavioural science plays within a user’s experience of the built environment through theories of affordance-based design, positive and negative affordances, and the psychological impact on the user. This dissertation examined the provided frameworks through the lens of contemporary exhibition design, however, is applicable to various typologies within the built environment which are experienced by a user. The second chapter contextualised the provided framework, analysing affordancebased design as a response to contemporary exhibition spaces. It examined a shift in affordances towards exhibition spaces and their influence in the surrounding community and argued that the role of contemporary exhibition spaces has been shifted to afford user learning and promote emotional responses through the physical architecture of the space and objects contained within. John Falk and Diane Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework was analysed to reinforce this affordance of learning in contemporary exhibition spaces. Donald Norman’s theory of the Three Levels of Processing was further explored to reinforce the ideology of contemporary exhibition spaces affording emotional responses, using examples of architectural methods to promote visceral, behavioural, and reflective processing. The third chapter of this dissertation reinforced the argument presented in Chapters One and Two through the analysis of two case studies of contemporary exhibition design. The two case studies exemplified a focus on affordance-based design through the architect’s response to the cultural context that surrounded the design. The first case study analysed was the National Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa. Examined through Falk and Dierking’s Contextual Model of Learning Framework, this case study argued the role of a user’s physical, sociocultural, and personal context in their psychological reaction to an exhibition space. The second case study presented was the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Germany. The two case studies were compared and contrasted through the integration of the relationship between two cultures into the physical architecture and how this impacted the emotional response of the user. The Jewish Museum was analysed through the lens of Norman’s Three Levels of Processing and determined the psychological impact caused by visceral, behavioural, and reflective processing. Therefore, the connection between the built environment and the psychological impact of a user has been argued through the provided psychological framework, the context of contemporary exhibition design, and relevant case studies.

References Ahmad, S., Abbas, M., Taib, M. and Masri, M. (2014). Museum Exhibition Design: Communication of Meaning and the Shaping of Knowledge. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, pp.254-265. Banerjee, M. (1995). Organization Behaviour. 1st ed. New Delhi: Allied Publishers LTD, p.12. Bitgood, S. (2002). Social Design in Museums. The Psychology of Visitor Studies, 1, pp.27-35. Falk, J. and Dierking, L. (2000). The Contextual Model of Learning. In: G. Anderson, ed., Reinventing the Museum: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on the Paradigm Shift, 1st ed. California: AltaMira Press, pp.139-142. Forrest, R. (2014). Design Factors in the Museum Visitor Experience. Ph. D. University of Queensland. Gibson, J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. London: Routledge. Giebelhausen, M. (2003). The Architecture of the Museum: Symbolic Structures, Urban Contexts. 1st ed. Manchester [etc.]: Manchester University Press. Heatherwick, T. (2019). Heatherwick Studio | Design & Architecture | Vessel. [online] Heatherwick Studio | Design & Architecture. Available at: http://www.heatherwick.com/project/vessel/ [Accessed 11 Nov. 2019]. Hudson, K. (1975). A Social History of Museums: What the Visitors Thought. 1st ed. London: Macmillan, pp.3-5. Jiang, H. and Jiang, S. (2012). The Architecture of Daniel Libeskindâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Jewish Museums. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 174-177, pp.1812-1819. Lake-Hammond, A. and Waite, N. (2010). Exhibition Design: Bridging the Knowledge Gap. The Design Journal, 13(1), pp.77-98. Libeskind, D. (2001). Jewish Museum Berlin - Libeskind. [online] Libeskind. Available at: https://libeskind.com/work/jewish-museum-berlin/ [Accessed 7 Nov. 2019]. Lim, Y., Donaldson, J., Jung, H. and Kunz, B. (2008). Emotional Experience and Interaction Design. In: R. Beale and C. Peter, ed., Affect and Emotion in HumanComputer Interaction: from Theory to Applications, 1st ed. New York: SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp.116-120. Lu, F. (2017). Museum Architecture as Spatial Storytelling of Historical Time: Manifesting a primary example of Jewish space in Yad Vashem Holocaust History Museum. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 6(4), pp.442-455.

Maier, J. (2008). Rethinking Design Theory. Mechanical Engineering, 130(9), pp.3435. Maier, J. and Fadel, G. (2008). Affordance based design: a relational theory for design. Research in Engineering Design, 20(1), pp.13-27. Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, NZ. (2019). Our building. [online] Available at: https://www.tepapa.govt.nz/about/our-building [Accessed 7 Nov. 2019]. Marstine, J. (2008). New Museum Theory and Practice. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Norman, D. (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things. 1st ed. New York: Basic Books, pp.21-25, 38-39. Norman, D. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things. 2nd ed. New York: Basic Books. Rapport, A. (2002). Spatial Organisation and the Built Environment. In: T. Ingold, ed., Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology: Humanity, Culture and Social Life, 1st ed. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd, p.465. Saumarez-Smith, C. (1995). Architecture and the Museum: The Seventh Reyner Banham Memorial Lecture. Journal of Design History, 8(4), pp.243. Tramposch, W. (1998). Te Papa: Reinventing the Museum. Museum Management and Curatorship, 17(4), pp.339-350. Young, J. (2000). Daniel Libeskind's Jewish Museum in Berlin: The Uncanny Arts of Memorial Architecture. Jewish Social Studies, 6(2), pp.1-23.

List of Illustrations Figure 1.01. Diagram of the Contextual Model of Learning Framework, Falk and Dierking, 2008, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/1-Interactive-Museum-Experience-Model-FalkDierking-2008_fig1_298299762/actions#reference] Figure 1.02. Diagram of the Three Levels of Processing, Norman, 2004, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Threelevels-of-processing-Visceral-Behavioral-and-Reflective4_fig1_311833541/actions#caption] Figure 2.01. Interior of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum, Hursley, 2005, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.archdaily.com/179679/yadvashem-holocaust-museum-safdie-architects/50163bae28ba0d1598001252-yadvashem-holocaust-museum-safdie-architects-photo] Figure 2.02. Interior view of Vessel, Moran, 2019, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://static.designboom.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/thomasheatherwick-studio-vessel-hudson-yards-new-york-film-designboom-02.jpg] Figure 3.01. Exterior view of Te Papa, New Zealand Institute of Architects, date unknown, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://www.nzia.co.nz/practice/Jasmax/1304/projects/tepapatongarewa/1923#] Figure 3.02. Architectural Concept Plan for Te Papa, Jasmax Design Director Peter Bossley, 1998, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://media.springernature.com/original/springerstatic/image/chp%3A10.1007%2F9 78-981-10-6904 8_4/MediaObjects/427597_1_En_4_Fig1_HTML.gif] Figure 3.03. The Holocaust void inside the Jewish Museum, Hufton + Crow, 2001, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://libeskind.com/wpcontent/uploads/SDL_Jewish-Museum_%C2%A9HuftonCrow_033rs.jpg] Figure 3.04. The view from within the Garden of Exile, Michele Nastasi, 2001, online. [Accessed 18. Nov. 2019, retrieved from https://libeskind.com/wpcontent/uploads/exterior-view-garden-of-exile-cmichele-nastasi-2280x2874.jpg]