Page 1


Studies show that the exposure to green spaces can benefit health, attention capacity, and work morale, especially in campus settings. However, modern era brings two issues that are worth exploring: the lack of time and the use of mobile electronic devices, which is why the human behaviors in lunch landscapes, the landscape that can be accessed during lunch break and the behavioral changes caused by electronic devices are worth exploring. This research attempts to answer three questions: what people do in lunch landscapes, what characteristics do they like, and how the electronic devices can influence the behaviors in lunch environments. 12 Study sites are selected from 4 University of Georgia campus precincts that contain food vendors. They are examined closely in preliminary observation, and multi-level site inventory. The sites are categorized into 4 groups based on their appropriate uses. Each site is then observed for 20 minutes at a time for 3 times during 11 am to 12.30 pm. The gender, activities, the lengths of stay, and the functional subspaces of the participants are recorded and examined. The results found that the uses of electronic devices are the majority use of campus green spaces while physical activity ranks the lowest. Male participants prefer the seat next to the crowd a little more than female participants. Planters and alternative seats are highest among the seating selections. People in general prefer the locations with sun, with crowd, and the majority of people in lunch landscapes use electronic devices. The preference of those who use electronic devices and those who don’t have similar pattern, but the cell phone users in particular are more likely to stand in the sun next to the movement of people.

For most people in the urban setting who have strict hours of work, the opportunity to be exposed to the green environment daily is important to retain health. The design of spaces that allow human interaction with nature will have to be further researched. This study will create a stronger potential for future studies to utilize a relationship between built environment and human health. INDEX WORDS: Environment and Health; Environmental Psychology; Behavioral Sciences; Lunch: Landscape Architecture; Observational Study; Campus design.



PONGSAKORN SUPPAKITPAISARN B.L.A., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2011

A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree


Š 2013 Pongsakorn Suppakitpaisarn All Rights Reserved



Major Professor: Committee:

Sungkyung Lee Brad Davis Umit Yilmaz Marguerite Koepke

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT There are so many thanks to make. I have to say I would not survive the process as healthily as I have without mental supports from the family and friends. Their understanding of the situation has helped me in so many ways. The committee has been doing wonderfully to nudge me in the right direction. I have to give credits to Professor Lee, my advisor, who has been patient and encouraging; reading drafts upon drafts and constructively criticizing the work of a beginning researcher to finally come together. Many abrupt deadlines and urgent emails had been responded on time. Many weeks were spent reading rough drafts with ridiculous grammar and meaninglessly poetic proses. She is an inspiration of how to be a great professor. To these actions and qualities, I feel ever grateful.


TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………………...vii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………………..viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………1 2: RESTORATIVE BENEFITS OF NATURE AND MODERN CAMPUS LUNCH LANDSCAPE……………………………………………………………………………..8 Restorative Benefits of Nature………………………………………………………8 Specific Benefit Example: Obesity…………………………………………………16 Campus and Community Context of Restorative Benefits…………………………17 Lunch Landscape-Campus Lunch Landscape……………………………………....22 Mobile Electronic Devices and Behavioral Impact………………………………....25 The University of Georgia Relevance………………………………………………27 3: IN-DEPTH LITERATURE REVIEW-- CASE STUDY APPROACH The social life of small urban spaces……………………………………………….30 Campus Outdoor Spaces……………………………………………………………33 Communicating Behavioral Research to Campus Design………………………….38 Spatial Behavior in San Francisco Plaza……………………………………………42 Introducing Healing Gardens into a Compact University Campus…………………44 Student performance and high school landscapes…………………………………..46 Emerging relationships between design and use of urban park spaces……………..48 Differently Designed Parts of a Garden Support Different Types of Recreational Walks …………………………………………………………………50 Overall Relevance…………………………………………………………………...53 v

4: METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………………………58 Secondary Studies………………………………………………………………….58 Preliminary observation…………………………………………………................58 Site inventory……………………………………………………………................58 Primary Observation……………………………………………………………….60 Scope……………………………………………………………………………….60 Observational conduct……………………………………………………………...60 Site selection……………………………………………………………………….61 Site categorization………………………………………………………………….64 Hypotheses…………………………………………………………………………70 5: SITE INVENTORY……………………………………………………………………...73 Campus Precincts…………………………………………………………………..73 Site Inventory………………………………………………………………………78 6: RESULTS, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSION……………………………………..127 Results……………………………………………………………………………..127 Discussion………………………………………………………………………....140 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………...143 REFERENCE……………………………………………………………………………………….147 APPENDIXES………………………………………………………………………………………151


LIST OF TABLES Pages Table 4.1: The sites in their categories………………………………………………………………66 APPENDIX A: Literature Table concluding all restorative benefits of nature by Ma (2007)……...152 APPENDIX C: Primary Observation Timeline……………………………………………………...163


LIST OF FIGURES Pages Figure 2.1 Reasonable Person Model illustrated by Kaplan (2011) …………………………………13 Figure 2.2 Healthy Campus Policy illustrated by Dooris (2001)…………………………………….21 Figure 4.1 Diagram showing the process of this study………………………………………………57 Figure 4.2 Campus Precincts, Eateries, and Selected Sites………………………………………….63 Figure 4.3 Categorization mapping based on general physical arrangement………………………..64 Figure 4.4 Categories of selected sites in campus context…………………………………………..67 Figure 5.1 North Campus Precinct………………………………………………………………….74 Figure 5.2 Central Campus Precinct………………………………………………………………...75 Figure 5.3 East Campus Precinct……………………………………………………………………76 Figure 5.4 South Campus Precinct…………………………………………………………………..77 Figure 5.5 Bulldog Café Context Map………………………………………………………………80 Figure 5.6 Bulldog Café Photographs……………………………………………………………….81 Figure 5.7 Bulldog Café Site Inventory……………………………………………………………..82 Figure 5.8 UGA Creamery Context Map…………………………………………………………....84 Figure 5.9 UGA Creamery Photographs…………………………………………………………….85 Figure 5.10 UGA Creamery Site Inventory…………………………………………………………86 Figure 5.11 GA Center Courtyard Context Map……………………………………………………88 Figure 5.12 GA Center Courtyard Photographs…………………………………………………….89 Figure 5.13 GA Center Courtyard Site Inventory…………………………………………………..90 Figure 5.14 MLC Lawn Context Map………………………………………………………………92 Figure 5.15 MLC Lawn Photographs……………………………………………………………….93 Figure 5.16 MLC Lawn Site Inventory……………………………………………………………..94 Figure 5.17 Library Lawn Context Map……………………………………………………………96 viii

Figure 5.18 Library Lawn Photographs…………………………………………………………….97 Figure 5.19 Library Lawn Site Inventory…………………………………………………………..98 Figure 5.20 North Side of Brooks Mall Context Map……………………………………………..100 Figure 5.21 North Side of Brooks Mall Photographs……………………………………………...101 Figure 5.22 North Side of Brooks Mall Site Inventory……………………………………………102 Figure 5.23 Lamar Dodd Rain Garden Context Map……………………………………………...104 Figure 5.24 Lamar Dodd Rain Garden Photographs………………………………………………105 Figure 5.25 Lamar Dodd Rain Garden Site Inventory…………………………………………….106 Figure 5.26 Odum Pocket Lawn Context Map…………………………………………………….108 Figure 5.27 Odum Pocket Lawn Photographs……………………………………………………..109 Figure 5.28 Odum Pocket Lawn Site Inventory………………………………………………...…110 Figure 5.29 Tate Roof Garden Context Map……………………………………………………....112 Figure 5.30 Tate Roof Garden Photographs…………………………………………………….....113 Figure 5.31 Tate Roof Garden Site Inventory……………………………………………………...114 Figure 5.32 MLC Plaza Map……………………………………………………………………….116 Figure 5.33 MLC Plaza Photographs……………………………………………………………….117 Figure 5.34 MLC Plaza Site Inventory……………………………………………………………..118 Figure 5.35 Founder’s Garden Context Map……………………………………………………….120 Figure 5.36 Founder’s Garden Photographs………………………………………………………..121 Figure 5.37 Founder’s Garden Site Inventory……………………………………………………...122 Figure 5.38 Warnell Garden Context Map…………………………………………………………124 Figure 5.39 Warnell Garden Photographs………………………………………………………….125 Figure 5.40 Warnell Garden Site Inventory………………………………………………………..126 Figure 6.1: The comparison activities in percentage of total observation…………………………128 Figure 6.2: Comparison of activities in percentage between 4 typologies defined by author……..130 Figure 6.3: Comparison between male and female activities……………………………………...131 ix

Figure 6.4: Comparison between male and female electronic devices and preference of crowd movements………………………………………………………………………………………..131 Figure 6.5: Percentage of people spending time in sun and shade………………………………132 Figure 6.6: Average time of people spending in sun and shade....………………………………133 Figure 6.7: Percentage of people spending time in crowd and away from crowd………………133 Figure 6.8: Average time of people spending in crowd and away from crowd…………………134 Figure 6.9: Percentage of people seat preference… ……………………………………………135 Figure 6.10: Average time of people spending in different seats……………………………….135 Figure 6.11: Percentage of people using electronic devices versus those who don’t…………...136 Figure 6.12: Average time of people using electronic devices versus those who don’t………...136 Figure 6.13: Comparison of visual electronic users and overall users…………………………..138 Figure 6.14: Comparison of the cell phone users to overall users……………………………….138 APPENDIX D: Food Map by UGA Campus Architect………………………………………...164 APPENDIX E: Percentage of activities in different landscape categories…………………165-166


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION University environment can be very stressful and exhausting for everyone. The students experience stress in many directions. They are just around the age where they have to respond to social acceptance and academic pursue (Chow, 2007). Faculty members and staffs have to go on with their desk jobs where they have to use their attention span on many issues in limited time (Broom and Starzdins 2007). Many scientific studies find out that there are the needs for students and faculty members as daily workers to seek out mental and emotional restorations (Matsuoka, 2010) (Kaplan, 1993) (Lau, 2009). Furthermore, the technology nowadays can make information accessible, but also force the minds and attention to work harder than ever (Louv 2011). There is a way to alleviate parts of the stress and exhaustion out of people who are involved in campus environment. Researchers found that exposure to natural environment can restore the attention capacity and emotional negativities (Hartig 2007). Being surrounded with trees, leaves, water, And wildlife reminds a human of the bigger world he is a part of. In Kellert’s book: The Kinship and Mastery, 1997, the author examined the relationship between human and nature through extensive literature review and claims that they can even contribute to creation of better society and global environment. However, due to the tight schedule of modern life and the technology, allowing accessibility of everything indoor, make it easy for people to miss the benefits of being outside (Broom and Dixon 2007). The green spaces on campus that are accessible during lunchtime will allow students and faculty members to expose themselves to the natural elements and have better physical and mental performances (Louv 2011). In his exciting latest installment, Nature Principle (2011,) Richard Louv has proposed the idea of the high-performance human-- hybrid between information and nature. This is the era where the information is accessible everywhere. If people use technology and can be outside, the quality and quantity of information that human can process and create may be limitless. The idea of creating landscape that could allow the high-information human to thrive and become high-performance human from lunch landscape is an interesting ideas that could be explored. 1

This research will seek to respond to the idea by analyzing people’s activity in green spaces during lunch breaks in campus settings, with notation about how electronic devices may affect the preference in green space. These analyses will be helpful to come up with a design suggestion to encourage people with technology to stay intact with nature. The finding of the thesis will be likely to answer these three questions: 1) How do people spend time in campus lunch landscape? 2) What spatial quality in lunch landscape are people attracted to? 3) How do people with technology act differently from others in such space? The thesis consists of 6 chapters. Each chapter will unfold the process to find these answers. The contents of the chapters are as described below. 1) This chapter has discussed the brief importance of the study, the objective of this research and will discuss some basic definition, the quick view of the methodology process, and the expected outcome. 2) Chapter 2 - will explain restorative theories and how they are important for human health and well-being, the notion and history of lunch landscape, the importance of restoration in campus landscapes, and the prevalence of electronic devices along with its effects in humanbehaviors. 3) Chapter 3- will discuss about the existing behavioral studies out there about open spaces that have similar characteristic with the spaces studied in this thesis. What the researchers want to find, the method they used, and the findings 4) Chapter 4- will discuss the detail of the observational study, the site selection, what was observed, and why such method and data analysis procedure were selected 5) Chapter 5- will show the inventory of the site- the general description about University of Georgia campus, each site plan, photographs, and special characteristics in detail 6) Chapter 6- will show the result of the observation, the analysis of the data, and what to make of the result Green Space: The definition 2

Throughout the research, there are several mentioning of ‘green space,’ ‘open space,’ ‘natural environment,’ ‘garden,’ etc. These words are used in a very similar context, referring to the open spaces with vegetation. In this study, the term is mentioned as a combination between The Planning Institute of Australia and The State University of New York’s definition of ‘open space’ to describe the function of the subject we are focusing on. Kaplan’s definition of the tern ‘natural environment’ and ‘nearby nature’ will describe its quality. The Planning Institute of Australia describes ‘open space’ as a setting that contains natural elements, mainly plant communities. The open spaces can be used for recreations, sports, or interactions (Australia, T.P.I.o, 2009). The function of the open space is to be open and accessible from the public. However, if the open space is to be restorative, it has to have a vegetative quality of ‘natural environment.’ ‘Natural environment,’ as explained by Kaplan, include the variety of outdoor settings with the substantial amount of vegetation. The nature Kaplan is describing can be in parks, arboretums, vacant lots with some grass and trees, and so on. The focus of the natural environment definition will be mainly on the floral aspect and not fauna (Kaplan 2007). The quality of the space the thesis refers to when discussing the green space would base on this term as well as ‘nearby nature.’ Kaplan explains that ‘nearby nature’ is the natural area that can be intertwined with everyday environment. These spaces are near you, such as a ‘metro’ park, a plaza with substantial vegetation, or a green trail. It usually refers to a space within the urban areas, but does not limit to a city—a place where someone can walk around or experience as time allows (Kaplan 2007). In conclusion, the term ‘green space’ and ‘natural environment’ in this thesis mean the open spaces that contain a lot of plants and vegetation that are accessible to people. This includes the environment we can see from far away and the place we can be in, big and small. These environments can be different in quality and effects on human experience as we will discuss later on in the thesis. Campus Lunch Landscape Lunch landscape is the term used by the author to refer to the any green space that is accessible during lunch break, such as the outdoor cafeteria, the open spaces within walking distant to food vendors, 3

or the seating areas between food access and classes or workplaces. That is, the area where the students or employees can retreat to in the short period of time between their compacted schedules. People do not necessarily eat in a lunch landscape, but use it along with other purposes, such as people watching, conversing, sunbathing, or communicating through electronic devices. The further exploration of lunch landscape would be fully discussed in Chapter 2. For most people in the urban setting who have strict hours of work, the opportunity to be exposed to the green environment daily is very valuable for one’s physical and cognitive functions (Kaplan 2011.) A university campus is an excellent example for the environment that can leave humans stressed or mentally fatigued. Thus, the restoration benefits of nature are necessary to optimize the ability of students, staffs, and faculty members. The design of spaces that allow human interaction with nature will have to be further researched. It is important to understand what physical elements will make college students, faculties, staffs, and visitors stay and make interactions with nature in public green spaces during their lunch break. Methodology This study focuses on lunch landscape because if offers the opportunity for students and faculty members who have a tight work schedule. The study has two phases of observation- the primary observation and the secondary observation. In the primary observation, the researcher visited several different sites around the University of Georgia campus and stay for the length of 5-10 minutes. The site selection was done by aerial photograph search to pinpoint possible green spaces that matched the ‘lunch landscape’ description. The primary observation helped the author see the basic behavioral pattern of the users of the space and determined how the observations will be conducted, where would be the optimum sites, and how the sites were categorized. After the primary observation, the sites were selected so that the researcher can access by bicycle during his own lunch breaks which vary between 11 am – 2 pm during weekdays. The researcher makes the inventory of the sites. The spaces are categorized into 4 types based on its intended functions: (1) the spaces for dining, (2) the spaces for active recreation, (3) the spaces for passive recreation, (4) and the 4

spaces for other uses. The time span of research ran through the middle of fall semester, during October 16th to November 5th. The temperature range of Athens is usually 60-70 F during the time, making it the preferred temperature to be outside according to an observational study done in San Francisco. The researcher stay at each site for about 20 minutes, looking at how people use the space, what action they perform at the site, how long they spend there, and how are the environmental conditions at the time (for example weather condition and temperature.) The observed behaviors are listed in 6 categories: (1) dining (2) socializing (3) being restored (4) using electronic devices (5) non-electronics reading (6) physical activities. The data will be analyzed quantitatively to see the relationship between the actions and spatial characters. For example, from x persons who used electronic devices, y persons sat on seating furniture facing traffic, which count as z% of all the subjects studied. The activities will be analyzed qualitatively in spatial mapping that can visualize the behavioral pattern and see if it can answer the researcher’s inquiry. People engaging in electronic devices will be carefully noted compared to other categories to see if there are difference in pattern, location selection, and the length of staying. The results would be concluded to make a design insight that may apply to the future design in campus lunch landscape. Further detail about the methodology can be found at Chapter 3. Expected Outcomes The author expects the outcome to stay true to the previous observational studies on open spaces such as Golicnik (2010,) Marcus’ (1998) and Whyte (2001.) In Whyte’s study that explores the urban plazas in New York City, we found that people are attracted to people. The seat choices and options should be available. The natural elements are important, but the shelter from too much of it is to be provided, and if possible, extra stimuli should be provided to create social triangulation (Whyte 2001.) Marcus (1998,) makes a design guideline to campus landscape and provides variety of instructions specific to the spaces. Most of them mention that people are attracted toward the edge of the space, the fascination elements such as water, plants, and wildlife must be accessible as well as food vendors, and there should be variety of seating options with tables. Golicnik (2010) made observations in 3 open spaces in European city, and noticed that the transparent


edges, solid edges, and programming buffer will help determine the character of the space. These observations, however, does not regard people with portable electronic technology, so the author creates the second part of the hypothesis based on his primary observational study. With the information about these three related observational studies, the author hypothesizes that the students, faculty members, and staffs on campus will be attracted to the areas where there are edge seating with shelters. They will be there if there are plenty of fascination elements, and will stay longer with the food access and tables along with other types of seating. The people who are using electronic devices outdoor might react to the space differently, such as they will prefer the spot in the shade even in the colder days to prevent sun glares. They might have their headphone plugged in; hence the sound buffer might lose some priority to this user group. In term of limitation, the result of this observational study will be rather specific to many factors at the observation time, seasons, and locations. These factors can obscure the outcome of the study. The carefully selected times and dates of observations and the reference in previous studies, as well as a set of assumptions, can be use to ensure the accuracy of the outcome.

Conclusion University campus can be a stressful environment. The measures to alleviate the stress and increase mental capacity to the students, faculty members, and staffs should be taken to improve the quality of the University. Researchers have found that the restorative environment or the natural environment can help reduce stress, deflect negative moods, and increase attention span. During modern era, time management can be an issue, so a campus lunch landscapes that people want to wander in are very important. This research tried to find out what people like in such landscapes, what they do, and how they do it differently with mobile electronic devices with them. The researchers selected the approachable site and made the observational study that look at the behavioral pattern in different spatial qualities. The statistic data will also be collected and analyzed. The expected outcome is that people will enjoy the area with fascination elements, wide range of seating, and food, while people with electronic device may react to the space differently because of the specific needs their devices require.


The next chapter will explain the existing theories about restorative benefits of nature, the lunch landscape, and the importance of this study toward and individual, society, and ecological system.


CHAPTER 2: RESTORATIVE BENEFITS OF NATURE AND MODERN CAMPUS LUNCH LANDSCAPE This chapter will explain the background information about restorative theories, the application of the theories as an approach to a problematic issue such as obesity, campus landscapes, lunch landscapes, how these three ideas are related together, and how it is a relevant issue to the University of Georgia. The study also explores how engaging with electronic devices can affect health and behaviors and its prevalence in today’s society. To understand the bigger picture, theories that behind the conclusions that the exposure to natural environments are essential and beneficial to human as a species need to be discussed. That would lead to the application of those benefits to the students and faculty members as individuals, and how natural campus landscapes can support the overall university’s performance and better environment. Restorative Benefits of Nature There are many studies done involving the restorative benefits of nature. The notion of nature and human relationship is explained well in Kellert and Wilson’s Biophilia Hypothesis. The more practical studies are done based on two theories: Ulrich Psychoevolutionary Theory and Kaplan’s Attention Restoration Theory. Each one has different sets of studies and applied guidelines for the designs toward health and well-being. For example, Ulrich’s Natural Distraction Design for the healing-oriented landscape and Kaplan’s Attention Restorative Elements for restorative landscape. Furthermore, there is a recent study from Kaplan to use the benefit of nature to create better environment. The new applied theory is called “The Reasonable Person Model” Even before the science world, healing and health benefit of landscape has been known and applied in human history from Ancient Greek. Stella Maria Hug’s study in 2011 took an anthropological approach and traced the evidence of landscape and people health from ancient time to present day to display how landscape and nature can be a therapeutic influence. The paper shows the evidence of therapeutic landscape traced back to Greek and Roman culture. Her study stresses the need of access to


natural environment in urban life style; however, she admits that we need scientific evidence to convey so (Hug 2011). The modern conceptual idea of restorative environment is described extensively by Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson’s The Biophilia Hypothesis. The book has an extensive empirical reviews and applications of ideas that respond to the notion of restorative environment. Wilson’s Biophilia Hypothesis believes that humans have a very strong connection natural environment, and the connection has developed throughout the evolutionary process. Humans evolved in natural environment, and we genetically grew the dependence toward it. We like certain elements of nature because we are hardwired to (Kellert and Wilson 1993.) These reactions are inherent. It is associated with human competitive advantages and genetic fitness; meaning that during our evolutionary process, those who tend to interact with nature became more suitable to survival and reproduction. The existence of our preference toward certain kinds of nature implies that the interaction with them increase the possibility of achieving personal goals and fulfillment in life as the population with biophilic tendency had thrived, making it a common trait throughout most human population (Kellert 1997). While the book has set a basic understanding of why human is connected to nature and how we can benefit from them, there are two more prominent theories that can be used to scientifically explain the effect of nature in human health and well-being. In 2007, Terry Hartig has collected the literature in restorative relationship between human and nature to explain to public how to understand the restorative environment as health resources. In the essay, he has separated the theories of restorative nature into two interconnected groups. The groups include (1) Ulrich’s Psychoevolutionary Theory and (2) Kaplan’s Attention Restoration Theory (Hartig 2007). Although the author could not find the name “Psychoevolutionary Theory” that Hartig uses in his essay in any literature by Ulrich, the prominent theory that Ulrich proposed was that human has evolved along with nature; hence they respond to natural environment. Ulrich agrees with Wilson’s biophilia theory that humans are hardwired to respond positively to natural environment. He explains through the evolutional theory by stating that the natural environment relieves the stress from fight-or-flight situation 9

quicker after the stressor was gone; thus allow a mental shift toward a positive emotional state. He also mentions that only a few minutes of natural exposure will reduce the symptoms that indicate stress. In the modern urban environment where there are many stressors, the exposure to the natural environment will help humans’ psychological health to be more resilient toward stress; thus they will suffer less hormonal responses from stress and have a better physical health. (Ulrich 1999) The theory focuses on the stress reduction and emotional improvement after being exposed to green space, and initially tested on the visual exposure to vegetation. The brief explanation of the theory was provided in the introduction of a study done by Ulrich in 1984. In the study, the operational patients were assigned to random rooms with windows to green space or to brick walls. He found that the patients whom the view of nature is available to recovered one day faster in recovery and used less self-issued pain-killer. This famous study proofs the fact that the visual exposure to natural environment has impact on physical and mental health (Ulrich 1984.) To make it relatable to Kaplan’s Attention Restoration Thoery, the author will refer to Ulrich’s theory as the “Stress Reduction Theory.” Many applied study had an experiment related to the notion of Ulrich’s theory by seeking the stress reduction effect from visually and physically access to nature. (Matsuoka 2010,) (Lau 2009,) (Leather 1998,) (Kaplan 1993,) (Lottrup 2013,) etc. Most of the studies assign the participants from different backgrounds (high school students, desk workers, college students) to the windows with views against without. The results always show that the view of nature has the benefits toward stress reduction and, in some cases, happiness in the work or school environment. While Ulrich’s Stress Reduction Theory responds to stress and emotional response, Kaplan’s Attention Restoration Theory focuses on mental fatigue and mental capability. In the book: With People in Mind (1997,) written to collect all the empirical studies and application for designing restorative landscapes, Stephen and Rachel Kaplan mention Attention Restoration Theory. It explains that humans have two different types of attention: involuntary attention and directed attention. In everyday life, humans have to work on mental battle between the matters they need to direct their attention to such as work or driving and the other matters that will attract the attention such as loud noises. The effort used to 10

focus in the directed attention leaves a person mentally fatigued. Mental fatigue can cause lower ability to perform cognitive functions. It can also make people focus only on the short-term achievement while ignoring long term goals. According to Kaplan, the attention can be restored as they are exposed to the natural environment. The natural fascination helps alleviate the fatigue and allows the mind to be vigilant for decisions and cognitive ability. Many studies have been done to show that the Attention Restoration Theory has wide range of application from motivation to study (Matsuoka 2010,) better attention capacity (Lauman 2007,) reduce aggression and violence (Kuo 1998,) cognitive function (Wells 2000,) better society (Kaplan 2011,) (Louv 2011,) etc. These studies compare between two groups of subjects. One has access to nature in regular basis while other does not. The results show that the negative, impulsive thoughts are reduced when exposed to nature, and the attention capacity is restored, making the cognitive tasks more efficient. Ma’s (2007) study conducted an extensive literature review to show the experiments that has been done up to the year 2007 in these two theories, how the theory is measured, and what the results entail. The conclusion of such experiments shows that the exposure of green space mitigates negative health impact, support positive health improvement and happiness in many ways. The table can be seen in appendix A. Now that the basic theories have been discussed, the next step will be to look at what theories or models derived from these theories can affect the design guidelines. Two sets of essential elements to design a restorative landscape will be discussed in this study: the Natural Distraction Elements and the Attention Restoration Elements. Then the Reasonable Person Model would be explained. In 1999, Ulrich has mentioned the Supportive Garden Design Theory. The theory described certain elements that will improve health outcome of the patients in the healthcare facility. He claims that the stress reactions, such as blood pressures and stress hormones (Ulrich 1993), will affect the health condition of the patients, and the exposure to the natural environment will alleviate the stress; hence improve the psychological and physiological well-being of a patient. The natural alleviation of the stress in this design theory is call ‘natural distraction.’ The natural distraction elements include (1) social 11

support, (2) exercise, (3) positive distraction, and (4) sense of control; meaning that the therapeutic quality of the landscape can be accomplished by providing different seating groups for different sizes of social encounters, the opportunity to exercise in different intensity levels, the soft distraction such as plants, arts installation, water, or wildlife, and the sense that the user of the site or other human has some power to control the environment, such as movable chair, choices of seating and paths, and the cleanliness of the environment. The Attention Restoration Elements has been explained in Kaplan’s book, With People in Mind (1997.) The theory indicates that people have certain environmental quality that they will be most restored in. The restorative elements include (1) being away (2) extent (3) soft fascination (4) compatibility. This means that to optimize the restorative effect in human mental capacity, the landscape has to remove the user’s mental awareness from the stressor. The landscape has to promise the connection to the bigger environment physically (curvilinear paths promising more to be seen) or mentally (miniature waterfall reminding the user of the larger, natural ones.) The environment has to contain the element of soft fascination. The soft fascination is an element that can retain the user’s attention but not force the user to strain their indirect attention such as water, vegetation, or wildlife. Finally, the landscape has to be compatible, which mean the user will be able to navigate and access the parts of the site they wish to. The observation is made by the author that there is an overlapped connection between the Natural Distraction Element and the Attention Restoration Element. The soft fascination and the positive distraction are defined similarly and work in the similar function as well as the relationship between the compatibility and the sense of control. This may mean that the restorative environments discussed in Ulrich’s theory and Kaplan’s theory are the similar environments, showing the connection between the two prominent theory that describe the restorative benefits of nature. The Reasonable Person Model (RPM,) introduced by Kaplan in 2009, is slightly different than the two theories discussed earlier in this chapter. It approaches more to the psychological side of the environmental psychology area, however it shows the relationship between how human processes information in relation to the surrounding environment. The term ‘environment’ used in the Reasonable 12

Person Model is slightly different as well since it includes the social environment as well as physical environment. Kaplan essay in 2011 describes the RPM clearly. The model starts from the notion that people can be reasonable, attentive, and focused, but the same person can be very distracted, impulsive, and unreasonable. The fluctuation between the two comes from the ability to process the information in a thought cycle that consists of three elements: making mental models, being effective, and creating meaningful actions (Kaplan 2011). Mental model building is the thought process that humans make to see the causes, the effects, and the efficiency of creating an action. That is, it is the process that makes us decide whether our action would be reasonable. If the mind is distracted, the model will not have expansive access to the reasoning, thus a person will be less reasonable. Meaningful Action is the after effect of mental model, but it also can be influenced by social and physical environment. People become unreasonable when their efforts turn unfruitful or unrecognized. It is frustrating, which create a less effective mental model, and hence creating more meaningless actions. This is why compatibility and the sense of control are important in restorative and healing environment. Being effective is the cumulative of being sharp and decisive. Being effective will create the confidence from mental models and meaningful actions that have been built in the past and enhance more efficient in future mental models. If the environment cause human mind to be distract and impulsive, the person will be less effective, which leads to less confidence in the decision making process. The diagram below shows the relationship between three elements of RPM

Figure 2.1 Reasonable Person Model illustrated by Kaplan (2011)


The natural environment helps people to respond to the model with more capacity, leading to stronger, more meaningful action, and ensure the sense of being effective. In short, the Reasonable Person Model explains how exposing to green space can lead people to an overall better and healthier lifestyle. It also supports the hypothesis that those who are exposed to natural environment will be more likely to achieve personal goals in the long run (Kaplan, Kaplan 2011). Now that we have a brief introduction to each theory that associate with this thesis, we will move on to discuss the importance of the individual’s benefit in natural exposure. It is crucial to understand how these theories and their related studies help to explain the importance of a regular exposure to natural environment. The proof of the relationship between physical health can be shown in Ulrich’s study (1984,) which indicates that the view of green space shortens a post-operative hospital stays and lessen the amount self-issued painkillers used by patients. Hartig (2003) and Laumann (2003) agree that the exposure to green space lower blood pressure and heart rate. These, as noted by Ulrich (1984) may have resulted from the lower levels of stress and anxiety which are affected by the exposure to the green spaces and representation of natural environments such as views from windows or graphic murals. The most direct and obvious link between green space and physical health is stress and negative emotional responses, as shown in Ulrich’s (1999) articles as he mentions that stress can be a factor that effect negatively on physical health. Chronic stress has been proven to affect poorly on physical health and can lead to many health issues such as obesity, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular diseases (Kuo L. 2008). As the exposure to the natural environment alleviates stress, it also reduces some factors that may lead to these health issues. Hartig (2007) has collected the data that being physically accessed to green space will reduce blood pressure back to pre-stressor condition within 4-10 minutes. In the same study, Hartig mentions that the natural environment can evoke positive emotions and deflect negative ones in 7-15 minutes of exposure. Louv (2011) explains that the green and open spaces help people meeting each other in a less negative mood, allowing the social interaction that may help cope the stress.


This fact reflects on Ulrich’s natural distraction that social support helps reduce the stress in therapeutic landscapes (Ulrich 1999). Beside stress, the actions that lead toward better lifestyles can be inspired by the exposure of green space. Several studies have shown that in the green spaces that accommodate physical activities such as jogging, walking, or other recreation can help encourage people to engage in those activities. (Maller et. al 2003.) In 2009, Hug has compared two groups of people who exercise in indoor and outdoor facilities, asking them to give a score to both in term of restorative elements, excitement, and whether they should do it more often. The result showed that exercising outdoor is much more fun (Hug 2009.) In addition, the study by Bodin and Terry (2003,) tested 12 runners report on emotional changes between urban and natural jog. The results show that the runs among nature have moderate effect on improving depression and anxiety while completely deflect the angry mood (Bodin, 2003). These positive reinforcements for physical engagement are helpful to reduce the factors of certain diseases like type II diabetes (Wells, 2007.) Brisbon (2005,) also indicates the relationship between the quality of the built environment and asthma by showing that the lower level of physical activity along with a poor air quality can lead to a lower immune system. With the existence of more green space, the air quality would improve, and there would be an encouragement for physical exertion. These findings mean that the green spaces that offer opportunities for exercises can offer an additional health benefit. Further study has been conducted by Maas (2009) to investigate whether the morbidity defined by physician is also related to green space in people living environment. The study took data from medical record and compared it to the percentage of green spaces in 1 km and 3 km radius. At the 1 km radius from green space, 15-24 diseases appear in the lower rate. The relationship is the strongest for anxiety disorder and depression. The result yet again expands the endless restorative benefits of nature. As explained earlier in this chapter, Reasonable Person Model explains that humans will be more likely to a long term goal and have higher awareness of their well-being (Kaplan et. al. 2011.) That implies that people with less mental fatigue will be more mindful about their diet, sleeping pattern, and exercising routine than those with higher mental fatigue; thus leading to a healthier lifestyle. 15

Specific Benefit Example: Obesity To paint a clearer picture of how the exposure to green space can help reduce the factor and improve the conditions of a specific health problem, a prevalent health issue is picked to make a case study. The epidemic of obesity has been discussed for in depth. According to University of Georgia Obesity Initiative (2012) who has a goal to tackle obesity in the state of Georgia, over 65 percent of adults in Georgia and 40 percent of children are overweight or obese. The state has to spend more than 2 billion dollars each year to healthcare cost and the loss of productivity by obesity related issues. (Obesity Initiative 2012) The University of Georgia has several movements to assess the issue such as UGA Obesity Initiative, and hence will be discussed briefly to show the important role of green space in human health. The issue of obesity is a very complicated issue that consists of many contributing factors ranging from genetics to food to urban infrastructure. It requires a multidisciplinary approach, and cannot be solved by the exposure to natural environment alone (Wells 2007). However, there are some contributions that the natural environment can offer to reduce certain factors that may cause or prolong the obesity issue in an individual. Stress, as the main link between physical and mental health, is a contribution factor to obesity. In 2008, Lydia Kuo described an experiment. She gave mice energy dense diet, gave some stressors to the experimental group and none to the control group. She recorded its change several weeks after and found out that the visceral fat grew in the mice that are exposed to stress compared to control group, proven that stress can have direct link with food consumption and storage. With this experiment, we can conclude that stress can also affect human behavior, making people demand a quick-high calorie diet. Chronic stress also stimulates the brain to generate hormones called neuropeptyde Y, which increases the accumulation of belly fat (Kuo 2008). Cortisol also makes people tired and unproductive, which less to less sleep and more stress (Kyrou 2008). The reduction of stress induced by the exposure of natural environment, by theory, will reduce the time and intensity of the stress (Ulrich 1984.) When the period and intensity of stress has been reduced, the level of cortisol and neuropeptyde Y will also decrease. (Kuo 2008) 16

As discussed earlier, certain green spaces accommodate and inspire physical activities. Hug (2005) proves that the exercise, either indoor or outdoor, reduces chronic stress. The regular physical activity will also reduce the risk of obesity, since it stimulates muscle growth, increases metabolic activities, and increases caloric output. These factors give contribution to reduce the risk of obesity (Brisbon 2005.) People with mental fatigue will be less likely to do something toward long term goals, according to Kaplan (1995.) The actions will come from impulsive thoughts, meaning that a person with fatigue will be more likely to eat unhealthy food choice or decide against exercises. The sedentary lifestyle that can be can be cause from impulsive behavior (Kaplan 2011) can contribute to obesity (Wells et. al 2008.) Exposure to the natural environment can increase human’s reasonableness and thus reduce the occurrence of this circumstance. (Kaplan 2011) Although regular exposure to green space alone will not cure obesity, the link between this prevalent issue and the physical and mental restoration can still be traced. Toward the further studies and experiments, the stronger relationship may be found. As it is, this section of the study has shown the benefits of green space exposure to a certain health issue. Campus and Community Context of Restoration Benefits The benefits of the regular exposure in natural environment can extend beyond an individual benefits. In a campus context, the exposure promises the improvement of the university as a whole. The physical attribute of the green space can contribute to microclimate control and better environment (Erell 2011). The presence and access to green spaces can heighten the students, faculty members, and staffs cognitive performance (Kaplan 2007). Well designed natural environment can also inspire the people around the university to make a better society and environment (Kaplan 2011). In addition, green space help contribute to the system of creating a healthy campus design (Dooris 2001). Not only that the landscapes such as lunch landscapes offer social and economical benefits, they also offer environmental benefits as well. A properly designed lunch landscape can help take care of the


environmental issues in the urban or developed setting such as storm water runoff, microclimate control, and wildlife habitat. Berthier (2004) attempted to quantify the attempt of the soil runoff compare to pavement in an urban catchment using 2D analysis and proves that the existence of soil surface in the way of runoff makes the difference in urban and suburban environment. The green spaces that have soft surfaces, trees, and plants, help absorb the water from the storm water runoff that can be a big environmental issue in developed environment. Although the full effect of storm water mitigation can be achieve only by a carefully calculated design, the presence of green spaces in the middle of paved area can help reduce the speed of runoff and offer the precipitation to the ground (Berthier 2004). The landscapes between workplaces and food vendors, which are both fairly developed spaces, can also help control the microclimate and mitigate the urban heat island effect. Erell (2011) explains that urban heat island can be caused and intensified by many factors including building density, impervious surface, and lack of vegetation. To solve the problem, another chapter of Erell’s book explains the significance of vegetation in microclimate. The vegetation will help reduce penetration of short wave solar radiation intercept the infrared to the atmosphere. It can create heat balance by physical heat storage and photosynthesis, creating the park cool island effect that converts the urban heat island in summer. Urban parks with only 10 m (30 ft) across can reduce microclimate temperature down up to 2 K (4 F.) The existence of urban canopy can help reduce the strength and advection of wind, making the microclimate more comfortable (Erell 2011). Erell’s study is supported by Masakazu’s study in 2012, when the researcher examined the relationship between the urban canopy and radiant environment in street canyons. The results show that the urban canopy reduce heat island effect and the canopy should be required if the ratio of the width between two tall buildings and the height of the shortest one exceed 1.5 (Masakazu 2012). The more accessible the green environment is, the smarter and more effective the members of the unit are. Studies show that human subjects can perform better in cognitive tasks after the exposure of green space. Wells (2000) shows that the children growing up around the area with natural environment 18

have more attention capacity and cognitive ability.Tennessen and Cimprich (1995) look at the views of the students’ dormitories and relate them to the residents’ attention capacity. The students who have more natural view out of their window score higher than those who have views to the built environment. Not only the students and children are affected by the natural environment, the older adults can also improve their cognitive function through the exposure to green space as well. A study in the geriatric care shows that the elderly have more concentration if they spend relaxing time outdoor (Ottoson and Grahn 2005.) The study from Rodney Matsuoka (2010) shows more direct impact on high school performance. The study shows a strong relationship between the views of green space to student’s standardized test score and their future life plan. Lau (2009,) reports the improvement of college students’ cognitive ability after experiencing a healing garden in campus. There is the explanation for the result from Attention Restoration Theory. As the mental fatigue builds up, people who have visual or physical access to nature has quicker, more effective way to relieve those tensions and refresh the attention capacity; hence they can perform better in cognitive tasks. These studies can imply that the views out the windows and the exposure to nature can improve the work quality of people who have access to them. The campus can benefit from having smarter students and capable staffs and faculty members; thus it might be a good idea to provide the green space for them to visit in a daily basis. The reduction of mental fatigue and stress can have benefit to faculty and staffs in another way too. It makes the staff and faculty members love their job (Kaplan 1993.) The employees who are happy with the jobs will perform better tasks and less likely to resign. Furthermore Kaplan (1993,) mentions the lower rate of ailment. Leather (1988,) agrees that the exposure to green space buffers the effect of stress from work, improving the general well-being of the workplace. Fewer sick employees mean better job performances, which will make the system of campus run smoothly and effectively. The exposure to green space does not only contribute to the improvement of individual and the performance of the university campus, it can also contribute to a better society in a certain degree. In this


section, the capability of the exposure to natural environment to improve one’s social behavior, neighborhood quality, and the environmental actions will be discussed. In theoretical perspective, the study of Kaplan (2011) mentions the reasonableness and its effect on people. One could understand that a person can be very reasonable, nice, coherent, and generous at times, while the same person can be irritable and out-right uncooperative. This is because human mind processes the emotional reflection and responsive actions through Reasonable Person Model. The model requires directed attention; which means that if a person has lower attention capacity, the model will not run as effectively. The outcome is that they will be more likely to be irritable, impulsive, and responsive to negative emotions. Kuo and Sullivan (2001b) have proven that people who have a regular exposure to a natural environment in the Low-income housing will less likely use aggression and violence compare to those in the same situation who don’t have regular access to green space. In another study, Kuo and Sullivan (2001) study crime rate in 98 apartments in the inner city neighborhood with and without green space. The results show that the apartments with lower natural environment have more crime reports. The same study suggests that there is a negative relationship between the perception of danger and the amount of green environment, while the relationship of the accessibility to green space, trust, and perception of safety is positive. This study shows that the regular exposure to natural environment can be a factor that contributes to a better neighborhood and community.

The exposure to green environment may increase the tendency for people to create a better environment according to Kaplan (2011.) In this article, Kaplan discusses about the factors that can affect the global environment. A common term that is used to describe the declination of the environmental quality caused by human is ‘anthropogenic factor.’ However, Kaplan offers the new term call ‘anthropogenerous factor:’ a human factor that affect positively to the environment. Kaplan suggests that by being surrounded by a supportive environment, people will be generous and caring for the environment as well. This can be supported by the Reasonable Person Model Theory (Kaplan 2011b.) If human have a very effective decision-making model, he or she will realize that the actions that are 20

friendly to the environment will affect positively to the humans as a species; hence they will be concerned about their environmental actions (Kaplan 2011). The quality of campus landscape can improve the quality of the overall campus. Dooris (2001) discussed the emergence of setting-based approach to health promotion and its application to higher education by creating a case study at the University of Lancashire, England. He studies the structure of how health and well-being concerns can be addressed through setting and external environment that can be included in the part of planning. The factors of students and faculty members’ well-being include (1) healthy, supportive empowering workplace (2) healthy student personal and social development (3) supportive and health promoting physical environment (4) wider community (5) academic development in curricular and research (6) Health policy and planning. The relationship can be shown in figure 1.2 below. Lau (2009) uses this model to make a case study in the University of Hong Kong regarding the additional of ‘healing garden’ to the university campus. He mentions that the requirement in number 1, 2,3, and 4 can be accomplished by a well-designed campus landscape.

Figure 2.2 Healthy Campus Policy illustrated by Dooris (2001)


Lunch Landscape and Campus Lunch Landscape ‘Lunch landscape’ is the term the author uses to describe the landscapes the thesis focuses on. This term will be referred to often in this study. The lunch landscapes, as the author mentions, are defined by their relative distances to two components of daily schedule: work and lunch. The significance in the location makes this type of landscape a prime spot to have a daily exposure to green space. With the limited use of vehicular access on campus, the walkability between the green spaces, the food vendor, and the lunch landscapes should be highly considered. According to Marcus (1998,) a campus open space is more likely to be used if associated with class buildings or food vendors. In 2002, Mineta Transportation Institute published an article to introduce design and planning professionals to the technology needed for the application of Transit Oriented Design study (TOD). Most of the publication talks about GIS application to planning, but the regulations and basic theories regarding TOD are explained thoroughly. The publication’s lead author, Bossard (2002) indicates that the distance should be 0.5 mile for walking and 2 miles for bicycle. Hence, the definition of the term ‘lunch landscapes’ in this study includes the green spaces that are 0.5 mile within the radius of a food vendor, and in the same time are 2 miles within the radius of any work places or classes, and vice versa. There are not many history relating dining and public landscape together, especially lunch. However, there are some studies that regard the design to accommodate eating outdoor, and some studies which indicate that the surround environment can affect the eating portion and the type of food being eaten. To understand the notion of lunch landscape, these studies will be explored. The only study the author found that describes the physical setting of outdoor dining is Women and the Everyday City written by Sewell (2011.) The book explores how women experienced urban landscape and modern [1900s] use of public space and how the landscape changed when women became a part of urban society. The study uses the records of three women in different social statuses between 1890-1915 in San Francisco to map out the location each one visited and reconstruct their fantasies and memories in historic perspective. The section that involves the built dining landscape for women explains that the dining for women is hidden from the main promenade, with vegetation for privacy. There is a 22

notion that eating outdoor in the urban space is more for an entertainment than function. While there are an implication that dining for men when they socialize just among men are out at the promenade, observing the pedestrians (Sewell 2011). The trend of men’s outdoor dining seems to become universal in the study of Whyte that was conducted in the late 1980s (Whyte 2001.) Through an observational study called ‘Street Life Project,’ Whyte and his peers collected information and direct observation in many parks and urban plazas in New York City. In his conclusion book, Whyte indicates that food attract people who attract more food which attract more people. The plazas and spaces should be made versatile to embrace street dining and outdoor plazas that transition gracefully and transparently into the traffic flow. He suggests that the space should be designed so that people can stay a while. In his observation in Southledge area shows that three-quarter of all users during lunch hour stick around for more than 15 minutes, and that was when the space was crowded. The more recent study by Zacharias (2004,) observing 7 popular urban plazas in San Francisco during 11 am to 3 pm, supports it by saying that people will adjust their crowding threshold when the space is really attractive. Claire Cooper Marcus and T. Wischemann(1998) suggests many directions in designing campus landscapes, many of which concern the use of them during lunch time. The approachable, affordable food vendors are suggested along with the significance of having tables for the users to eat on. It seems that the choices of seating are a very important part in designing lunch landscape. The seating must be flexible to around a private time, a small group, or a large social-dining encounter. The detailed consideration even includes watering during the evening, so that the grass could dry by lunchtime. Two studies have related the surrounding environment with dining portions and types. (Woodruff 2005,) (Sobal 2007.) Sobal (2007) tries to find out how microenvironment can affect food intake. He found that the color, package, size, and surrounding distraction can contribute to make food intake differ. For example, when an eater is distracted, they tend to eat more than usual portion. This study shows that the environment can affect food intake, but does not discuss the effect that the outdoor environment may have toward dining experience. Woodruff (2005,) in the other hand, studies the relationship between the 23

location that the Canadian students eat food and the types of food they eat. The results show that the children who eat food at home or school are more likely to get healthier food than whose who eat at the food outlet or ‘between the place.’ Unfortunately, Woodruff admits that the location ‘between the places’ is unclear, hence the study cannot prove more than to explain that the location of dining can affect the choice of food that students eat. The historical perspective of landscape regarding lunch is succinct, since the landscapes are built to be used in many purposes other than lunch (Marcus 1998). However, having landscapes and open spaces known as lunch landscape around campus could make a significant improvement to campus environment. Because of the time poverty we are facing in the modern environment (Broom and Starzdins 2007), the importance of lunch landscapes is that they offer a quick way for natural exposure. During a tight schedule of modern day and the new technology that creates the information overload, a 4-minute exposure will help restore attention capacity and alleviate stress (Kaplan 1988.) The lunch landscapes are like other green spaces in that they draw the sense of place into the location they are in. The spaces are thought of as the parts of the work places or campuses. With this regard, the lunch landscapes can make the work or school environment persuasive for visitors. It was studied that it would make the employees and students work more efficiently and keep the job longer, and it can create a sense of community in a workspace or a campus (Ma 2007). Well-designed landscapes are attractive to people, and they effect the admittance rate to employees. People are drawn to nature and tend to feel happy around them. The campuses and workplaces that have green spaces such as lunch landscapes create the ‘cue to care’ with make people feel secure; hence, the lunch landscapes on campus that are well designed can attract new students and employee to attend at the college or company (Kaplan 1997.) Because of the restorative benefit of nature and human intrinsic value to love certain language of green spaces, the well designed landscapes around work or study areas make people happier and do their jobs better. Matsuoka (2011) shows that students score better in standardized exam and think more about future in schools that have an exposure to nature 24

for them to access to (visually or physically.) Kaplan (1993,) also states that people will keep their job longer and perform the jobs more efficiently with the green spaces around workplaces. Finally, the green spaces on campus or workplaces such as lunch landscapes create the sense of community (Kuo and Sullivan 2001.) The green spaces allow people to meet when they are relaxed and attentive, making them friendlier to each other than usual. In term of workplace or college campuses, this can lead to a collaborative work and companionship between students, faculty members, and staffs. The restorative benefits of lunch landscape can improve University of Georgia in similar ways that it could improve other campus landscapes, but there are some specific information that are specifically relevant, making the campus the optimum place to study in this topic. The Main Campus of University of Georgia in Athens is quite large. According to the webpage, UGA by the Numbers (September 2012,) the main campus consists of 389 building on 759 acre and expanding. The work force in total of 9,757 includes 2,862 faculty members, 4,053 administrators, and 2,842 staffs. The school has the total students of 34,475 (including extended campus.) To make the information relevant: the University of Georgia is bustling with people that seek stress reduction and attention restoration, thinking it would be good to improve cognitive performance (aka. Hoping for a better grade,) and want to have a happy, healthy workspace. The author is one of them too. Mobile Electronic Devices and Behavioral Impact There are studies involving mobile devices. Most look at mobile telephone, since it has been there the longest and there are many studies linking the effects these mobile devices have over human behaviors (Yuan 2012; Hong 2012; Mansar 2012; Turner 2008). Unfortunately for smart phones, the behavioral studies are aimed for mental health related behavior along with market buying decisions (Mansar 2012; Fjeldsoe 2009; Morris 2012; Hong 2012). A few studies mention how these mobile devices can impact health and cognitive related behavior on both positive and negative results. Among those studies, a study shows that the location and surrounding environment has an effect on the comfort of using an electronic device, however, the study does not include green environment as a specific setting.


Studies show that having electronic devices around can result in positive effect. Mansar (2012) and Fjeldsoe (2009) claim that electronic devices can be used to promote healthy lifestyle and well-being. In Fjeldsoe (2009,) the author review 14 studies that evaluates health behavior intervention generates by SMS and assesses changes in behaviors to see if virtual social support can make a change in bad habits. The result is that the social support from short messages can intervene with unhealthy behavior and promote healthier ones. Mansar (2012) focuses on a more specific problem. In order to design a web interface for Middle Eastern people to fight against obesity, the researcher made a brief literature review on how action intervention in electronic devices can help improve social behaviors. The answer is that the web based electronic devices can, at all times, increase awareness of people’s goals, foster motivation, and improve attitudes of the participants. This means that: when the electronic devices are used in the right way, it can promote health and strengthen social supports for better social behaviors. However, there are negative behavioral impacts in engaging in mobile electronic devices. Hong (2012) examines the relationship between psychological character of phone addiction and the use of mobile phones in Taiwanese female students. Hong explains that electronic devices can reduce concentration during class, leads to unsafe driving, and creates more stressful financial situation. In Chow (2007,) it was shown that financial situation is one of the main issues that put stress on the students and hinder their academic performance. According to Hong, high anxiety and low self-esteem are related to the amount of cell-phone use. Female students, more likely than male, use cell phone as their primary social interactions with friends, romantic interest, and family (Hong 2012). The study shows that the electronic devices can be overused and create more stress. The most relevant data through the research in mobile devices and human behaviors in public is made by Turner (2008.) Turner considers phone behaviors which people are comfortable and which they are annoyed in different setting. In 2008, according to Turner, cell phone subscription has soared beyond population size in many countries. People start using calls in places such as the streets, public transportation, and bars. Mobile phone conversation can take extra cognitive burden for those who use it and those who overhear it. In the study, the researcher gave survey to 184 participants to see their comfort 26

when using the phone or hearing someone using it. The results show that people are more comfortable to use cell phones on the street, then public restaurants. The ones people feel less likely to use is on public transportation line (Turner 2008.) The study, although very completed, does not mention the use of cell phone on green space or any outdoor setting that is not on the street sidewalks. Many studies admit the prevalence of mobile technology, and the first published journal relating mobile devices and human behaviors together that the author could find was published on 2008. Most of the studies related to smart phones are published about year 2012, (Mansar 2012; Morris 2012; Hong 2012; Bernacki 2012) and the use of laptop computer or tablet computer has not been widely studied in behavioral field. As far as the thesis author could find, environmental behavior studies never focuses on the use of electronic devices. Turner (2008) mentions in his results that only 58% of participants carry their cell phones everywhere and 59% think that a public call should only be made in an emergency situation. Marcus’s study was published in 1998, and Abu Ghazzeh was published in 1999, hence there are less likely to be a prominence activity involving electronic devices at the time. However, since using cell phones and other electronic devices in many different ways, it may take some effects on how people act and react in an outdoor environment as well. The University of Georgia Relevance University of Georgia is on its way to be a healthy and green university. The main campus is adorned with many attractive green spaces based on the author’s primary observation. There are many organizations in University of Georgia that target the improvement of health and well being of students, faculty members, staffs, and even the population of Georgia. The Obesity Initiative, for example, creates an opportunity to tackle obesity health related problem (Obesity Initiative 2012). The University Health Center and the Department of Sports and Recreations has many health enhancing programs, such as counseling, cooking class, and the Biggest Loser UGA activity (UHC.) However, having more design insight studied in the University of Georgia campus would make the future design and planning for the main campus filled with health and well-being goals. This study


can help provide the information for the campus TOD master plan in 2050, and Health Science campus development. Conclusion There are many theories that relate human with nature. Kellert and Wilson’s Biophilia hypothesis suggests that human and nature cannot be separated. Ulrich’s psychoeveolutionary theory agrees and supplies that the when humans is exposed to natural environment, they feel happier and less stressed. Attention Restoration Theory focuses on the attention capacity, and how the natural environment could fill them. These theories have been tested to show that the exposure to green space can contribute to reduce the factors of prevalent health problem such as anxiety disorder and obesity. The further studies also show that the natural landscape in campus environment physically enhance the ecology of the campus, increase student and faculty performance, making them love their jobs and create a better society and community. However, because of the time crunch, the option of the landscape that can be accessed during lunchtime is crucial to be available. The time does not allow people to be outside and do other activities after they are done with work. It also builds up stress, which the exposure to natural elements can break down. University of Georgia is a large campus with a lot of mature trees; thus it is filled with people who seek restoration. Although the current campus is already healthy and green, there is more information about green space to be explored for future design such as TOD around the rail system or the development of Health Science Campus such as the pocket spaces during train and bus rides, green roofs and walls, and additional healing gardens. The next chapter will discuss about the existing behavioral observations and surveys about open spaces that can be applicable for campus lunch landscape.


CHAPTER 3: IN-DEPTH LITERATURE REVIEW-- CASE STUDY APPROACH Looking through the existing studies can provide a substantial amount of information. It showed what has been found, what is left unclear, and what can be new to the world. In the last chapter, we discussed the theories that prove the restorative benefits of nature. In this chapter, the studies that are taken to measure the importance and guidelines for the design that can be relevant to lunch landscape will be fully discussed. There are many studies conducted to look at behaviors of teenagers, at the campus landscapes, at urban plaza, pocket parks, etc. These studies will contribute to not only seeing the design of such space in a different light, but also how to create the experiment that are compatible to the timeframe available and the information needed in the author’s study. Throughout the research, there are 8 studies that present close relationship to the thesis. These studies will be examined closely based on these categories. Purpose: The purpose of the study helps the reader identify if the study is related to the topic of interest. In these case studies, the purpose helps the thesis author understand what the case studies’ authors are looking for. Methodology: Methodology is the way that the studies seek the answer of the questions asked in the purpose. The thesis’s author can use this part of each case study to modify his observational study for accurate results. Measurement: Measurement is a part of methodology the thesis’s author want to focus on. It shows in which form each study records in data. Again, this part will help the thesis’s author create a practical, believable result in his study. Results: The results of previous studies show what have been done and can be apply in the future. The thesis can use supportive evidence and factual bases to build on, compare, and use as an explanation to different circumstances. Discussion/Application/Analysis: The discussion, application, or analysis would show the readers how the results can be applied or generalized for utilization. There are many studies that lack of this part 29

of the study, but by identifying the process used to determine results data, the thesis can be more accurate and efficient. Relevance to this thesis: The relevance is created to show the thesis’s author reasons to select the studies. A table showing each study, its purpose, methods, results, and relevance can be shown at the end of the chapter by way to summarize the studies. These are the case studies selected for this thesis, ordered at the time the experiment is conducted. 1. The social life of small urban spaces / by William H. Whyte (1980) 2. Campus Outdoor Spaces/ by Claire Cooper Marcus (1998) 3. Communicating Behavioral Research to Campus Design: Factor Affecting the Perception and Use of Outdoor Spaces at the University of Jordan/ by Abu-Ghazzeh (1999) 4. Spatial Behavior in San Francisco Plaza: The Effects of Microclimate, Other People, and Environmental Design/ by John Zacharias (2004) 5. Introducing Healing Gardens into a Compact University Campus: Design Natural Space to Create Healthy and Sustainable Campus/ by Stephen Lau (2009) 6. Student performance and high school landscapes: Examining the links/ by Rodney H. Matsuoka (2010) 7. Emerging relationships between design and use of urban park spaces/ by Barbara Golicnik (2010) 8. Differently Designed Parts of a Garden Support Different Types of Recreational Walks: Evaluating a Healing Garden by Participatory Observation/ by Carina Ivarsson (2012)

The social life of small urban spaces / by William H. Whyte (1980) Purpose


This is an observational study to collect information from videotaping different open spaces across New York City through Urban Street Life Project. The purpose is to examine the behavior of social life in urban spaces and explain it in simpler manner. Methodology The data is collected by videotape. The time-lapse filming and video records the activities from 8 am to 6 pm. The data on map will be overlay to the analysis and conclusion. Measurement Several observers look for people whose behavior differs than the commuters, and to see how they react in certain ways. The characters are noted to categorized and simplified for information. The thesis’s author only extracts this information from the anecdote told in the chapters of the study. The process of data collection remains unwritten in the book. Results The raw results of the study are not published in the book. However, Whyte has generated the guidelines categorized in different topics. The topics that relate to the thesis’s focus include social interaction, seating, natural elements, food, transition, undesirable elements, effective capacity, and triangulation. In social interaction, Whyte suggests that people are attracted to people. The area where social interaction happens is not in the middle of the space. He suggests designers to select the site for social interaction near the traffic line. The seating area should relate to pedestrian flow. The design of the building, according to Whyte, does not affect the characteristic of the space, but it can contribute to the openness of the space that affects social behaviors. More seats tend to attract more people in some spaces, but the trend is not consistent across the sites. People will sit where there is a place to sit. The height of comfortable seating runs from 7 in to 44 in. The extra space or lengths of seats provide buffer and social comfort. People like to sit in the corner or the area where there is foot traffic. Benches, as Whyte suggests and Marcus agrees, do not work. Movable chair are much more well-like in New York City. 31

Access to the sun should be provided for users. Suntrap is important for warmth and comfort. Wind protection will allow people to enjoy a space longer. Trees must relate closely to seating space and should be plants in group. Water is great for urban setting since it creates great look, sound, and fascination for users. Whyte briefly mentions food in his study. Food attracts people who will attract more people who will attract more food. It’s a warm, welcoming cycle. The food sources of New York City are small vendors. The vendors should be versatile, transparent, and near foot traffic to serve both passerby and plaza users. Good plaza starts at the street corner. Transition is key to the success of urban plaza designs. People should not be able to tell where streets end and plazas begin, so that the impulse users feel more compelled to stop by. Sight line should be equal, and the open spaces should not be sunk unless there are some really good reasons and countermeasure for it. As Whyte notices human behaviors in the spaces, he also observes the undesirables. Homeless people can make the space look less attractive or compelling to stay. However, according to Whyte, the designs that try to drive away homeless people also drive away others. Instead, Whyte suggests one should design the spaces so attractive everyone uses it. The ‘undesirables’ will disappear as the spaces are packed. The effective capacity can be flexible. When an urban plaza is really attractive, people do not mind crowding. A study in Southledge shows that three quarter of all users during lunch hour stay more than 15 minutes. With this information, Whyte suggests that the design should allow people to stay a while during full capacity and make them feel comfortable. The element that will allow strangers to interact with each other can be called ‘triangulation.’ People who never know each other need some topic so they can generate conversation. The external stimuli can be physical objects, visual arts, street performances, or a really unique planting feature. Discussion/Analysis/Application


The analytical process is unclear, but the application has been made into the guidelines shown in the result section. The study has been done in New York City, which has a lot of people in a small urban space. Thus, applying the information to the campus space of University of Georgia requires careful assessment. Relevance to the current thesis The directional guidelines can be used to evaluate the sites. The results can be compared with the thesis for further analytical results. Again, the difference in setting needs to be considered in the analytical approach using this case study. However, this observational study is one of the oldest and with most detailed results which could be used to model the study further.

Campus Outdoor Spaces/ by Claire Cooper Marcus (1998) Purpose In a part of her book, Urban Places, Marcus gave her guidelines and suggestions to design campus landscapes. The book itself derives from the similar principle and purpose: to address the design issues and suggestions to the variety of outdoor social space. In this chapter, the guidelines of the design in social landscapes around campus are discussed in length. The issues that Marcus see when the design address users at the time (1998) is that most studies assume the users are able-bodied, relatively young adult males, mostly those who reside in the United States. In Marcus’s guidelines, she tries to address to every possible kinds of user issues. Methodology The guidelines shown in the chapter, as well as the other parts of the books, are collective analyses derived from an evaluating method called Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE.) Post-Occupancy Evaluation is the process of evaluating spaces after they have been occupied for some time to create better settings in the future. The evaluation helps the designers decide the effectiveness of space beyond visual impressions and aesthetic beauty. Marcus mentions some useful results of Post-Occupancy evaluation. The process can be use in education to learn the working component in a landscape, in professional world 33

to redesign a place or designing a place that have similar attribute to the existing one. The PostOccupancy Evaluation Method can also be very useful for staff development during downtime. Marcus also indicates that even though Post-Occupancy Evaluation can be very useful in designing public spaces, it cannot replace public participation. The public participation would be the evaluating process that provides most well-rounded and in-depth information for public space design. However, it may take plenty of time and resources. Post-Occupancy Evaluation consists of several independent steps to fully understand a space. These steps are defined below. 1. Participant observation: Participant observation can be done by having the observer use the space as a participant. Experiencing the space can give a general insight and understand the space better 2. Sketch plan and initial site observation: The plan and notes of the site helps generate the ideas of circulation and to see the site thoroughly as unity. 3. Indicate functional subareas of the sites: Each site has different subzones or programming. Like the site analysis used in design procedure, bubble diagrams indicate the existing functional usage of the site can be crucial in understanding the space and the behaviors occurring within each subzones. 4. Look for messages from administrator: A part of design success can be seen through the communication between users and administrator. The sign such as ‘no fishing’ or a path directing foot traffic a certain way will explain the uses and behavioral pattern to a certain extent. 5. Investigate behavior trace: Human leave traces as they use the open spaces. The foot traffic on the grass can create a new path that is not paved. Littering can indicate the lack of trash can, for example. 6. Produce activity map: The activity map will show where people are in the subzones. Along with the note of what the individuals are doing, the activity tables and map can allow 34

important information to emerge. The reoccurring pattern can be seen through this visualization 7. Interview: Interviews and interaction with the user of the spaces give the direct feedback of their preference. In some circumstances, it also indicates the reason they use a space in certain ways. 8. Data Summary: Data summary is the step where the researcher brings the data together to apply it in usable information suitable for the purpose of the evaluation. Measurement The data is recorded in a certain manner by these following questions. Who are using the spaces? How are they using it? What trace do they leave behind and what does it indicate? What did the designer and the administrative think when they first design the space? What works? What does not? The data collected seems to be most qualitative, but the quantitative data could be derived from the organization of behavioral mapping. The number of people appearing on subzones can statistically provide the information which could be shown in graphs and can be analyzed further. Since the book is the collective consortium between several studies, Marcus does not show much transparency of how the collected data on each Post-occupancy Evaluation got translated into several guidelines. This is the part that the thesis’s author might explore in other literature about how the process can be conducted. Results The results from this study are vast and very critical to campus open spaces. These guidelines are divided by the function of the spaces themed in ‘home’ including front porch, backyard, front yard, mall, and study area. since according to the research, the students in college campuses has a building that they call a ‘home base,’ and the notion of home make them react to the space differently. This section will summarize the finding of the study accordingly. Before dividing into rooms, Marcus indicates in the beginning of the book some attribute that all of the open spaces should have. The information is applicable to this thesis; hence it should be further 35

explored. According to Marcus, any space should locate where it is visually and physically accessible to public and convey that the space is available. The site has to be engaging on both outside and inside while support most desired activities. It should provide the feeling of security, reduce stress, enhance emotional well-being, and geared toward the target user group while encouraging other subgroups to use the space. The size and arrangement should be comfortable at peak time and accessible to the disabled, elderly, and children. The area should support community program and contain the elements that user can change or choose from. The space should also be easily maintained and balance well between a visual statement and social setting. The mall or quad refers to the large, central space between rows of buildings. According to Marcus, the mall should contain the attractive natural elements with various arrangements of tables and chairs. The tree could form natural boundary. People tend to attach themselves to the edge of the islands, and they are the perfect location to provide shade. The quad provides major circulation, thus the design should have that as priority, along with adequate lighting. The central plaza of the quad will meet the high degree of uses throughout the day. It should locate where the major flow pass. Choices of seating forms and locations must be provided to accommodate needs. Bike rack, affordable food, and fascination elements must be provided. The front porch refers to the area where the building wall stops, but the area still extends further out. The porch is usually partially enclosed. This is a perfect area to create a suntrap space as well as breezeway. Marcus suggests the designers to provide seating with backs for privates and groups. Tables are important to eating options, and food vendors should be located nearby. The front yard must give the notion of a welcoming feeling. Lawn should be provided on both full sun and partially shaded areas. The trees that offer shade can provide seating; hence the species must be carefully selected not to create disturbance. Bench and seat walls should be given at the edge. Grass should be watered in the evening so it dries by lunch time. The backyard should stay away from major path. It must be designed to meet ADA standard, People who use and walk past backyard should have the building as the destination, so that the people 36

whose ‘home’ is in the building can feel relaxed. Materials should be warm and inviting, and seating should be provided around the edges or the islands. The areas should be large enough to accommodate the events, but not too large that the user feel exposed. The study should be close to food with open lawn. To be effective, it should be secluded and small, located away from main traffic. The semi-enclosed patio or terrace work very well in such case. Large trees and blank walls are popular for people who seek serenity of mind. Comfortable seats and table should be provided. Marcus also mentions the visual connection to indoor study area if possible. The problems that Marcus observed in campus designs include crime, but mostly at night. Welllit landscape can solve the security issues. Walking, biking and the reduction of automobile should be encouraged to reduce traffic noises and pollutions. Way finding such as maps and signs should be provided to help avoid getting lost and confusion. Discussion/Analysis/Application The results of these studies are already applied to the guidelines. The cultural context of the design is the coastal area of California. However, according to other studies, these guidelines can be applied to designs in different context if the factors are carefully examined. Relevance to the current thesis This book and the study done by Clare Cooper Marcus posts as the great inspiration and a very good example for the thesis and other studies that have done the observational studies in campus design such as Abu-Ghazzeh, Lau, and Ivarsson. The methodology is clearly laid out and easy to follow. There is some unclear explanation on how the data collection can be turned into the results. However, it is because the study is a product of many studies. Although this thesis has a limitation in time and cannot prolong the study by admitting in permit process required for interview, the thesis’s author has made the methodology to be similar to Marcus’s study. The results and guidelines explained will help the thesis’s natural generalization to produce a solid conclusion that can be used in other designs. The guidelines provided are also useful when the author made primary observation and made a concise evaluation in each site. 37

Communicating Behavioral Research to Campus Design: Factor Affecting the Perception and Use of Outdoor Spaces at the University of Jordan/ by Abu-Ghazzeh (1999) Purpose The goal of the study is to assess the user’s perception and the behavioral pattern of outdoor space use and to determining whether there are some significant relationship between user’s behavior and their perception in landscape. The author specifies 3 categories of recognition in the attributes of a place. That is: place’s objective attribute, its effective quality, and behaviors that occur at the space. He mentions that the behavior aspect has been found least interested in among researchers despite its significance. “What one can do” is the important information. The implication of the existing behavioral study, at the author’s time (1999) is mostly focused on explanation, policy, and planning. He claims that there was a lack of explanation in small, intimate space. The study is conducted in order to study how individuals perceive campus outdoor spaces at the University of Jordan and how such space can support activities. The study claims that the results are based on the context used, but expected to contribute to developing methods to study how people use green spaces in other context. That is, the results coming from the study may not be able to apply to the places that have different cultural preferences, climates, or architectures from University of Jordan, but the process that the author uses to conduct the study can be referred to when a researcher is to conduct a similar method in studying the perception of green spaces. The author assumes that user needs regarding campus should be a deciding factor how the design is made. He is looking at people’s meanings and values associated with outdoor spaces, the quality of the space that infuses sense of place, and the importance of the perception of green space to everyday’s experience. Methodology The study’s methodology consists of several parts. 38

Observational study at 10 sites The first part, the author takes the 3 month long of observation during summer to decide the sites for the observational study and create the data. The observation is unobtrusive and briefly at the time randomly picked between 11 am to 3 pm. These observational data was transcribed into a description used later in the study. Surveys The researcher recruits 140 subjects from 14 different colleges with the distribution of 60% undergraduate and 10% graduate student, 20% faculty members, and 10% staffs. They completed the questionnaire whether they came from urban or rural area. Given the country of Jordan a context, the urban area lacks of natural feature, and the rural areas are accessible to greens and fields. These are done to see if the experience with green spaces during childhood can affect the perception and preference of landscape later in life. Photograph pairing The subject completed a photographic survey by selecting the landscape they would prefer from a pair of photographs while explaining the reasons. The subjects recognize the sites and refer to the real places while answering to the survey. The author explains that the decisions made about the site using photograph can give the same result at physical presence of the site. Interview After picking the location, the subjects are interviewed about the behavior they plan to perform there, the relationship of use based on pedestrian traffic, landscape arrangement, seating, shade, visual access, and privacy. Measurement Since the data from this experiment comes from an interview, the researcher had to transfer words into text database of sites, choice pairs, and subject number. The data such as sentences will be simplified and reconstructed into a uniform. Then the data will be translated to the factors that affect the choices. 39

Results The decision making seems to come from the actions they wish to perform within the space, and the previous experience in similar spaces. The actions those are most commons in the interviews include: socializing, sitting, people watching, study. Among 10 sites, the researcher found the interest in a site called Milk Bar Street that has been mentioned often in the paper. The student subjects report that the site is exciting, attractive, and entertaining, while the faculty members dislike it for the crowd and lack of seating availability. The researcher mentions that this may due to the ability of students to find an unconventional place to sit; ie, planters and steps. All 100% of subjects agree that the social setting in the open space is important. Most feel that greenery help them improve the experience even though they do not focus on them directly or do not intend to interact with nature. There are some reoccurrence in trends among certain backgrounds. People from rural areas decide their preference based on the presence of greenery, while the ones from urban areas take decisions from the size of the areas, the seating available, and the circulation. Most graduate students tend to aim for quiet places. The author has concluded that social background can have an effect in perception and preference of landscape. Discussion/Analysis/Application The author takes the result and applies it through the guidelines that Claire Cooper Marcus (1998) has proposed. He categorizes the landscape in 3 different rooms that are related to the behaviors made in such space. Those are front porch, front yard, and backyard. He then explains how his findings apply to those types of landscape; however, this part of discussion offers very little new information from what appeared in Marcus’s original study. However, it could be noted that the observational research done in the coastal area of California gives the similar results to the one done in Jordan. This might show that the information from different contexts can be generalized in some certain capacity. He also mentions that the difference found might derive from the climatic difference between California and Jordan.


The author then moves to discuss about Milk Bar Street, which is the promenade leading to campus. He describes the importance of such space and how they are preferred by many subjects. One of the reasons is the presence of large trees. The trees and its characteristic contribute greatly in personal preference. The abundance of tables is another reason that the space becomes very popular. Many campus landscapes, according to the author, do not have tables, obstructing the student from using the areas for eating or studying. The author then concludes that the sense of space is not in recreation alone, but derives from the retreat, social interaction, and restorative activities. Furthermore, in one campus, the designers or planners should provide both urban and plants-oriented landscape to increase the variety of users. The author suggests the implication and recommendation on further researches by recite three approaches to evaluate landscape: the physical and ecological quality, the behavioral and functional quality, and the visual quality. These three need to combine to make an effective open space. For behavioral quality, which is the focus of this research, the designers need to keep with researches in perception. Behavior is an important factor that the designers cannot expect exactly, but can collect the data, make assumptions, and create possibilities. Relevance to the current thesis Abu-Ghazzeh’s study focuses on the behavioral aspect of landscape in campus context, which the thesis’s author is focusing on. Abu also draws his application from Marcus (1998) and apply to his results in order to develop insights and recommendation. The process of implication and discussion can be further explored and applied to the thesis. His methodology, while includes behavioral observation, is rather different from the thesis’s direction, however, the factors that derive from the study such as the behaviors that the author has observed, the important factors that affect the decisions, and the ways that subjects perceived certain spaces are interesting. These contributions can be used to shape the observational study of this current thesis. As mentioned earlier, the comparison between the author’s finding mostly matches what was offered in Marcus (1998,) suggesting that besides a slight cultural and climatic differences, the results 41

appear very similar and applicable. This can be a good insight that an observational study at the University of Georgia can be generalized in certain extent.

Spatial Behavior in San Francisco Plaza: The Effects of Microclimate, Other People, and Environmental Design/ by John Zacharias (2004) Purpose The study observes plaza-user behavior in San Francisco. The observation is conducted to determine whether the behaviors are similar across different microclimate regimes. In this study, certain social behaviors that may affect others, such as smoking are examined. Zacharias refers to his previous study done on microclimate in 2001, Montreal, Canada. The result is that people prefer more sunlight and less wind. The condition is true up to the temperature of 22 degree celcius (72 F.) The questions that Zacharias wants to answer in this study include 1. Are the responses to microclimate condition the same across different microclimate regimes? The previous study measures the spatial behavior in Montreal. It would be compared to the result from San Francisco to see the difference. 2. When the spatial supply is limited in preferred environmental condition, will people move to less preferred condition or respond by crowding? Do certain behaviors, such as smoking, constrain the choices of other plaza-users? 3. Can environmental design (seating availability, inviting sense, etc.) of the space mitigate the preference set by microclimatic condition? This part of study is addressed by examining the behavior before and after redesigning a plaza. Methodology Seven privately owned plazas in downtown core of San Francisco are examined in 30 minute temporal periods randomly picked from 11am to 3pm. The observational study focus on whether a person is sitting, standing, or smoking. The temperature is taken in shade at the central of each plaza. 3 levels of wind is recorded: none, slight, and strong. The observation will not be conducted in the rain. 42

Afterward, the behavioral data will be transferred in to GIS and processed through single regression equation. Human density is calculated for sunlit and shaded area over space and time. Measurement The effects are interpreted by measuring the length of seating or standing in sun and shade. The head count is conducted to calculate density. The information is processed through multiple regression analysis. Results Each question asked by Zacharias is answered. 1. The behaviors observed in San Francisco are similar to those observed in Montreal. The hotter it is, the more people sit in the space. However, it is difficult to determine the length of stay. 2. In term of social factor, smoking behaviors do not affect non-smokers in San Francisco. This may due to the fact that the smokers move to the less desirable spaces and group among each other. The survey Zacharias also conducts shows that general impression of the plaza, whether it is ‘welcoming’ or ‘depressing’ is generated by levels of sunlight not the size. 3. The amount of seating space or alteration of environmental design has only modest impact to the user compared to the existing microclimate. This may due to the fact that the redesign of the space is focusing mainly on putting more available seats and without any attempt to alter the microclimate itself. Discussion/Analysis/Application The study disproves the conventional believes that people in different climate will have different preference in microclimate conditions. Social factors and design factors have been considered differently for quite some time, but upon this study show that two social behaviors will not disturb each other as long as there are available zones for each one. Designing seating and effective social setting cannot replace the thermal comfort or sunlight, which the designers have to truly bear in mind. Relevance to the current thesis 43

This study mentions that the outdoor temperature people prefer fall around 60-69 F, which reinforces the seasonal selection that the thesis’s author uses for his observational study. The study shows that as long as the microclimates are similar, the behaviors in different overall climate are invariant. This supports that the observational study done in University of Georgia can be generally applied to the certain extent. The methodology of this study is very well documented, hence can be highly used in consideration on how to conduct the thesis observational study. The analytical process is very transparent and clearly explained that it would generate the understanding of how the observation can come to conclusion and can be further studied.

Introducing Healing Gardens into a Compact University Campus: Design Natural Space to Create Healthy and Sustainable Campus/ by Stephen Lau (2009) Purpose The purpose of Lau’s study is to explore the application of ‘healing garden’ to compact university campus design and renovation. The objective of this study is to seek understanding and provide the proposal for campus natural space and potential roles of creating supportive campus environment. The term ‘healing garden’ referred in the study means the area with plentiful natural elements such as plants and water that have therapeutic or beneficial effects to the majority of users, and is a healing setting designed to make people feel better. Lau refers to Dooris (1998) to explain why healing garden can take an integrative part of creating a healthy university campus. The healing garden would contribute into creating Health-promoting physical environment. Methodology Lau took a case study at Hong Kong University, which is a compacted campus by his definition. He uses the questionnaire survey given to 33 participants. Measurement 44

The survey has three parts: the perception and usage pattern, natural view, and preferred areas to sit in a natural space. Besides background information, the survey bases mostly on multiple choices questions, which can be applied into a quantitative data. Results Lau’s study shows that people enjoy green spaces for an escape from stressful environment, but they prefer more urbanized settings for socialization. Most participants visit the green space once a week. Half of the participants stay in the space for 10-20 minutes. The reasons for the visit are taking break from work and just to get outside. Time seems to be among the strong factors that inhibit the subjects from visiting the green spaces. 94% of the participants have visited and enjoy the views at the green space. Most people stay less than 5 minutes. The participants indicate that visual access is important and want the view from their windows to the green spaces. Discussion/Analysis/Application Since the results are from a multiple-choice survey, the analysis for application is straightforward. The green spaces at Hong Kong University are better-used than Lau’s expectation. The interesting finding is that in a compact scale, a green space will provide retreat but become less accommodating for a group interaction. The reasons that prevent people from visiting green space include time issue, climate, insect problems, size and distance of the green spaces. The analysis shows that in order to create an effective healing garden for a university campus that has limited space, one need four topics of concern. These topics are indicated as following. 1. Enhanced visual connection of natural space 2. Space morphology must be coherent to its function, and microclimate control is to be highly analyzed. 3. Chose plants that allow fascination while ecologically friendly 4. The vertical spaces such as green walls and green roof should be highly considered. Relevance to the current thesis


The methodology of this study is vastly different from the thesis’s intention, but it shows a different approach to study human perception and preference toward green spaces in campus setting. The information from the result is very valuable; especially when there are data that supports the PostOccupancy Evaluation done by Marcus. The results seem to reflect oh Abu-Ghazzeh studies also that the urban areas like Milk Bar Street is open to more social setting that a small secluded area preferred by graduate students who seek solitude. This can mean that there are connections across culture in human preference and perception in natural exposure.

Student performance and high school landscapes: Examining the links/ by Rodney H. Matsuoka (2010) Matsuoka: Purpose In this study, Matsuoka examines roles played by the availability of nearby nature in high school student academic achievement and behavior. He believes that the exposure to natural elements in high school students will be associated with higher test score, better behavior, and better attention capacity. The study is an exploratory study that utilizes the existing theories to apply in school setting. Methodology Four hypotheses are being explored in this study. They are listed as followed. 1. The higher level of nature in view, the better the performance will be 2. The higher level of nature in campus, the better the performance will be 3. The greater ability to view and contact the nearby nature during lunch time will lead to better performance 4. The larger windows on the classrooms mean more views and hence mean better performance. These hypotheses are tested in 101 high schools around the state of Michigan, making correlation between the performances according to those four hypotheses. Measurement 46

Matsuoka uses Chimprich rating to rate the views of nature in each school. The naturalness is measured and rated in the campus’s cafeteria and classroom. Campus’s vegetation level and student’s potential access such as class room and cafeteria window sizes, whether the policy allows students to eat lunch outdoor, and the length of lunchtime are recorded to compare with student performances. In term of performance, Matsuoka looks at the measurable results from records. These results include Michigan Merit Awards, graduation rate, and future four-year college plan. The negative behaviors are examined through the record of disorderly conduct and criminal acts. The information is analyzed through linear and non-linear regression analysis to find results. Results The four hypotheses are responded in the different way. Higher visual access to nature and higher performance are highly correlated. The views that contain trees and shrubs have more positive effect to students’ performance and behavior than those with grass and parking. The vegetation rate has positive effect in performance and behavior. The higher performance is correlated with the ability to physically contact natural elements. However, the size of the window generates no difference. Discussion/Analysis/Application The discussion allows four relatable points to emerge. More contact of naturalness during lunch can lead to higher performance. Landscape without nature brings stress. Green spaces can affect important decisions in students. Nature in campus landscape is not just for beauty. There is a strong correlation between the school policies that allow students to have lunch in the natural area and their performances. Matsuoka suggests that this may due to Attention Restoration Theory. Even with the classroom with windows, students need to pay attention to the teachers and cannot get full effect of restoration. Hence Matsuoka suggests that the exposure to nearby nature during lunchtime is very important. Matsuoka states that landscape without trees and shrubs have negative impact on students’ performance. The landscapes with large flat area are less preferred and offer little to restoration. The immediate views that the students can see will be beneficial if are adorn with diverse vegetation. 47

The exposure of nature measured in this study is significantly correlate with future four year college plan, which is beyond previous studies those examine just a short term outcome. Matsuoka states that in the pivotal moment where such decision is important, natural exposure can have connection to academic and career accomplishments in students. Trees and shrubs in school campus have been proven in this study that they are not just a beautifying element but a performance enhancer to for the students. It is a part that can be influential for students’ performance and school’s success. Matsuoka states that there are some limitations of the study. The ratings are done objectively by the principal researcher, and only single are taken to overall school vegetative state. There is no way to know how students really use the space in each activities and what elements that students react to. Relevance to the current thesis This study is highly related to the thesis. The notion of lunch landscape is mentioned to correlate with academic accomplishment. The significance of decision making in late adolescent age is discussed and proven to be important. Academic setting, although in a different level, has been used to be a focus area in the study. The methodology is highly different. The information about policies, architectural features, and student awards proves the importance of access to green space. In his limitation, Matsuoka mentions that even though his way of study is tangible, it lacks the specific information of which activity the students interact with nature and to what element the interactions happen. This notion opens to another approach, such as the observational study used by the thesis’s author.

Emerging relationships between design and use of urban park spaces/ by Barbara Golicnik (2010) Purpose The study is conducted in order to describe the pattern of use in public green space and indicate the relationship between the design and use of urban park spaces, focusing on the parks that have abundant of open lawn area in European cities. The questions that direct the study are: how well do 48

designers predict use of space they have created and how confident can they be that the design responds to the user need? Golicnik propose the use of GIS in this study. She uses the study to explore the effectiveness of GIS for spatial annotation and visualization in the analytical process of observation and behavioral mapping data. The principle in her study is that she does not judge these designs based on beauty and form, but on people in the act. The statement somewhat resembles Clare Cooper Marcus’s purpose on Post-Occupancy Evaluation. Methodology Golicnik states that the usual observational study divides mapped environment into zones and matrix to separate people across each zone. The more accurate results can be drawn by the geographic information used in GIS. 3 Parks are selected in the study to be examined. The parks are comparable in size, context, and function as urban cores of green spaces. The observation are recorded on map by graphic notes with very detailed description and programmed into GIS. May is the month selected for the study. The time of each observation is 10 minute. The researcher walks through each park, makes visual scan, and records the data on the map Each parks are examined in 4 time periods: 10am to noon, 12-2pm, 2-4pm, and 4-7pm. Measurement The measurement of data is used by symbolizations of common activities such as sitting in pair, walking in pair, fishing, skateboarding, lying down, etc. These symbols are drawn on the map at the location each activity occurs. The data being examined includes gender and number of people conducting such activities. Results The study shows very specific set of results across three parks. Each finding consists of specific distance and measurement and refers to several terms by Lynch’s Image of the City. 49

Landmark and edge can create attractive seating. Active use of lawn depends on buffer zone and inner edges of the space. Perfect seating is against a solid edge at least 5 m (15 ft) from pathways. Sizes of lawn will accommodate activities that can be performed in the inner buffer. If the character of the space becomes an island: no solid edge, people will not stay there. Trees can be anchor to solve the island issue. Personal space between strangers is 3.7 m (11 ft.) The general ideas of buffers are 2 m (6 ft) from inner edge of the park, 16 m (50 ft) from outer open area, and 7m (21 ft) from outer solid area. Solid areas, according to Golicnik, are the areas that back up against planting or walls. Discussion/Analysis/Application Golicnik concludes that GIS helps develop an effective analytical data, and recommends it to be used in further observational research. She admits that there might be some human error in the observation, but such subject can be improved in further studies. Relevance to the current thesis This study shows a very wonderful visualization of spatial analysis created by GIS. Several images on plan view can be used to evaluate the exact form of human preference in green space and how a group interacts with other groups. The analytical process may be further researched to see whether it is applicable to the ongoing thesis. The observational part of the methodology is clear, detailed, and precise, and may be used as an example to develop the thesis’s own list of things to observe. The knowledge shown in results can be used in mind while evaluating the sites use in the thesis’s observations.

Differently Designed Parts of a Garden Support Different Types of Recreational Walks: Evaluating a Healing Garden by Participatory Observation/ by Carina Ivarsson (2012) Purpose The study aims to deepen the knowledge in environment-behavior relationship needed for gardens, parks, and open spaces designs, while focusing on the behaviors observed from a therapeutic garden. The paper explores how patients use and interact with the therapeutic settings by looking at the 50

behavior and location. This can be improved to create a qualitative evaluation for further designs. The author states that the study focuses on walking, which is a therapeutic action and a measure of physical activity. The literature review reveals walking in historic perspective, the relationship between walking and health, and the relationship between physical activity and environment. Methodology The observational site is located in a rehabilitation center in Sweden, where patients undergo long therapeutic rehabilitation program. The rehabilitation can be emotionally exhausting. The author claims that the garden has been laid out by evidence-based design that uses the theories from landscape architecture, environmental psychology, psychiatry, and occupational therapy. The time of observation is between 9 am to 12 pm. Originally, the paper states that the observations are during 9 -12 am, but the thesis’s author assumes that 12 pm fit more to the context of observation. In such time, the rehabilitation center allows the patients to access the site and participate in horticultural therapy from Monday to Friday. The observation lasts 7 months. The data of 17 patients is collected consistently. The process used is called participant-as-observer, meaning that the observer join the space as a user and do not interact with the subjects. The types of data collected include who; where; what action; with whom; how long; and other notes. Measurement The author looks for the behavioral patterns that occur during the observation. Maps are used to identify the locations and comment events occurring in one spot of the garden. These data are then systemized into several themes. Afterward, the common behaviors and the spatial characteristic of the sites are compared and related. The author generalizes that although the patients are exhausted from the therapy, the ideas and finding from this study can still be generalized and applicable to most space designs. The author refers to Yin (2003) that case studies can be generalized to ‘theoretical propositions,’ but will need more information to apply universally. The study uses the naturalistic generalization, which occurs when there 51

is a conclusion formed from several similar cases. The new study can be generalized since if it is similar to those cases with slight modification to answer new, specific questions. Results The research found out that walking is the most occurred actions taken for such therapeutic garden. The researcher categorized different types walking into two main themes: Introvert walk and Extrovert walk. People take the introvert walk when they need to focus on themselves, focusing, or reflecting in internal thoughts. The subtypes of this walk include the walking therapy session, recharging minds, and exchanging the therapeutic experiences with others. For introvert walks, the study show that they enjoy the area where someone can really focus on themselves. The simplicity and coherence would be in dominance with the landscape gently keep track of the patient’s movement. There might be some restorative elements, but not so much that it distracts the patients from the reflective experiences. In the other hand, extrovert walks focus on the physical activation and engagement to the environment around them. The patients who go out for extrovert walks take the more demanding part of the garden. Three subtypes of extrovert walk include catching up with surroundings, looking for interactions, and following guidance such as signs or trails. The extrovert walk, according to the author, takes place around the active part of the garden. The trials and botanical signs along with interactive elements keep the walkers interested. The plant materials that change form overtime, such as ones with seasonal interests work well for the walk. The interactive engagement such as gardening or playing with the fountain is the popular spot for the patients who seek an extrovert experience in walking. Discussion/Analysis/Application The author states in this section that the observation is not made to investigate walking, but different types of walking emerges from the data collected, allowing the author to link the physical attribute of a space to the behavioral pattern from the patients. The author suggests that since walking is the main activity that patients engage in therapeutic session, the designs should be made to respond to those activities. A design should contain certain elements that offer availability for both introvert and extrovert walks. While one is simple and coherent to allow mind to rest, the other must spark passive 52

interest. No analytical procedure is explained to how to apply the emergent knowledge into the designs, but the author presents it as the description of the result and possible application that can be derived from such results. Relevance to the current thesis The study is related to the current thesis by showing an example case of observational process. The observation extends for seven months, while the time is limited in this thesis. However, the behavioral mapping and the questions asked during observation is a common occurrence in the field of study and can be further explored. The simple analytical process and the generalization are briefly explained in the paper, but seem simple and time-efficient. There are some limitations for applying the results to the data group in this thesis, since the user group of the studied therapeutic garden differs from this thesis’s focused user group; although Ivarsson mentions that it should apply to most future parks and open spaces designs. The activity, walking, does not come to focus in other studies in similar topic, such as Abu-Ghazzeh, Marcus,Whyte, or Zacharias, but may offer some explanation to the behavior recorded in this thesis’s observational study further on.

Overall Relevance Overall, these 8 studies present the information that can be used in three different parts of the current thesis: supportive background information, methods, and design suggestions/ theories. Abu-Ghazzeh (1999,) Lau (2009,) Matsuoka (2010,) and Ivarsson (2012) present a strong case about the benefits of natural exposure in different levels that are closely related to the thesis. AbuGhazzeh and Lau’s literature review sections provide the information about the benefit of green spaces in the university campus and its exposure to the students and teachers. While Lau (2009) focuses on a more compacted sized university in his case study (Hong Kong University,) Abu-Ghazzeh focuses on a case study in the similar scale as the University of Georgia (University of Jordan.) They both confirm that the university campuses, regardless of sizes, are in need of the restorative landscape. Matsuoka (2010,) looks at the high schools around Michigan area. Although his study subjects are slightly younger than the focus 53

group of the thesis, Matsuoka effectively presents the increase in academic performances and student behaviors in relation to the exposure of green space. His study is distinguishable for the thesis because it is an only study the thesis author could find that recognize the significance of lunch landscapes. He also suggests in his discussion the need of a specific study to look at individual behaviors that people may do during lunch break. While Ivarsson (2012,) does not focus on students or campus environments, the study shows several activities that can relate to restorative environment, which shows that the variety of lunch landscapes should be provided. Many studies contribute to the thesis’s methodology. Whyte (1980,) Marcus (1998,) Zacharias (2004,) Matsuoka (2010,) Golicnik (2010,) and Ivarsson (2012,) share the ideas to create the methodology of the thesis study. Whyte (1998) originates to observational study and confirms it to be an optimum way to look at specific behavioral patterns in given spaces. Marcus (1998,) recommends the Post Occupancy Evaluation and explains it in practical details. Parts of the methodology used in this thesis including the preliminary observation, site inventory, and primary observation are modeled after the Post Occupancy Evaluation method. Zacharias (2004) observes people who smoked, which according to the study can cause the aversion from public. This specific information is adjusted to fit the electronic device users. While Matsuoka’s methods (2010) are not involving observations, they generates a set of clear hypotheses. The steps of creating the hypotheses and proving them by the results are easy to follow and thus being integrated into the thesis. Golicnik (2010) suggests the use of technology of site inventory and provides the observational tables and maps that the thesis uses as an example, and Ivarsson (2012,) states the typology of landscape based on its uses during her preliminary observation. The process of creating a type by Ivarsson is improvised in this current thesis in that the categorization of the sites is based on activities themed by the observers. Conclusion All of the studies provide some design suggestions that can be based on the construction of the hypotheses and the discussions. While most of the general information, such as the microclimate, seating positions, and food involvement, is provided by the guidelines suggested by Whyte (2001) and Marcus 54

(1998,) the author studies provide more specific information that can be applied. For example, Zacharias (2004) suggests the optimal temperature for the preference to be around 50-72 degree. Lau (2009) stresses the importance of ventilation and visual mystery. Matsuoka (2010) focuses on the views from windows. Golicnik (2010) looks at the specific measurements and shapes of individual activities, and Ivarsson (2012) focuses on the restorative walks, active and passive, which will reflect on the landscapes that are appropriate for reflection and intimacy. Existing studies can be used to determine the direction of future studies. The methodology and analytical process build a good example of how the studies that ask the similar questions to the thesis have been conducted. The results can be used to support, contrast, or compare with the thesis’s results to create more discussions. In this chapter, we explored 8 studies from the field of environmental psychology and landscape architecture, examining the studies that look for the relationship between physical character of open spaces and human behaviors. Many methods have been used to answer such questions including surveys, observations, interviews, spatial analysis, and so on. The results point to the similar set of behaviors: people like nature, need to feel secure and know where they are, and enjoy the feeling away of stressful environment. The table concluding findings from case study can be found after the end of chapter. In the next chapter: Methodology, the methods for this thesis’s observational study will be discussed in great length. The importance to use the observational study, site selection, analytical process and data collection will be revealed.


CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY This chapter of the thesis will explain how the thesis questions are answered. There are three questions asked in this thesis as listed below. 1) How do people spend time in campus lunch landscape? 2) What spatial quality/elements in lunch landscape are people attracted to? 3) How do people with technology act differently from others in such space? To find the answer, a participant-observation study is conducted along with two secondary studies: preliminary observation and site inventory. The two secondary studies help explain the results and shape the design experiment. The process of the study started with the exploration of possible sites via Google map and the maps from University of Georgia Campus Architect website. There, 12 sites are selected. The observer conducted preliminary observation and categorized the sites into 4 types of lunch landscapes. Site inventory is made for each landscape. The primary observation is conducted to observe the elements which will be analyzed into the results. The full process of this research method is illustrated in figure 4.1. The chapter is structured in four sections. The first section explains two supplementary processes, the significance of each process, how the data is collected and what information is retrieved from it. The second section explains the primary observation. It explains the possible approaches of the studies and the reason why participant-observation is the one selected, the site selection criteria, the site categorization process, and the nature of the study. The third section goes through the analytical process, why this process is selected among others, and what type of information comes out of the interpretation. The last section discusses hypotheses, the expected answers of the three thesis questions.


Figure 4.1 Diagram showing the process of this study


Supplementary processes 1. Preliminary Observation The preliminary observation is conducted to understand the space and create a better inventory for the sites, to identify the functional subspaces of the sites, to look for the ‘message from the administrator’ and find what the spaces might be appropriate for, and to look for common behavioral patterns. This information is crucial for the site categories and action categories. The thesis author uses part of Marcus’s (1998) step for Post-Occupational Evaluation to guide the preliminary observation by being in each space and take notes to describe what being observed on the site. These notes are taken into the analytical process of each site. This approach is relevant to the study because some behaviors that occur on the sites are caused by a certain subjective characteristics such as the relation to a building, the locations of the seats, etc. The study is conducted as participant-observation, meaning that the observer acts as the user of the site; hence reduces any impact that might affect the observed behaviors. To record those subjective characteristics, the preliminary observation was conducted in October 5th 2012. Nine sites were selected at the time. The thesis author added three additional sites to the observation to create more variety and accuracy to the study and made the secondary observation on October 16th. The full process of site selection will be fully explained in the second section of the chapter: the preliminary observation. 5-10 minutes were spent at each site. The observer noted how people move through each space, the common behaviors occur on each spaces, the information that surprises the author, and what follows the author’s expectation of each site. The notes taken on the primary observation and the list of actions observed are presented in Appendix B. Most common themes in actions are eating and drinking, reading a book, using electronic devices, and social interactions. There are physical activities at the certain sites, but not all. The author expected to see more people having the direct interactions with nature such as sitting on the grass and underneath the trees, but the results on such behaviors are quite low. These certain elements are noted and helps categorize the sites and actions as discussed in the next section. 58

2. Site Inventory The site inventory is important for this project because it allows the observer to look at the site thoroughly. The inventories keep records of what the observer saw in visual form that is easily accessed later and easy to communicate to the readers. The site inventory also helps identify the subspaces in term of areas, connections, and locations in large and small scale. Making inventory of the site helps record the location of circulation, messages of administrators, and behavioral trace, which can be used to generate the hypotheses of such sites. The information can help forming hypotheses: allow the observer to generate connections between behaviors, furniture, and location on plan view. The data is collected using maps and observation data. The map data is acquired by Google Map, Bing Map, University of Georgia Campus Architect websites, and Athens Clarke County data acquired through Taylor Ladd in 2012. The observational data are obtained from a photographic site visit on November 2nd 2012 and two preliminary site visits. The site inventory will be shown and discussed in Chapter 5: Site Inventory. In each inventory, the observer provides the overall (1.) maps, (2.) photographs and (3.) sketched plan with text description. 1. The 1:1000 scale plan addresses where the site is on campus in relationship to campus precincts, available eatery, and available dining commons. It also shows the 0.5 mile buffer around the green space being addressed. The purpose of overall map is to locate the site in campus context and identify the potential users. 2. The photograph records the physical data and quality of the site. Some of the quality cannot be captured only by photographs, such as the light play or the organization of the space looked from ground plain. These photograph recorded will be used to support some objective description recorded for analysis and suggestion notes. 3. The sketched plan shows the site features, site furniture, and the surrounding buildings to show what are offered to be done on the site. The messages from administrator, such as the path that cuts through grass a certain way, a sign (if applicable) along with the behavioral 59

traces such as foot path on grass show the effectiveness between design intentions and uses. The circulation observed during preliminary observation will be recorded in the site sketch. Primary observation Scope The study is observing student’s behaviors on campus landscape during lunch hours using the participant-observation method. The time of observation is 11 am- 1 pm during weekday, as it is the time frame where people are likely to be during their lunch break. The session would last about 20 minutes. Whyte (2001) suggests that people stay around 15 minutes or more during lunch hour in New York City. The case study provided by Ziesel (2007) also indicates that 20 minutes is enough to observe the behavioral patterns and dynamics. Golicnik (2010) only spends 10 minutes on the visual scan of her observational study to identify the results. These studies show that the 20 minutes time is sufficient to conduct an observation. Due to the time limitation, the study cannot be conducted all year long. October, November, and February are the suitable month since the temperature range in lunch time fall to 50-70 degree Fahrenheit, covering the pleasurable temperature range offered in a study by Zacharias (2004,) which states that the comfort temperature to be outside is 60-69 degree Fahrenheit. The weather condition and temperature will also be conducted and recorded as a variable that can factor into human behavior, but the observation will not be conducted during the temperature below 50 degree or if there is rain. The timeline of the observation are listed in Appendix C. Observational conducts. 1. The observer’s presence has the most minimal to no influent the subjects’ behavior. This study is a participant-observation study, meaning that there should be no contact between the observer and the subjects. The contact between subjects and observer may also compromise the outcome of the study. The observer will assume that by observing the behaviors in the space, the observer has little to no effect on what the subjects are doing, and that the subjects assume that the observer is another user of the space. However, some effects may be unavoidable. For example, the subject 60

will not take the seat that the observer is taking, or they will not use the space in the same way as if they are using the space alone (i.e., engage in very personal or intimate actions). These effects will be minimized as much as possible. 2. There are no highly influential or mandatory campus events during the observation. The influential or mandatory events, such as University sport events, commencement, or graduation may throw off the dynamic of the space completely, so the observation will not be conducted during such time. However, the regular events that happen around the spaces such as student activities, campus tours, or class dismissals help describe the quality of the space clearer. In this observational study, the observer will assume that there is no influential of mandatory campus events happening on campus during the observation. Site Selection Since the University of Georgia is named one of the greenest campuses and filled with green spaces and mature trees, the campus lunch landscapes in this study are sampled from several existing ones. The site has to follow the lunch landscape criteria. That is, it has to be within 0.5 mile walking distance from food vendors or eatery and 2 mile or bicycling distance to academic buildings. The University of Georgia has several types of food vendors as the map from University of Georgia Campus Architect displays in Appendix D, however a certain types of vendor, such as fix-priced meals and meal plan system do not allow the students to bring food outside; hence the study will not focus on those dining locations. The sampling of green space is selected in numbers to closely resemble the number of food vendors in each campus precinct, but will slightly differ because of the availability of green spaces to be studied. Campus precinct, according to Campus Architect, offer its own sense of place. According to Marcus (1998,) students on campus have developed a feeling of ‘home’ based on an academic building they most use. The author has developed the notion that if a precinct carries the sense of place with that academic building, it can possibly act like a neighborhood to the students. This explains why the delineation of campus precincts is included in the study. The priority of landscapes selected includes the


closest to most food vendors, the variety in shapes, sizes, and characters, and the uniqueness of the spatial characters. Overall, there are 6 campus precincts at the University of Georgia Main Campus. 4 out of 6 have food vendor that fall into the thesis’s focus. From 4 campus precincts that contains focused food vendors, there are focused 11 food vendors in total that are recorded by University of Georgia Campus Architect, and 12 lunch landscape are selected. Figure 4.2 shows the locations of focused food vendor in relationship to the list of the study sites and campus precincts. The geographic information used in this map is the data from Athens Clarke County, acquired by Taylor Ladd in 2011.


Figure 4.2 Campus Precincts, Eateries, and Selected Sites


Site Categorization The categorization of the selected site comes from two factors: general physical arrangement and behavioral traits those are most common in each space. The general physical arrangement criteria of the site are explained in Figure 4.3. The questions are asked whether the green space is a part of food vendor, offer visually and physically wide open spaces, connects between multiple buildings, or supplies with intimate areas where people can feel private and alone. These characters will decide what categories they belong to. The categorization is reinforced by the behavioral pattern in each space. The majority of behavioral pattern such as eating, moving through the space, taking a nap, or other behaviors can help determined the sites with less clear features.

Figure 4.3: Categorization mapping based on general physical arrangement 64

Out of the 12 observation sites based on primary observational study, the sites are categorized into four categories. 1. Green spaces appropriate for dining activities are the spaces that are adjacent to the food outlets or the spaces that the food outlets in campus provide for dining. Most green spaces falling in this criterion will have a close proximity or are the part of food outlet, intimate, and provided with seating with tables. The circulation will mostly be strict and efficient with a smaller size. 2. Green space appropriate for movement and circulation are the spaces that have a lot of open areas for active movement and multipurpose uses. Usually they are adjacent to many academic buildings and are large in size to accommodate a variety of activities. The circulations are very open for interpretation, and the seating is limited. The designs are usually formal. 3. Green space appropriate for intimacy and reflection are the spaces carefully designed to be experienced with senses. They are treated to block off any distraction and usually reflects the naturalistic quality of design. The size range from small to large. The green spaces for passive recreation would have a medium to large size and filled with variety of plantings. 4. Green spaces for other purposes do not fit in any categories above, but usually are much smaller pocket spaces that intermingle with the academic buildings or pathway between classes. The special quality of these green spaces is that they create an interesting dynamic for people who use them. The examples for these spaces are pocket parks, transit hub, or the front yard of academic buildings. Table 4.1 shows the selected sites in their categories, and Figure 4.3 shows the selected sites according to categories in campus context.


Location Green space appropriate for dining activities

Bulldog Café Courtyard

[cafés and restaurant courtyards]

Georgia Center Courtyard University of Georgia Creamery

Green space appropriate for movement and circulation

Main Library Quad

[lawns and open spaces]

MLC Lawn Brooke Mall

Green space appropriate for intimacy and reflection

Warnell Garden Founder's Garden MLC Plaza

Green space not intended for other purposes

Tate Deck Greenroof

[pocket spaces, academic building front yards, etc.]

Lamar Dodd's Rain Garden Odum’s pocket lawn

Table 4.1: The sites in their categories


Figure 4.4 Categories of selected sites in campus context


Observation subjects There are five things to observe in order to answer the three thesis questions: the amount of people circulating through the space at one time, rough demographics, location within the site, actions, and length of stay. The process of observation in each topic is described below. 1. Amount of people circulating though the space: In certain sites, the areas are used for circulation. Amount of people passing through the space can build the character of each space at the moment. To measure this category, the observer counts the number of people circulating through the area in thirty second every five minutes increment. The number of circulating people may correlate with how many people decide to use the space and how long they stay (Zacharias 2004;) (Marcus 1998;) (Whyte 2001). A very well design space, although can alleviate the threshold of crowdedness (Zacharias 2004.) 2. Demographics of the subjects: People with different ages and genders may have different preference in environment (Abu-Ghazzeh1999;) (Whyte 2001.) In this study, the observer looks at the estimate age groups of the participants (children, teen and young adults, adult, and elderly) and genders. The observer also takes notes whether the participants come alone, in pair, or in group since they will act differently (Golicnik 2010). 3. Actions: The behaviors are themed into 6 categories based on the activities people perform during the preliminary observation. These activities include: 3.1 Eating and drinking: Eating and drinking is a part of lunch break. Foodscape, to a certain extent, has influences in dining behavior (Sabal, 2007.). This category includes snacking, coffee, or any kinds of meal into consideration. 3.2 Face to face social interaction: Social interaction is an important element in many observational studies (Marcus 1998; Whyte 2001; Golicnik 2012.) The observation category includes only face to face interaction such as talking, showing intimacy, etc.


3.3 Non-electronic reading: Non-electronic reading is used because there are many people who read outdoor. It also acts as the control variable when looking at those who engaged in electronic devices. 3.4 Restoration and natural engagement: Directly or visually engaging in natural/ restoration elements is the factor to improve cognitive ability and human function. Such behaviors included in primary observations are watching people, looking at the grass, lying down, etc. Although subjects may also get restorative benefit subconsciously by just being around the space (Abu-Ghazzen 1999,) the fact whether a participant enters the luch landscape just to enjoy nature or not is worth exploring. 3.5 Physical activity: Physical activity is a rare pattern happening during lunch time. However, there are many spaces that are suitable for physical activities. This category examines the possibility of physical movement during lunch break such as Frisbee, throw and catch, walking the dog, etc. In some spaces, physical activities can happen more often while in some it is impossible. 3.6 Engaging in electronic devices: Since the portable technology become popular, people are using them outside more freely. There is not any observational study conducted outdoor that focuses on these types of behaviors in environmental psychology just yet. This category includes talking on phones, texting, using laptop computer and other mobile devices, etc. 4. Location within the site: The observer takes note about where the participant stay within the site based on the functional subspaces indicated in preliminary observation note and site inventory. This part of the observation can be used to decide which areas are suitable to certain actions (Marcus 1998;) (Ivarsson 2007.) 5. Length of time: Although length of time is difficult to determine because people move in and out of spaces beyond the observational time (Zacharias 2004,) the relationship between certain actions and elements and the length of stay should be taken notes of. In this study, if the participants are in the space before the observation begins, the observer puts Before at the 69

starting time. If the participants stay until after the time of observation, the observer recorded it as After. Hypotheses The hypotheses estimate three questions asked in the beginning of the thesis: Question 1: How do people spend time in campus lunch landscape? Hypothesis 1.1: The appropriateness of the space discussed earlier in this thesis will agree with the appropriate categories determined by the author The author expects that people spend time doing different types of actions in different types of campus lunch landscape. The uses of landscapes will agree with the functions offered. In the green spaces appropriate for dining, most people would spend time eating and drinking at the areas provided. In the spaces appropriate for circulations and movements, the majority of the crowd would be engaging in physical activities. The spaces appropriate for reflection and intimacy will allow the majority of participants to engage in restorative activities. In the spaces for other purposes, the majority of the subjects will be engaged in socialization. Hypothesis 1.2: Higher percentage of male participants will sit closer to the crowd, and a higher percentage of female participants will use more electronic devices Whyte (2001,) mentions in his study in 1980 that men would prefer the upfront area next to the crowd. Another gender-specific characteristic in this study is found on the usage of electronic devices. Yuan (2012) found that the cell phone usage rate among female students is really high in Harbin, China. The hypothesis looks to understand whether the trend of seat preference still exists in a modern world with a higher trend of gender equality, and whether the activities of electronic devices are higher among female participants in the University of Georgia campus.

Question 2: What spatial quality/elements in lunch landscape are people attracted to? According to many literature (Zacharias 2004;) (Matsuoka 2010;) (Marcus 1998;) (Whyte 2001;) (Ivarsson2007;) (Golicnik 2010,) people have different preference of space depending on the uses they 70

require at the moment. However, there are some tangible common themes that recurring throughout different studies. These themes described below are expected to occur again in the result of this study. Hypothesis 2.1: In the temperature range provided in the study, people prefer sun more than shade According to Zacharias (2004,) people prefer sunny area over shaded are in the environment where the temperature does not exceed 72 F. Whyte (2001) and Marcus (1998) also mention the suntrap area where people find most comfort in. Hypothesis 2.2: People prefer to stay near the movement of the crowd. According to Whyte (2001) and suggestion of Golicnik (2010,) people tend to sit where there is a general flow of traffic. The site will be labeled as away from main circulation or adjacent to the main circulation to see the difference in the preferences. Hypothesis 2.3: People prefer adaptable seats such as seat walls and grass than tables and benches in lunch landscape. Participants will enjoy the elements that they have control of such as movable chairs and choices of seating locations (Whyte 2001.) Grass is another element that seems to be important to a campus landscape for its versatile uses, especially if there are trees or wall to generate the back of the sitting area (Marcus 1998.) This hypothesis states that people will make choices toward grass and improvised seating than fixed benches or tables. Hypothesis 2.4: There will be more people who use the electronic devices outside than those who don’t According to the preliminary observation, many participants use some kinds of electronic devices such as smart phones, cell phones, and laptops. The author believes that the percentage of those who use the electronic devices in the landscape would be higher to those who don’t.

Question 3: How do people with technology act differently from others in such space? Hypothesis 3.1: People with visual based electronic activities will need more shade than overall users Users of laptop, smart phones, and other visual devices have the limitation in the sun because of the screen glare. Most of the access involves a long time of carrying a device; hence they will need the tables 71

to put the devices on. The author expects this group of user to prefer more shaded areas even in the colder day. Hypothesis 3.2: People with cell phone conversation will stay in less comfortable microclimate and away from the crowd. People who use cell phones for conversations will act differently than most people or users of other electronic devices. Turner (2008) explains that many people see phone conversation as public disturbance, even when they themselves use the cell phone. The example of people’s behavior while taking an action that irritates others can be found in Zacharias’s study (2004) about smoking. The behavior of this group includes staying away from other non-smokers in the less comfortable areas so that their actions will not bother the public. In this study, the author expects that the cell-phone users will react in similar ways to the smokers in the study by Zacharias (2004.) Conclusion The observation study is an important method to see the pattern of human behaviors and how they are influenced by surrounding environment. In this chapter, we discuss the method of observing people in green spaces around the University of Georgia. The observational study helps us find the answers of three questions: how people react in lunch landscape, what spatial qualities attract people, and what behaviors are influenced by modern technology. The observation is done around lunch time in the months with moderate temperature on 12 sites across campus. The sites are categorized in four groups based on its function. The age, genders, group, and themed actions are recorded and will be analyzed in statistical patterns. In the next chapter, the selected site will be fully described and discussed to see its characteristic and how the thesis’s author expects the result to be on each site before the observation based on the existing design theories.


CHAPTER 5: SITE INVENTORY This chapter produces the site inventory of 12 study sites. There are two different sections of the chapter. The first section describes 4 precincts that have food vendors, how they are in the context of the adjacent area, and how the location relates to the study sites. The second section is the inventory of the study sites. Each site contains the campus map showing the relationship of the study site to the eateries, the photographs, and the hand-sketch inventory describing furniture, circulation, immediate contexts, and functional subspaces. Campus Precincts As discussed in chapter 4, there are 6 distinctive campus precincts in the University of Georgia Main Campus. Each precinct has its own sense of place and character. This section of chapter five shows the adjacent contexts of the four precincts that contain study sites along with the context within the precincts themselves. Figures 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 elaborate the contexts as such. By showing the areas around it, the observer can identify the potential users of each area and how it might affect the uses of the sites.






Site Inventory Figures 5.5-5.40 show the inventory. The study sites are organized within their action categories. Each site would be explained in brief verbal description subjected by the observer explaining the surrounding environment and the explanation of why the sites are selected and categorized in particular manner, the GIS context map showing where the site is regarding to campus environment and its 0.5 mile radius of walking distance according to Bossard (2007,) the diagrammatic site inventory based on the area during lunchtime via primary observation, and the functional subspaces map noted by the primary observation and behavioral traces. These three types of information can be respected as a part of observational study based on Marcus (1998) and Ziesel (2007.) The particular notes focus on the features that may predict certain types of activities, such as the seating with table predicts the longer duration of sitting. The circulation will be noted to see if it allows more or less people to pass through and stop.


Bulldog Café Courtyard a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding The outside portion of Bulldog café is adjacent to the University of Georgia Bookstore and Tate Student Center with stairs leading down from those areas. The area connects to Tate Plaza which has many student activities. On the west side, it is adjacent to an expansive walk connecting to Lumpkin Street and other green spaces. The space itself is multi-level and small. It consists of seat planters, tables in the shaded side and sunny side. Benches are placed in the shaded areas and the upper level area, overlooking a small multi-level lawn with planting. The sunny side of the area is planted with single row shrubs. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way Bulldog Café is an eatery that many students come and eat. According to primary observation, the area is always filled with noises either from the students speaking to each other or from the event occurring at Tate Plaza. People flow quickly and there are many chances to approach the lawn or watch other people in this space. The place is adjacent to the inside dining with a lot of tables, and categorized as the space that accommodates dining activity. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The interaction with nature is quite rare. In fact, it seems that nobody notice the surrounding. They are very occupied by the electronic devices, their company, or food. However, it seems that people stay very long with this preoccupation.





University of Georgia Creamery a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding UGA Creamery is located in south campus right next to Brooks Mall. The adjacent area is recently renovated and decorated with prairie grass. There is a path connecting from the mall directly to the entrance of this landscape, adorn with seat walls. The site is small and surrounded by tables. There is a bench near the entrance of the creamery. The landscape itself is a part of a shaded walkway extended from Warnell School of Forestry to Carlton Street. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The site is selected because of its interesting quality. The tables and seating are placed in different spaces that have their own characteristics in term of crowdedness, naturalness, and lights. It is categorized as a landscape appropriate for dining because it is a part of a creamery that serves food and snacks. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place Despite being in the middle of people’s traffic in a sunny day, UGA Creamery gives a feeling of intimacy and welcome. The tree branches create an interesting light play and the prairies outside gives an interesting atmosphere.





Georgia Center Courtyard a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding The Courtyard of Georgia Center is a very small space that is framed by the architecture from all four sides. It connects to the hotel dining service and many conference rooms. The courtyard has the policy for not having food from outside. In term of physical description, there are two levels of the space. The higher one is at the same level as the hotel lower ground, but sinks about 2 feet from restaurant entrance. It stays at the outer radius of the plaza-like courtyard, connected to the doors and surrounded by planters with shrubs, perennials and annual plants. There is a sculpture or water feature on the upper deck, but the observer never saw it in operation. The lower deck sinks another foot from the upper deck, wrapping around the giant oak tree which acts as the main feature of the area. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The site is very small, and it functions as an outdoor eating area with a very unique characteristic. The quality of the space does not follow Whyte’s (2001) suggestions by lowering the ground level and surround everything by glass, creating an undesirable fish bowl effect. However, the sunlight streaming at the space and the arrangement of the ornamental plants and seating are inviting. The conflict of these two design elements can create interesting results in behavior observation. Since the area is provided to function as a dining space, it is categorized as a green space that accommodates dining activities. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place Climate really takes effect on this space. On the hot, sunny day, people tend to sit at the lower deck under the shade of the tree. On the cooler day, the upper deck on the area where the sun hits becomes popular. Nobody eats at this courtyard in any cloudy days during the observation. The fact that there are less uses of electronic devices in the space may due to the lack of evenly shaded area.





MLC Lawn a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding MLC Lawn is surrounded on three sides by MLC building. The building itself is a complex containing many classrooms, conference rooms, offices, and a coffee stand. The other side of the lawn is connected to a broad walkway linking students from Lumpkin Street, one of the main streets on campus, to Tate Plaza. Across the paved walkway is Tate Student Center and its green roof. The MLC Lawn is connected to the building with the upper deck looking down, accompanied by three stairways and large planters. The faรงade gracefully level down to the grass, creating an amphitheatre like structure. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The multi-level seating is an interesting feature of the landscape. It is a space that connects to the high volume of people during lunch time. During a preliminary observation, the site is filled with people on the grass, planters, and steps. The size of grass lawn is not large, and the space is fragmented by pavement. Its popularity is to be explored. It is categorized as the landscape appropriate for movement because of the high density of circulation. The majority of open spaces also allow the movements. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place Flat, open, and highly playful with light, the MLC Lawn is attractive to many people. It seems like a quick stop before stepping inside or a place to hang out a while after lunch. The microclimate created by large trees and soft grass is relaxing, and there are many people to watch.





Main Library Quad a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding UGA Library quad is a part of historic North Precinct. The site is surrounded by academic buildings including Dean Rusk Hall, Law building, Law Library Annex, and Peabody Hall. The seating from the buildings are facing toward the lawn. There is a memorial plates and garden in the north end. At the south east direction, there is a part connecting this quad to one of the busiest bus stops on campus. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way UGA Library becomes the main circulation landscape for a lot of people. In the preliminary observation, more than 25 people occurred per 30 seconds in the high time, making this landscape filled with live and movement. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The site is bustling with people, and the grass is highly maintained even in winter time. There are chains surrounding the grass in most sides, although, sending a limiting access. However, occasional grass access is spotted. The trees are attractive, but cannot be sat under due to the large radius of mulch being placed underneath. The front of Law Annex in particular has a suntrap that is very attractive. The main circulation cuts through the front of library.





Brooks Mall a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding Northern Part of Brooks Mall spans down to cover the area between Warnell School of Forestry and the School of Pharmacy. West Green Street connects people from the bus stop in Sanford Street down to this area and Odum School of Ecology. On the east side, the area is shaded evenly with trees. The small platform in front of Warnell Building has some seating looking toward the building. The opposite site, at the School of Pharmacy, has stone retaining wall running down the planter edge, creating a sitting space. There is a porch with two benches under the roof. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The site is circulated with people, but not as frequent as the Library Quad. There us some interesting dichotomy between the eastern and western side of this space, as well as its comparison to the main lawn. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place Most of the trees planted in the lawn is quite young and well protected. Although the shapes of the lawns are similar to those from MLC lawn, the grasses are not being utilized. It might be because the circulation paths cut the lawn off of both faรงades.





Lamar Dodd's Rain Garden a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding The rain garden is directly in front of Lamar Dodd’s School of Arts. It is near a dining hall, residential halls, Ramsey Student Center, and East campus parking deck. Many students get off the bus at the stops just south of the space. The site is mostly in accessible, but there is a pocket with benches overlooking planting arrangement and the bridge that can overlook the space from a different angle.. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The space is beautiful, and it addresses one thing that most campus landscape should address in the future: sustainability. This landscape uses storm water management as its true purpose. Its aesthetic comes from native plants that do not need much requirement in maintenance. However, due to the limited access, it does not respond to any other purposes in particular. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The area is always shed on by sun and adorned by some subtle yet peculiar artistic expressions here and there. It feels very different from any conventional campus landscape. Unfortunately, its high exposure to direct sun and wind makes the microclimate fluctuate more often, rendering the space less popular in any climates less than optimal.





Odum’s pocket lawn a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding This circular lawn is between West Green Street at the point that it turns to pedestrian traffic and Soule Street as it turns to a parking lot. It is in front of Hardman Building. The space is adjacent to Brooks Mall, but elevates up about four feet above ground level. One side can be accessed by stairs, while the other is sloped up. The lawn itself is not flat but rolls up then sinks in the middle where there is a drainage area. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The space is close to be called a space for movement and circulation, but there is not much to connect to. It is close to two building, but only near an entrance of one. The circulation is difficult and the lawn is not appropriate for conventional physical movement because it is not flat, yet it is filled with activities in the preliminary observation date. These conflicts between function and popularity make the space worth exploring. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The rolling grass reminds one of the hilly, more natural landscape. The tree canopies in this site here go beyond the mulch, and can be rested under. The surrounding areas are filled with interesting looking prairie, and the raised elevation allows one to watch people come and go at West Green Street from the bus stop toward Brooks Mall.





Tate Deck Green roof a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding This thin strip of landscape is sitting on top of Tate Parking Deck. It is adjacent to the entrances of Tate Student Center and the main walkway that connects Lumpkin Street to Tate Plaza. The thin grass is flanked on both sides by planters with seating edges. In the main west entrance of Tate Center, there is an ornate decorative pavement on the ground. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The site has a simplistic design. The very controlled look makes it differ from other campus landscape in UGA. This is only one well-known roof garden with grown trees in the university. The site is categorized in ‘other’ category because there are several possible uses, but none is strong enough to be a main purpose. It can be used for reflection, considering the views, but it is very large and open. It can be used for movement, but it connects to nowhere, and the high steps make it less accessible on the south side. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The site is systematic and cold yet supply great views on both west side and south side where there is some daylighting on Tanyard Creek. It is elevated up and buffeted by wind and sun, making its microclimate fluctuate rapidly and easily. The site is comfortable during a breezy, sunny day, and can be too hot or too cold otherwise. Small trees on the planters provide small shade and little to no wind protection. The amount of concrete pavement is high, reflecting heat and light everywhere.





MLC Plaza a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding MLC Plaza acts almost as a gateway to Miller Learning Center from Sanford Street. The space is split into two parts by the stairs and path directed from Baldwin Street that separates North precinct from Central precinct. The western side is the sloped lawn, backed by thick spread of evergreen shrubs. The other side is a systematic granite blocks underneath the canopies of crepe myrtle trees, surrounded by semi-circular planter about 2 feet in height. The south side of the site has a bike rack and an overlook down to Tate Student Center. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way The site is selected for its dynamic movement that clashes with the intimate feeling it offers. Even with a giant circulation bisecting the area, it still contains the integrity of one site and offers the calming effect. The elements that can create this feeling should be further studied. The peaceful, contemplating atmosphere even in busy surrounding suggests that it might belong to the reflective and intimate category. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The dense, low canopies cast shadows over the granite blocks, making it feel like a small pergola in early fall. When the leaves fall, the dense branching persist. The lawn is well surrounded from three sides, leaving a side facing a circulation path. The side is perfect for people watching or sunbathing.





Founder's Garden a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding Founder’s Garden is adjacent to Lumpkin Street, one of the main streets connecting the campus from north to south. However, there is a limited access due to the elevation difference. The other side of the garden is next to the College of Environment and Design. The space is enclosed by trees and contains many subspaces. The Founder’s House in the middle separates the spaces into north and south. The subspaces include the formal lawn, the smaller, informal lawns, the shaded paths on both east and west side of the garden, the deck, the courtyard, and the labyrinth. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way Founder’s Garden contains several subspaces. Each one has its own character and style. They come together coherently yet secluded from each other, which make a great spaces for reflection, intimacy, and interactions with nature. The space is categorized as a landscape for intimacy and reflection because its secluded spatial quality and its intimate scale. c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place The spaces are very peaceful. However, loud traffic noise from Lumpkin Street can interrupt the experience quite a bit. The light plat is interesting, and there are always flowers during the observational time. Natural elements are very high, and the site is highly adorned with intricate art. Founder’s House, the smokehouse, and the kitchen building create a picturesque backdrop for the landscape.




Warnell Garden a. Brief Description of place and its immediate surrounding Warnell Garden is surrounded by parking lots. It’s enclosed on three sides by heavy vegetation and opens up one side to Odum School of Ecology building. The space is in intimate scale, setting at the side of heavy foot traffic between Odum School and Brooke Mall, but the part is screened from the major traffic view. People who walk past can only partially see what is inside. The park consists of the planters made of stone in perfect heights for seating, jagged in zigzag angle. The square large pond in the middle consists of turtles and fish. The floor is made of stone. The selection of plants are various but mostly native. b. The reason this site is selected and categorized this way In the primary observation, the garden strikes as the area that is really peaceful and can give a restorative experience. It has many quality described in Kaplan’s ART theory. The surrounding of trees gives the feeling of being away. The zigzag shape and planting design gives the feeling of extent. The seating that can be laid on for a nap, or sit, or socialize in big and small group brings compatibility, and the water with fish and turtles bring fascination. Such space would offer many benefits, but it would be interesting to see how people behave in such a space. The site seems peaceful and has not much activity to be engaged with except the interaction with nature and reflection of self, thus it was categorized as a green space for reflection and intimacy c. Subjective participant-observation reflection of the place There is something magical about the light through the beech trees that make me as a user feel like everything is going to be okay. The thesis author felt safe and protected in the space, as well as mesmerized by the sound of the wind, the gargling water, and the movement of tiny turtles at the pond. There are many people walking past the entrance, but the noises cannot reach the space. The thesis author felt very relaxed and restored.





Conclusion In this chapter, the attributes of each site has been explored and diagrammed into simpler explanation. These observed attributes will be useful when the behavioral information is added and compared in the next chapter. The results and conclusion chapter will show the objective behavioral observation results, the subjective participant-observer notes, and statistic of data in a site, in a functional group, and as the whole campus landscape category. These results would draw some insight to suggest in the further study.


CHAPTER 6: RESULTS, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSION This chapter presents the results of data to answers three questions in the thesis. To reiterate, the three questions are as followed. 1) How do people spend time in campus lunch landscape? 2) What spatial quality/elements in lunch landscape are people attracted to? 3) How do people with technology act differently from others in such space? In chapter 4, 8 hypotheses are generated to answer these questions. Chapter 6 consists of three sections: the results comparing to each hypotheses, discussion, and conclusion. The first section will show the statistical data drawn from the observational study in forms of percentage, graphs, and table, the discussion whether they agree with the hypotheses, and some subjective observational notes. The second section describes the design suggestions derived from the observational study and the limitation of the study. The last section concludes the thesis and suggestions for further research.

Results Question 1: How do people spend time in campus lunch landscape? The total participants collected are 508 people. More than half of the participants (51.5%) engaged in electronic devices such as texting, using portable computers, and talking on cell phones. The second common activities are reflection and restoration engagement such as daydream, watching people, or playing with leaves (42.2%). The third common activities are dining, sipping coffee, or having snacks (35.4%). The least activities found in this observation are physical activities. Less than 10% of the observed activities are physical such as pacing around, training dogs, or roller-skating. Figure 6.1 represents the activities observed during the study. Notice that the total % goes beyond 100%/ This phenomenon is due to the fact that a person can perform more than one activity during the observation session. The average length of staying in one space is 10.34 minutes.


Figure 6.1: The comparison activities in percentage of total observation

Hypothesis 1.1: The appropriateness of the space discussed earlier in this thesis will agree with the appropriate categories determined by the author The only matching data is: the green space appropriate for dining will be used primarily for dining activity. The results show that the physical activity was not performed much at all in these lunch landscapes. The hypothesis underestimates the prevalence of electronic device usage in public spaces. More people eat lunch or have snacks outdoor than estimated, and a lot of participants use the space to do visual and direct interaction with nature such as watching people, laying on grass, or meditate. Figure 6.2 compares activities in percentage between four typologies. The first hypothesis contains both agreements and disagreements. Green spaces appropriate for dining activities are used most for dining related actions. The engagement of electronic devices overthrows most results of the other spaces. Another difference noticed is that the restorative activity is very high in percentage in the spaces for circulations and movements. In the spaces provided to be appropriate for movements, there are many people to watch and hence there are more people watching. Another noticeable result is that the physical activity, although still low, is the highest in the spaces with other appropriate uses. Maybe this is due to 128

the fact that there are too many people and movement at the circulation based landscape. So the spaces that provide some open area but with less crowd traffic is more appealing to users who seek physical activities. The social activities in Reflective spaces are lower than expected, which might be an effect from the fact that people seek peace in such space. The comment is enhanced with the higher rate of nonelectronic reading in this category’s result. The landscapes that do not fit any of the three categories have to most physical activities. For the charts of individual site categories and other detailed information regarding founded experiment, visit Appendix E . Hypothesis 1.2: Higher percentage of male participants will sit closer to the crowd, and a higher percentage of female participants will use more electronic devices In 508 participants, there are 228 (44.9%) males and 280 (55.1%) females. There is little difference between male and female percentage of activities for the most part. However, on the reflectiverestorative actions, the percentage of male participants is much higher. Although the male and female participants show very little difference in most categories, the direct interaction, such as watching people, touching landscapes, or sunbathing, are found much more in male participants. The different in position suggested by Whyte (2001) may take role on this result. If men chose to sit at the ‘front stage’ they will have more opportunity to watch people and nature. This information can be subjected for further research. Figure 6.3 show the comparison of activities performed by male and female participants. 46.5% of male participants are engaged in electronic devices, and 55.7% of the female participants use them. This result shows that female participants are slightly more inclined to use the electronic devices in the lunch landscape. Another part of the hypothesis is also proven true. 72.4% male participants select to sit near the movement of the crowd, 66.4% of female participants do so. Figure 6.4 displays the comparison between male and female participants in these two subjects. Another noticeable result is that male participants are more likely to engage in restorative activities, such as sitting in the grass, watching people, or watching landscapes. This might relate to Whyte (2001) reference that suggests 129

that men like to be more in the open, visible areas. This preference may allow them more opportunity to react more with nature. Another possibly explanation might be from a cultural difference between men and women, namely their clothing attire. Men’s regular clothing, such as pants and jeans may allow more movement and access to certain activities, such as sitting on the grass, more than women’s clothings.

Figure 6.2: Comparison of activities in percentage between 4 typologies defined by author


Figure 6.3: Comparison between male and female activities

Figure 6.4: Comparison between male and female electronic devices and preference of crowd movements


Question 2: What spatial quality/elements in lunch landscape are people attracted to? Hypothesis 2.1: In the temperature range provided in the study, people prefer sun more than shade The sun and shade category is made by the amount of sunlight during the observation time (midday.) The spatial qualities and landscape elements under the sun and shade categories are very similar to each other. In the results, 59.1% of participants stay in the sunny area while 40.9% stay in shade. This may lead to believe that people prefer sun. However, the average length of stay in the sun (9.7 minutes) is lower than the average length of stay in shade (11.4 minutes.) Figure 6.5 and 6.6 display the difference in percentage and time of the participants in such spaces.

Hypothesis 2.2: People prefer to stay near the movement of the crowd. The observation suggests that 62.2% of participants chose to stay near the crowd while 37.8% stay further away. However, the average length for people who stay in the crowd (9.7 minutes) is shorter than the average length of people who stay away from the crowd (11.23 minutes.) Figure 6.7 and 6.8 display the difference in percentage and time of the participants in such spaces.

Figure 6.5: Percentage of people spending time in shade and sun 132

Figure 6.6: Average time people spending in shade and sun

Figure 6.7: Percentage of people spending time in crowd and away from crowd


Figure 6.8: Average time of people spending in crowd and away from crowd

Hypothesis 2.3: People prefer adaptable seats such as seat walls and grass than tables and benches in lunch landscape. The observation shows that the benches and tables, which are quite limited in usage and mobility has the similar percentage of use (25.6% in benches and 24.4% in tables.) Grass is the least preferred at 18.9% and the other seat options including steps, seat walls, and planters are most preferred at 31.1%. The length of stay varies very little among the four types of seat and correlates with the average of the overall length of stay. Hypothesis 2.3 posts an interesting question about grass lawn and interaction. It seems to contradict the suggestions from Golicnik (2010) and Marcus (1998) who say that grass is a popular spot to sit on in many circumstances. However, it is noticeable that the grass condition during late fall and winter may be less appealing to sit and hence alter the result of the study. The other results agree with the hypothesis that more adaptable seating options will be more popular. Figure 6.9 and 6.10 displays the seat preference and the minutes spent in each area. Hypothesis 2.4: There will be more people who use the electronic devices outside than those who don’t


In the results, 51.5% of participants use electronic devices while 48.5% do not. It can imply that there are people who use electronic devices as much as those who don’t. The average length of those with electronics is 10.11 minutes and the average length of those who don’t is 9.8 minutes. Figure 6.11 and 6.12 display the difference in percentage and time of the participants in such spaces.

Figure 6.9: Percentage of people seat preference

Figure 6.10: Average time of people spending in different seats 135

Figure 6.11: Percentage of people using electronic devices versus those who don’t

Figure 6.12: Average time of people using electronic devices versus those who don’t


Question 3: How do people with technology act differently from others in such space? Hypothesis 3.1: People with visual based electronic activities will need more shade than overall users There is no significant different between the electronic users and over all users. 60.2% of visual electronics users and 59.1% of overall user stay in the sun. Hypothesis 3.1 regarding visual electronic devices is proven false. There is almost no difference in percentage of how the users of these devices react to microclimate compared to the overall users. This may due to the sizes of the portable devices than the light can be blocked by the user’s shade and direction toward the sun. Figure 6.13 shows the comparison of visual electronic users and overall users. Hypothesis 3.2: People with cell phone conversation will stay in less comfortable microclimate and away from crowd. The preference of people on cell phone conversation positively correlates to overall preference in both microclimate and crowdedness. However, in both case the percentage is more extreme. The percentage of a cell phone speaker that stays in the sun adds up to 85.3% compared to 59.1% in the overall preference. Cell phone speakers stop near the crowd up to 73.2% compared to 62.2% of overall preference. Hypothesis 3.2 posts a more interesting aspect that the preference percentage does not only follow the overall crowd, but it agrees so in much larger altitude. This may due to much smaller sample of cell phone users in the study (n=41) compares to the overall variation (n=508,) or there might be a different behavioral factors involved, since the study that the hypothesis is based on (Turner 2008,) refers only to the behaviors and perspectives toward cell phone users indoor and public transportation. Figure 6.14 compares the cell phone users to overall users in both sun-shade and crowd-sparse categories.


Figure 6.13: comparison of visual electronic users and overall users.

Figure 6.14 Comparison of the cell phone users to overall users


Subjective Observational Notes 1. Nobody sits under a tree on the lawn. Marcus (1998) and Golicnik (2010) suggest people like to sit on a grass where there is an anchor point behind the back. It is true to most part of this observation. Many people sat on the sloped grass so that the back can lie against the slope. Some sat with the back close to the granite blocks, and many chose to sit on the ground with the back at the seat wall instead of on the seat wall itself. However, during the study span, very little amount of subjects sit under the tree in an open space, which is an example recommended from both Marcus and Golicnik for a compelling seating option. This may due to the fact that the trees in the campus are well protected around trunks with mulch and organic materials to avoid compaction around the critical root distance (Morris 2013). The trees that have seating options around such as in front of UGA Creamery, Tate Green Roof, and MLC are being utilized occasionally. If there is a way to create a seating option under the tree on a more natural open space, the students might utilize the trees more. 2. Nobody sits on the unhealthy grass. In the additional observation on February 2013, the grasses in some campus landscapes are yellow due to the lack of sun and long exposure to low temperature. Even though the spaces’ spatial qualities are the same, the observer notices a change in behavior that nobody sits or walks across those grasses even in the day of a perfect weather. This maybe because it is unattractive to them. The author believes it is the seasonal factor that can be noted even in the warmer climate such as in the University of Georgia. 3. People behave differently in different seasons with the same climate. This is also due to the additional observation in Feb 2013. The weather in Athens, GA around Late fall (November 2012) and late winter (February 2013) have been similar. On sunny days, the temperature of February can go up to 65 degree. However, the numbers of people who spend time outside drop drastically about 50%. Some spaces that have strong exposure to microclimate have little or no participants. This may due to some vegetation changes. The fact can be used to explain the phenomena happened in the areas in which strong characters are based on vegetation, such as the 139

food courtyard at Georgia Student Center that has a giant majestic deciduous tree covering the entire site. However it is not the case for some, such as the spaces in Memorial Plaza that has the canopy of crepe myrtles. Even when the leaves are all gone from the tree, the plaza is still actively used by many, although less than the site in fall with the same temperature and microclimate. It might also due to the participants’ mental model that suggests the appropriate activities to do in each season as well. 4. Users always explore new opportunities to use the landscapes. The observer always finds a surprise in an observation. People would find places to sit that never appear in any design guidelines, such as on a magnolia branch, on the architectural dÊcor, hidden behind the vase shaped planter. They also display the actions that are very uncommon, such as roller skating, dancing, training dogs, and meditating, in campus landscape. The designers should design the spaces to make these explorations possible. 5. In the areas where it feels intimate, people feel private. In the reflection and intimacy category, the observers find that many students display the behaviors that are usually done in more private spaces, such as showing intimate affections, sleeping, dancing to headphone music, or meditating. The observer comes to conclusion that when the space provokes such feeling of privacy and security, participants create the bond and trust with landscape that make them feel like home, even in the public spaces. 6. Table seats are used only when it is necessary. In many spaces, table seats are important since it can be used to prop up food, heavy books, or electronic devices. However, if the participants do not need the table, they will avoid table seats. People who engage in reflective actions, such as people watching or daydreaming especially, will not choose table seats unless also doing other activities. Discussion There are two parts of the results. The first part is the suggestions derived from this observation that agree with the existing guidelines. These conclusions confirm that those guidelines are applicable to 140

campus lunch landscapes in modern scenario. The second part contains the new insights derived from this study that should be taken in consideration when designing a campus lunch landscape. Suggestions that agree with existing guidelines 1. Provide options for spatial quality in every kind of spaces: A lot of people enjoy being in front, watching people, while other decide to take back seats and sleep in a spot away from the crowd. As proven in the result measuring in gender, the demographic quality might express difference between group preferences. Providing different spatial qualities would accommodate all kind of participants to expose themselves to the landscape during lunchtime. This suggestions agrees with Abu-Ghazzeh (1999,) Marcus (1998,) Whyte (2001) 2. Suntraps and shadow plays: People enjoy sun in this range of temperature, making the joy of sunshine essential to the landscape. The notion is mentioned in Zacharias (2004,) Whyte (2001,) and Marcus (1998.) It seems from the observation that the sunlight does not only provide the optimal microclimate, but the light play made by the contrast between sun and shade provides the aesthetic beauty to the site. The elaborately planned landscape should use the species and placements of plants to create light and shadow plays that can act as a fascinating element. 3. More pocket spaces in reflective landscapes: The pocket spaces are important in the landscapes appropriate for reflection and intimacy. It can reduce the social interactions, and focus the activities in small, intimate areas. The users can display actions that they would do in a more private scenario, such as sleeping or showing intimate affections without being seen. However, there is some security issue to be concerned in this notion. The suggestions agree with one made by Kaplan (1997,) Ulrich (1999,) and Marcus (1998.) New design Suggestions 1. Physical activities during lunchtime can be encouraged. 141

There are some of walking and exploring, dancing and playing with dogs during the observation, but with very low amount. However, the highest percentage of the physical activities are found in the area for other purposes, which have some open spaces but do not connect to many buildings or traffic. This may show that such characters of space may be correlated to the likeliness of physical activities. However, the notion needs to be further explored. Another option that can be further studied includes adding outdoor exercise equipments on campus landscape. 2. More alternative seating options for winter green spaces and lawn. The University of Georgia is fortunate in term of winter climate. The sun shines most yearlong and the temperature is moderate during the winter months. However, people are less likely to sit on the grass in late winter-early spring due to its unappealing appearance. There is more opportunity to be exposed to green spaces since most vegetation is still green and active during February. Around MLC Lawn, many options such as planter, seat walls, and veranda are utilized more than the lawn at some observational sessions, and those elements could be more encouraged. The other seating options that may have to be considered are those offered for people who want to sit on the grass with their back to the trees. In sustainable arboriculture practice (Morris, 2013) the area of critical root diameter must be protected to avoid compaction problems in most trees by mulching or fencing it off. The solutions can be to plant trees that tolerate compaction (UI, Plants 2013) or to design a seating structure that support weight but not create a burden to the trees. 3. The electronic devices are prevalently used outdoor, and there preference does not differ from other green space dwellers. With the technology that allows people to use the devices anywhere, the devices are what people pay attention to. However, they are outside, and that factor alone provides some restorative benefits (Abu-Ghazzeh, 1999.) There might be some further exploration of how the restorative benefits of nature can take effect to the electronic devices users compared to those


who pay attention to social interactions, food, and non-electronic readings, and to those who pay attention to nature. Limitations 1. Observational errors: Since this is the observational study, some human errors can be taken into account, especially when the spaces have some spatial obstructions for privacy or a lot of crowd traffic. However, the errors are minimized as much as possible to ensure the accuracy of the results. 2. Time limitation: It is to be understood that the result of this observational study will be rather specific to many factors at the observation time, seasons, and locations, and that these factors can obscure the outcome of the study. To solve the limitation, the time span of research has been selected when the weather conditions vary in great range. The time of the year chosen to make observations is expected to be most popular for students to enjoy the landscape, for it is not too hot or too cold. The temperature in such temperate climate in the University of Georgia makes the study applicable to other places with similar temperature range. Furthermore, the results from the observations are strengthen by the studies that have been done in the past regarding human preference and behavior. The hypotheses are based on previous studies and literature reviews. The observations that occur beyond the expectation will be discussed through researches and assumptions before taken into conclusion for the design insights. 3. Variety of spaces: Due to the limitation of the observer’s resource, the data collected only comes from small pool of applicable sites in the University of Georgia. There are bigger samples that can be observed and made conclusion out of. These sites can be explored using the same method in future studies for more specific results to the University of Georgia. Conclusion This study explores and observes the behaviors in campus lunch landscapes. University environment can be very stressful for students, faculty members, and staffs. The studies show that the exposure to green spaces can benefit health, attention capacity, and work morale. Due to the time poverty, 143

the landscape that can be approached during the lunch break is the idea worth exploring. The study sets goal to answer what people do in the landscapes defined as lunch landscapes, what they prefer in such settings, and to explore further implication of modern world, what is different when there are mobile electronic devices involved. The first part of the study is the literature review. There are four sections to the background knowledge: green space and health, campus landscapes, lunch landscapes, and exploration of the electronic devices. Kellert and Wilson’s Biophilia hypothesis discussed the concept of how humans are involved with nature and will be better surrounded by one. Ulrich’s Psychoevolutionary theory describes that human are healthier with the exposure to nature through studies and experiments, and Kaplan’s offer the Attention Restoration Theory that explains how a human can be more cognitively efficient with recurring those of nature. These basic principles apply to applications such as Ulrich’s Natural Distraction Elements, Attention Restoration elements, and the Reasonable Person Model. The study raises one health issue correlating obesity, stress, and exposure to green space to show the relationship between landscape and health. Campus landscapes are important to enhance ecological system. It also increases study and job performances, make employees love their jobs, and create better society and environment. The creation of good campus environment produces good society and setting that can contribute to creating healthy campus. Lunch landscape is the landscape where it is less than 0.5 mile, or in walking distance, to food vendor. Among campus landscapes, campus lunch landscapes are an integral part. There is little history recorded about the landscape as a part of lunch settings. However, having lunch landscape on campus are important since it is the time where people take short break from work. Lunch landscape can expose natural elements to those who don’t have time to receive a regular dose of nature. The study also points out that the mobile technology is an integral part of modern technologies. Small devices such as laptop computers, cellular phones, and smart phones can be carried anywhere. The uses of these electronic devices can influence health decisions and behaviors, thus should be corporate in the environmental behavior study. 144

The University of Georgia is a large campus with many mature trees and health policies. However, specific facts and insights can help improve campus landscape architecture and planning in the future. To understand methods and scope of the observational study, eight distinctive studies are looked at in the case study approach. Among them, some share similar topics and fields of study that gave very useful information to form the hypotheses and basic knowledge about the topic (Matsuoka 2010, AbuGhazzeh 1999, Whyte 2001, Lau 2009.) Some gives a very insightful and practical methodology response (Ivarsson 2012, Golicnik 2010, Marcus 1998, Zacharias 2004.) These studies help the methods and hypotheses to structure and form toward a more plausible findings. The second part of the student involves the observational study to find the answers to three specific questions. From several sites, 12 study sites are selected from 4 campus precincts from the University of Georgia that contain food vendors. The sites are categorized into 4 categories: Sites appropriate for dining, movement, reflection, and other purposes. Site inventory is produced for each site to understand the condition and movement throughout the site. Each site is observed 3-4 times for 20 minutes during lunch hours. The notes in movement, actions, location, time, and crowd are taken into account to produce results. The observation took place during October and November 2012 and February 2013, finding the optimal temperature for behavioral study. The hypotheses suggest that the functions estimated by the thesis author’s categories will be followed by users, that the preference will follow literature review regarding other open spaces preferences, and that the electronic users will have similar results with slightly altered variation. Results show that the existence of electronic devices is stronger than what is estimated. The majority of people in public space is involved with such space that the results differ from the hypotheses. Dining activities are performed most in the landscape appropriate for them, but on the other three categories, the electronic devices take the first place of involvement. Men are not different in women in term of behavioral preference, but tend to explore and interact more with nature. People prefer adaptable seats such as seat walls and steps over tables and benched in the overall study. Similar to what was 145

mentioned in Marcus (1998,) Whyte (2001,) and Zacharias (2004,) people love to be near the flow of people and in the sun, with their back somewhat protected. People with electronic devices show no noticeable behavioral difference than others. There might be some limitations to the study, mostly time constraints and human errors. There are three new and unique notes that rose from the study: outdoor physical activity during lunch hour is quite underrated, the seating options for the open spaces need to be explore further, and the importance of studying the susceptibility to natural restorative benefits toward electronic device users. These can be an aspiring topic for the future research. Human needs the existence of nature, especially in a stressful situation such as campus environment. There are many studies about the benefits of natural exposure to human. Lunch landscape can provide the health profits that can benefit health, job and academic performance, society, and environment. The study shows human activity patterns toward different type of landscapes, their preference. It also explores how modern use of technology can affect the behavioral pattern studied in former literature. The results can be useful to produce more productive and effective campus lunch landscape for better, healthier, and more ecological Universities in the future.


REFERENCE Abkar, M., M. K. M. S, et al. (2011). "Relationship between the Preference and Perceived Restorative Potential of Urban Landscapes." HortTechnology 21(5): 514-519. Abu-Ghazzeh, T. M. (1999) "Communicating Behavioral Research to Campus Design: Factor Affecting the Perception and Use of Outdoor Spaces at the University of Jordan " Environment and Behavior 31, 42. Australia, T. P. I. o. (2009) "Parks and Open Spaces 2009." Health Places & Spaces. Berthier, E., H. Andrieu, et al. "The role of soil in the generation of urban runoff: development and evaluation of a 2D model." Journal of Hydrology 299: 252-266. Bodin, M. and H. Terry (2003). "Does the outdoor environment matter for psychological restoration gained through Running?" Psychology of Sports and Exercise 4(2): 12. Booth, K. M. P., Megan M.; Poston, Walker Carlos (2005). "Obesity and the Built Environment." Journal of the American Dietetic Association 105(5): 110-117. Bossard, E., G., J. Hobbs, et al. (2002). Envisioning Neighborhoods with Transit Oriented Development Potential. San Jose, CA, The Mineta Transportation Institute, San Jose State University. Brisbon, N., J. Plumb, et al. (2005). "The asthma and obesity epidemics: The role played by the built environment—a public health perspective." Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 115(5): 1024-1028. Broom, D. H. and L. Starzdins (2007). The Harried Environment: Is Time Pressure Making Us Fat? The Seven Deadly SIns of Obesity: How the Modern World is Making Us Fat. J. Dixon and D. H. Broom. New South Wales, Australia, UNSW Press. Bull, F., B. Giles-Corti, et al. (2010). Active landscapes: the methodological challenges in developing the evidence or urban environments and physical activity. Open Space: People Space 2, Innovative Approaches to Researching Landscape and Health. T. Catharine Ward. Abingdon, Routhledge: 96-116. Chow, H., P.H. (2007). "Psychological Well-Being and Scholastic Achievement among University Student in Canadian Prairie City." Social Psychology of Education 10(2007): 10. Cotton, S. J., M. F. Dollard, et al. (2002). "Stress and Student Job Design Satisfaction, Well-being, and Performance in University Students." International Journal of Stress Management 9(3): 15. County, A. C. (2010). ACC GIS Database. Dixon, J. and D. H. Broom (2007). The seven deadly sins of obesity : how the modern world is making us fat / edited by Jane Dixon and Dorothy H. Broom, Sydney : UNSW Press, 2007. Dooris, M. (2001). "The Health Promoting University: a Critical Exploration Theory and Practice." Health Education 101(2): 9. 147

Dugdale, A. and J. Dixon (2007). The Technological Environment: Digital Technologies or Space to Play (up) and Belong? The Seven Deadly SIns of Obesity: How the Modern World is Making Us Fat. J. Dixon and D. H. Broom. New South Wales, Australia, UNSW Press. Erell, E., D. Pearlmutter, et al. (2011). Urban Microclimate: Designing the Spaces between Buildings. Washignton, DC., Earthscan. Felsten, G. (2009). "Where to take a study break on the college campus: An attention restoration theory perspective." Journal of Environmental Psychology 29: 160-167. Georgia, T. U. o. (2012, September 2012). "UGA by the Numbers." Retrieved January 25th, 2013. Georgia, T. U. o. (2013). "University of Georgia Health Center." Retrieved January 22nd, 2013. Georgia, U. o. (2013, 2/21/2013). "UGA Campus Architects." from www.architects,uga,edu. GoliÄ?nik, B. and C. Thompson, Ward (2010). "Emerging relationships between design and use of urban park spaces." Landscape and Urban Planning 94: 38-53. Groat, L. and D. Wang (2002). Architectual Research Methods. Canada, John Wiley & Sons inc. Hartig, T., T. Brinslimark, et al. (2008). Restorative Environmental Design: What, When, Where, and For Whom? Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Building to Life. S. R. Kellert and H. Heerwagen Judith. New York, NY, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Heimsath, C. (1977). Behavioral Architecture. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill Book Company. Hideki, T. and M. Masakazu (2012). "Relationships between the properties of an urban street canyon and its radiant environment: Introduction of appropriate urban heat island mitigation technologies." Solar Energy 86: 2255-2262. Hinde, S. (2007). The Car Reliant Environment: The Vehicle that Drives Obesity. The Seven Deadly SIns of Obesity: How the Modern World is Making Us Fat. D. H. Broom and J. Dixon. New South Wales, Australia, UNSW Press. Hug, S.-M., T. Hartig, et al. (2009). "Restorative qualities of indoor and outdoor exercise setting as predictors of exercise frequency." Health & Place 15(4): 971-980. Initiate, U. O. (2013). "Why Tackle Obesity in Georgia." Retrieved January 22nd, 2013. Ivarsson, C. and P. Grahn (2012). "Differently Designed Parts of a Garden Support Different Types of Recreational Walks: Evaluating a Healing Garden by Participatory Observation." Landscape Research: 19. Kaplan, R. and S. Kaplan (2011). "Anthropogenic/anthropogenerous: Creating environments that help people create better environments." Landscape and Urban Planning 100: 350-352. Kaplan, R. and S. Kaplan (2011). "Well-being, Reasonableness, and the Natural Environment." Applied Psychology: Health & Well-Being 3(3): 304-321.


Kaplan, R., S. Kaplan, et al. (1998). With people in mind : design and management of everyday nature / Rachel Kaplan, Stephen Kaplan, and Robert L. Ryan, Washington, D.C. : Island Press, c1998. Kellert, S. R. (1997). Kinship to Mastery: Biophilia in Human Evolution and Development. Washington, DC., Island Press. Kellert, S. R. (2008). Dimensions, Elements, and Attribute of Biophillic Design. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Building to Life. S. R. Kellert and H. Heerwagen Judith. New York, NY, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Kellert, S. R. and E. O. Wilson (1993). The Biophilia hypothesis / edited by Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, Washington, D.C. : Island Press, c1993. Kuo, F. E. and W. C. Sullivan (2001). "Aggression and violence in the inner city: effects of environment via mental fatigue." Environment & behavior 33(4): 543-571. Kuo, F. E. and W. C. Sullivan (2001). "Environment and crime in the inner city: does vegetation reduce crime?" Environment & behavior 33(3): 343-367. Kuo, L. E., M. Czarnecka, et al. (2008). "Chronic Stress, Combined with a High-Fat/High-Sugar Diet, Shifts Sympathetic Signaling toward Neuropeptide Y and Leads to Obesity and the Metabolic Syndrome." Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1148: 232-237. Kyrou, I. and C. Tsigos (2008). "Chronic stress, visceral obesity and gonadal dysfunction." Hormones (Athens, Greece) 7(4): 287-293. Lau, S. S. and F. Yang (2009). "Introducing Healing Gardens into a Compact University Campus: Design Natural Space to Create Healthy and Sustainable Campus." Landscape Research 34(1): 26. Lauman, K., T. Garling, et al. "Selective attention and heart rate responses to natural and urban environments." Journal of Environmental Psychology 23: 125-134. Leather, P., M. Pyrgas, et al. (1998). "Windows in the workplace: Sunlight, view, and occupational stress." Environment and Behavior 30(6): 739-762. Lottrup, L., P. Grahn, et al. (2013). "Workplace Greenery and Perceived Level of Stress: Benefit of Access to a Green Outdoor Environment at the Workplace." Landscape & Urban Planning 110(Feb 2013): 6. Louv, R. (2006). Last child in the woods : saving our children from nature-deficit disorder / Richard Louv, Chapel Hill, N.C. : Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, 2006. Louv, R. (2011). The Nature Principle: Human Restoration and The End of Natural Deficit Disorder. Chapel Hill, NC, Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. Ma, D. V., G. Fry, et al. "Health effects of viewing landscapes – Landscape types in environmental psychology." Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 6: 199-212. Maller, C., M. Townsend, et al. (2009). "Healthy Parks, Helathy People: The Health Benefits of Contact with Nature in a Park Context." The George Wright Forum 26(2): 33.


Marcus, C. C. and N. H. Greene (1998). Miniparks and Vest Pocket Parks. People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Spaces. C. C. Marcus and C. Francis. New York, NY, Van Nostrand Reinhold. Marcus, C. C. and T. Wischemann (1998). Campus Outdoor Spaces. People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Spaces. C. C. Marcus and C. Francis. New York, NY, VanNostrand Reinhold. Mass, J., R. Verheij, A., et al. (2009). "Morbidity is Related to a Green Living Environment." Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health 63(12): 14. Matsuoka, R. H. "Student performance and high school landscapes: Examining the links." Landscape and Urban Planning 97: 273-282. Moore, R. C. and N. G. Cosco (2007). What Makes a Park Inclusive and Universally Designed? A Multimethod Approach. Open Space: People Space. C. Thompson, Ward and P. Travlou. New York, NY, Taylor & Francis Group. Morris, L. (2013). Urban Soil. Ogden, C. L., M. D. Carroll, et al. (2012). "Prevalence of obesity and trends in body mass index among US children and adolescents, 1999-2010." JAMA: The Journal Of The American Medical Association 307(5): 483-490. Ottosson, J. and P. Grahn (2005). "A comparison of leisure time spent in a garden with leisure time spent indoors: on measures of restoration in residents in geriatric care." Landscape Research 30(1): 2355. Paltz, T. S. U. o. N. Y.-N. (2010). Common Definitions-green space. Rachel, K. "The role of nature in the context of the workplace." Landscape and Urban Planning 26: 193201. Sewell, J. E. (2011). Women and The Everyday City: Public Space in San Francisco, 1890-1915. Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota Press. Sobal, J. and B. Wansink (2007). "Kitchenscapes, Tablescapes, Platescapes, and Foodscapes : Influences of Microscale Built Environments on Food Intake." Environment and Behavior 39(124): 124-141. Stephen, K. and K. Rachel (2009). "Creating a larger role for environmental psychology: The Reasonable Person Model as an integrative framework." Journal of Environmental Psychology 29: 329-339. Tennessen, C. M. and B. Cimprich (1995). "Views to nature: Effects on attention." Journal of Environmental Psychology 15(1): 77-85. Terry, H., W. E. Gary, et al. "Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings." Journal of Environmental Psychology 23: 109-123. Thompson, C., Ward (2007). Playful Nature: What makes the difference between some people going outside and others not? Open space: People space. C. Thompson, Ward and P. Travlou. New York, NY, Taylor & Francis Group.


Travlou, P. (2007). Mapping Youth Space: Identity, Space, and Social Exclusion. Open space: People Space. C. Thompson, Ward and P. Travlou. New York, NY, Taylor & Francis Group. Ulrich, R. S. (1984). "View through a window may influence recovery from surgery." Science 224(4647): 420-421. Ulrich, R. S. (1993). Biophilia, Biophobia, and Natural Landscapes. The Biophilia Hypothesis. E. O. Wilson and S. R. Kellert. Washington DC, Island Press: 74-137. Ulrich, R. S. (1999). Effects of gardens on health outcomes: theory and research. Healing Gardens: Therapeutic benefits and design recommendations. C. C. Marcus and M. Barnes. New York, John Wiley & Sons, inc: 25-77. Urbana-Champaign, U. o. I. a. (2013). "UI Plant Database." Retrieved Feb 27, 2013 Van den Berg, A. E., J. Mass, et al. (2010). "Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health." Social Science & Medicine 70: 1203-1210. Ward Thompson, C. (2011). "Linking landscape and health: The recurring theme." Landscape & Urban Planning 99(3/4): 187-195. Ward Thompson, C. and P. Travlou (2007). Open space : people space / edited by Catharine Ward Thompson and Penny Travlou, London ; New York : Taylor and Francis, 2007. Wells, N. M. (2000). "At home with nature: Effects of 'greenness' on children's cognitive functioning." Environment and Behavior 32(6): 775-795. Wells, N. M., S. P. Ashdown, et al. (2007). "Environment, Design, and Obesity: Opportunities for Interdisciplinary Collaborative Research." Environment and Behavior 39: 29. Whyte, W. H. (2001). The social life of small urban spaces / by William H. Whyte, New York : Project for Public Spaces, 2001, c1980. Woodruff, S. J., R. M. Hanning, et al. (2010). "The Influence of Physical and Social Contexts of Eating on Lunch-Time Food Intake Among Southern Ontario, Canada, Middle School Students." Journal of School Health 80(9): 421-428. Zacharias, J., T. Stathopoulos, et al. (2004). "Spatial Behavior in San Francisco Plaza: The Effects of Microclimate, Other People, and Environmental Design." Environment and Behavior 36(September): 20. Ziesel, J. (2006). Inquiry by Design: Environment/ Behavior/ Neurosciences in Architecture, Interiors, Landscape, and Planning. New York, NY, W.W. Norton & Company.


APPENDIX A: Literature Table concluding all restorative benefits of nature by Ma (2007) Findings from the literature review: categories of landscapes and reported health effectsa No. 1







Categories of landscapes compared

Reported health effects

Ulrich (1979)

Nature scenes; dominated by green vegetation including cultivated fields

Improved well-being and reduced anxiety: increased positive affect factors and reduced fear arousal factor.

Urban scenes; commercial landscapes and industrial areas

Increase in sadness, decline in attentiveness.

Rolling farmland and trees

Stress reduction compared to prisoners viewing prison courtyard.

Prison courtyard

Prisoners viewing prison courtyard had a 24% higher frequency of sick-call visits, compared to those viewing farmland.

Natural scene; trees

Shorter post-operative hospital stays, lower scores for minor post-surgical complications, received fewer negative comments in evaluative nursesโ€™ notes and took fewer strong analgesics than the patients looking at brick wall.

Brick building wall

Longer post-operative hospital stays, higher scores for minor post-surgical complications, higher frequency of negative evaluative comments from nursesโ€™ notes, higher number of doses of strong analgesics than patients looking at natural scene.

Nature scenes: forest with lakes and creeks; park with various plant species and artificial creek; sea area with coastline, grass, cows and birds; mountain with snow and ice

Restorative effect: environments with nature elements generally scored higher rating scale measures of restoration than city environments.

Urban scene: major pedestrian street, bus/train station, rush hour

Restorative effect: city environment scored lower rating scale measures than natural environments.

Natural environment: tree views/nature reserve (1600 ha of vegetation and wildlife)

Reduced stress and improved mood: reduced stress levels/lower blood pressure. Increase in positive affect and decrease in anger/aggression.

No view/urban environment with medium density professional office and retail development

Increase in blood pressure, reduced positive affect and increased anger/aggression.

Natural environment: waterside/coast environment with grazing cows

Restorative effect: lower heart rate than subjects who watched the urban environment.

Urban environment: pedestrian street, bus station, streets with traffic

Higher heart rate than the group watching the natural environment.

Moore (1981)

Ulrich (1984)

Laumann et al. (2001)

Hartig et al. (2003)

Laumann et al. (2003)







Staats et al. (2003)

Tennessen and Cimprich (1995)

Kaplan et al. (1988, reported in Kaplan, 1993)

Kaplan (1993)

Grahn et al. (1997)

Natural environment; dense and open forest, path, no people

Attentional fatigue gave higher preference for the natural environment over the urban environment.

Urban environment; inner city, shopping streets, traffic, residential areas, urban park, people

Attentional fatigue gave lower preference for urban environment.

Natural or mostly natural view (trees, grass, bushes and/or lakes, no evidence of human influence)

Natural views gave higher scores on directed attention than built views. Natural views had no effect on mood state.

Built or mostly built view (city street, other buildings, brick wall)

Built views gave lower scores on directed attention than natural views.

View including natural elements

Fewer ailments and higher job satisfaction with nature in view.

No view or view without natural elements

Higher number of ailments and lower job satisfaction among workers with no view or view without nature than among workers with nature in view.

View including natural elements

Availability of nature in the view strongly affected satisfaction and restorative ratings; less frustration and more patience, higher enthusiasm and life satisfaction as well as overall health.

View without natural elements

No view or no access gave lower values of satisfaction and restorative ratings.

School playground with high degree of naturalness

Fewer sick-days, fewer attentional problems, fewer concentration problems, improved motor function.

School playground with low degree of naturalness

Higher number of sick days, attentional problems, higher degree of concentration problems and lower motor function than children playing in โ€œnaturalโ€ playground.

Subcategories of nature (in roman) and urban (in italics) 12

Parsons et al. (1998)

Natural scenes; forest (1) and golf (2)


Inter-beat interval: golf more complete recovery than urban (passive stressor). Blood pressure: forest and mixed more complete than urban (passive stressor). Golf quicker recovery than urban (passive stressor), urban quicker recovery than golf (active stressor). Skin conductance level: golf more complete recovery than others. Immunization: forest/golf less responsive than mixed/urban. Facial electromyography (EMG) activity; forest greater than others.






Ulrich et al. (1991)

Ulrich (1981)

Herzog and Chernick (2000)

Lohr and PearsonMims (2006)

Staats et al. (1997)

Urban scenes; mixed residential and light development (1) and urban (2)

Skin conductance level: urban greater than others. Urban slower recovery than mixed.

Natural scene: vegetation and vegetation with water

Lower fear and anger, higher levels of positive affects and intake/attention, faster and more complete recovery, greater stress reduction heart period deceleration (nonsignificant differences between scenes with and without water).

Urban scenes; with light or heavy traffic, few or many pedestrians (mall)

Slower and less complete recovery, lack in recovery in pulse transit time (PTT) for traffic environments, heart period acceleration. The traffic settings produced more recuperation than did the pedestrian mall exposures.

Nature scenes; dominated by vegetation including cultivated fields

Positive influence on psycho-physiological state; significantly higher alpha; positive influence on emotional state.

Nature scenes with water

Positive influence on psycho-physiological state; significantly higher alpha; particularly positive influence on emotional state.

Urban scenes; commercial landscapes and industrial areas

Less positive influence on psychophysical state; lower alpha, less positive influence on emotional state.

Natural scene: field/forest with high and low degree of openness

Higher tranquillity, lower feeling of danger.

Urban scenes with high and low degrees of openness

Lower tranquillity, higher feeling of danger.

Urban background with trees with varying canopy form (spreading, rounded and conical)

Positive emotional responses to urban with trees versus urban with inanimate object. Lower blood pressure and positive emotional response to trees with spreading shape compared to trees with rounded or conical forms. Positive response and lower blood pressure when viewing dense canopies. No significant differences in skin temperature or blood pressure when seeing trees than when viewing scenes with inanimate objects.

Urban background with inanimate object

Urban with inanimate object less positive response versus urban with trees.

Forest landscapes of different density (dense versus half open) and accessibility (path versus interrupted path)

Higher pleasure for higher accessibility, no significant difference related to density, indication that low density gave rise to more pleasure.



Van den Berg et al. (2003)

Park-like forest area with and without creek

Restoration; higher happiness, lower stress, anger, depression and tension. Improved mood and concentration. No difference was detected between environments with and without water.

Urban environment: street along a canal with shops on the other side of the street and street with shops on both sides

No affective restoration with respect to overall happiness and stress. Less restoration with respect to depression, anger and tension.

Landscape (in roman) versus no view (in italic) 19




Heerwagen (1990)

Nakamura and Fujii (1992)

Ottosson and Grahn (2005)

Diette et al. (2003)

Painting of natural scene; distant mountains, sunset, clustered trees and open grassy areas, path (mystery)

Stress reduction: patients felt calmer and less tense in the mural condition than in the plain waiting room. The restorative benefits of the nature scene were evident both in heart rate data and self-reports of emotional states.

White wall

Patients watching white wall had higher heart rate increase during waiting period, were feeling less calm and more tense than patients watching landscape painting.


Relaxing effect: the EEG data supported the conclusion that the greenery elicited relaxation.

Concrete block fence

Watching the concrete block fence brings sensory stress.

Garden, with old fruit trees and a variety of flower species

Increased powers of concentration after resting in a garden outside the geriatric home, compared to that after resting indoors in their favourite room. The results did not show any effects on blood pressure or heart rate.

Indoor environment (favourite room)

Lower power of concentration after resting inside (in favourite room) compared to resting in garden.

Nature scene; mountain stream in spring meadow, plus nature sound

Significantly reduced pain for the participants exposed to nature scene and sound. No difference in mean level of anxiety.

Without any scene or sound

Control group reported higher levels of pain. No difference in mean level of anxiety.

Range of greenery 23

Kuo et al. (1998)

Amount of green vegetation in neighbourhood common spaces (greenness rating 0ŕš‚â‚Źâ€œ4)

Stronger social ties, higher sense of safety and adjustment. Weaker social ties, lower sense of safety and adjustment than residents with higher degree of greenery.



Kuo and Sullivan (2001a)

Amount of green vegetation in neighbourhood common spaces (greenness rating 0โ€“4)

Less aggressive behaviour, fewer crimes reported to the police (both property crimes and violent crimes) than in areas without greenery. More aggressive behaviour, more crimes reported to the police (both property crimes and violent crimes) than in areas with greenery.


Kuo (2001)

Amount of green vegetation in neighbourhood common spaces (greenness rating 0โ€“4)

Lower mental fatigue: residents with nearby nature were more likely to be able to deal with the major issues of their lives. Such residents felt more hopeful and less helpless about the issues facing them. Higher mental fatigue: residents without nearby nature were less likely to be able to deal with the major issues of their lives. Such residents felt less hopeful and more helpless about the issues facing them.


Taylor et al. (2002)

Amount of window view of nature (0โ€“4 scale)

Improved self-discipline in inner city girls: For girls, view accounted for 20% of the variance in scores on the combined selfdiscipline index. For boys, view from home showed no relationship to performance on any measure. Lower self-discipline ratings for girls with less greenery in the window view.


Stigsdotter (2004)

Workplace greenery; four levels from no view of and no access to garden to view of and access to garden at workplace

View or access to garden gave improved comfort, pleasure and well-being (โ€œtrivselโ€ in Swedish) and lower stress levels. No view or no access gave lower values of comfort, pleasure and well-being (trivsel) and higher stress levels than employees with access to or view of garden.


Maas et al. (2006)

Amount of green space within a radius of 1 km and 3 km from residence


Leather et al. (1998)

Percentage of the view from window with rural elements (trees, vegetation, plants, and foliage)

Better perceived general health โ€“ higher amount of green space. Worse perceive general health โ€“ lower amount of green space. A view of natural elements was found to buffer the negative impact of job stress, intention to quit and a marginal positive effect on general well-being. Higher stress values; lower job satisfaction, higher intention to quit when no or low percentage of rural view.


Wells (2000)

Amount of nature in window view (different rooms in the house) on a naturalness scale 1โ€“5. Yard material; 4 naturalness categories


Higher naturalness score post-move gave better cognitive functioning.

Lower naturalness score on the view from the window related to lower cognitive functioning. 31

Kuo and Sullivan (2001b)

Varying levels of nature (trees and grass) surrounding public housing (scale 0ŕš‚â‚Źâ€œ4)

Residents in buildings with nearby nature had lower levels of mental fatigue and reported less aggression and violence. Residents in buildings without nearby nature had higher levels of mental fatigue and reported higher levels of aggression and violence.


APPENDIX B: Preliminary site observation notes Preliminary Field Observation Log Time started: 12:15 Time End: 13:15 Friday, Oct 5th Weather: Sunny, warm breeze, approximately 70-80 F Locations: Tate Center and Bulldawg Cafe, Miller Learning Center lawn and cafeteria, Tate Center Green Roof, University of Georgia Creamery, Brooke Mall, Ecology School Circular Lawn, Warnell Garden, Georgia Center Café, Lamar Dodd School of Arts, Bulldawg Café: The outside is packed with people sitting in the dining seats and talking. A girl is reading a book. Two girls are lying on a bench facing toward the entrance of the café, talking leisurely. Many groups of eaters come and go. The voices were inaudible. Several people are on laptops/ electronic equipments. Once in a while, people glance out in the green lawn, but most pay attention to their conservational partners, books, or electronic devices. The inside is similar with a lot of people and noises. There are a lot of students with their headphones, studying on the provided spaces. A lot of students are conversing and eat. The circulation is fast and there are always movements. Miller Learning Center: The outside of the lawn is more informal. A man is eating on a bench facing the lawn, then, after finish eating, he pulled out his laptop and work. Two college students laid down studying on the grass with papers and books surrounding them. There was no evidence of their lunches. Two ladies had their lunches early on, and was seen on the corridor looking down to the lawn, but they both had their laptop and headphone on. On the opposite side toward the entrance of Tate Center, two men and a woman were sitting on a stone railing of the stairs next to the entrance, conversing and watching people. A young man was standing, partially hidden in a shrub next to the entryway but below the stair case, eating hamburger while watching people in the lawn.


The inside was packed with people. It was similar to the Bulldawg Café that everyone was either talking to friends or focusing on their electronic devices. Some were watching a football game. The difference is that there was a lounging portion that was surrounded by an open windows led to green spaces. Not many people were eating there, but many were studying and relaxing with their electronic devices. Tate Center Green Roof: There are only a few people in the space. Two of them are talking on the phone in the proximity of the building’s entrances. The other three are throwing football at the lawn area. The sun is really strong to the entire site. University of Georgia Creamery: A lot of people are engaged with their electronic devices. A group of people are doing a team project. They had food containers next to them. None of them seem to pay most attention to the surrounding environment, but they picked the spots next to interesting plants, or the overlooking decks. Brooke Mall: Only one person was seen at the Brooke Mall during observational period. He was lying down on the shaded area with his bicycle next to him. There was no evidence of lunch being consumed at the time. Ecology School Circular Lawn: There are surprisingly many activities going on in this very small lawn. Many students, in two to three groups, sat down and had lunches on the bench. Two people were sitting in a shaded area in the lawn, taking lunch while engaging in their electronic devices. Two or three more just sat down and watch people. A few people walked pass the space when I sat down and took the observation. Warnell Garden: Warnell Garden is a small, intimate space. There are only two people in the garden, having lunch, but at a time of observation, they are staring to the water fountain [and each other’s eyes.] Another person was found in the other far end, engaged in electronic devices. Georgia Center Café: 159

The inside of Georgia Center CafĂŠ was regular. People are watching television, conversing, or engaging in electronic devices. Some of them looked at the arts on the wall or took a glance outside to the courtyard. The courtyard is almost fully occupied, but most of them did not seem to pay any particular attention to any surrounding environment. Their seat selections are set around the green edge, and nobody sat in the lower deck at the center of the courtyard, even though the seatings at the upper deck are full. One gentleman, in particular, was sitting directly in the sun, but seemed to be content of doing so because he did not change his seating angles although he is in a movable chair. He was conversing with the other man. Lamar Dodd School of Arts: There are two pairs of middle school children having lunch at the plaza on the hill top. A lot of children are running around and playing actively in the event that resembled a field trip. Near the main entrance of the school, several college students were sitting on the bench facing the rain garden, some staring in to the creek, and some are engaged in their electronic devices. Note from the Primary Observation: The observation was not going the way I was expecting. Apparently, they are not engaging to any outside environments when they eat. Most of them are engaged in the conversation or works they brought. The rest pay attention in their devices [cell phones, laptops, tablets.] However, there are some interesting choices of seating observed when there are multiple seating alternatives. Some people really use their time to observe nature and people, but most seemed that they did not eat lunch in the spaces. Seemingly, the groups that stay in the spaces longest are the groups that have social partners. Besides the Georgia Center courtyard areas, only one professor was found eating outside. More females are found eating outside, while more males are found being outside with non-eating related activities. MLC Plaza, Founder garden, and library lawn are added to cover the categories that are missing, completing all twelve sites to be examined in this observational study. Preliminary Field Observation Log 160

Time started: 12:10Time End: 12:35 Tuesday, Oct 16th Weather: Sunny, warm breeze, approximately 65 F Locations:Founder’s Garden, Memorial Plaza [MLC Plaza,] and Library Lawn Founder’s Garden: A man is sitting in a far bench at the northern most part of the garden, having lunch. Two teenagers are sitting in the grass. One of them has a book; the other has a set of papers. They were socializing and studying together. People walked pass the bamboo trail, and some cut across the pond. The garden was quiet. One young man walks up to the bench on the area overlooking the lawn and starts using his smart phone. Memorial Plaza: Memorial Plaza is bustling with people. Two young girls are sitting on the planter seat against the sun, talking. Four students sit on the granite blocks underneath crepe myrtle trees, using their laptop. Many people walk right in the middle of the space. The small, sloped lawn has many people sitting in the grass, studying, listening to music, and taking naps Library Lawn: Not many people stop at the library lawn, but many of them are moving about. There are a couple young adults sitting at the bench in front of Peabody Hall. One older man sits at the bench in front of the library, eating bag lunch. A woman smokes in front of the law library, and another man using the garden area at the far end, talking to his cell phone. Action noted in observation -

Sitting, day dreaming






Reading a book


Talking on cell phone


Using laptop, smart phones


Watching people


Watching the grass


Walking a dog 161


Laying in the grass


Playing throw football


Working on team project


Lying under the tree




Displaying intimate affection




APPENDIX C: Primary Observation Timeline Date 1

Date 2

Date 3

Date 4

Bulldog CafĂŠ









Georgia Center Courtyard









University of Georgia Creamery









Main Library Quad/ North Quad









MLC Lawn









Brooke Mall









Warnell Garden







Founder's Garden









MLC Plaza







Lamar Dodd's Rain Garden







Niche at Odum School









Tate Student Center Green roof










APPENDIX D: Food Map by UGA Campus Architect


APPENDIX E: Percentage of activities in different landscape categories




Spring 2013 MLA Thesis

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you