Influence of the Seat Arrangement in Public Reading Spaces on Individual Subjective Perceptions

Authors: Jo-Han Chang, Chung-Jung Wu

Abstract:

This study involves a design proposal. The objective of is to create a seat arrangement model for public reading spaces that enable free arrangement without disturbing the users. Through a subjective perception scale, this study explored whether distance between seats and direction of seats influence individual subjective perceptions in a public reading space. This study also involves analysis of user subjective perceptions when reading in the settings on 3 seats at different directions and with 5 distances between seats. The results may be applied to public chair design. This study investigated that (a) whether different directions of seats and distances between seats influence individual subjective perceptions and (b) the acceptable personal space between 2 strangers in a public reading space. The results are shown as follows: (a) the directions of seats and distances between seats influenced individual subjective perceptions. (b) subjective evaluation scores were higher for back-to-back seat directions with Distances A (10cm) and B (62cm) compared with face-to-face and side-by-side seat directions; however, when the seat distance exceeded 114cm (Distance C), no difference existed among the directions of seats. (c) regarding reading in public spaces, when the distance between seats is 10cm only, we recommend arranging the seats in a back-to-back fashion to increase user comfort and arrangement of face-to-face and side- by-side seat directions should be avoided. When the seatarrangement is limited to face-to-face design, the distance between seats should be increased to at least 62cm. Moreover, the distance between seats should be increased to at least 114cm for side- by-side seats to elevate user comfort.

Keywords: Individual Subjective Perceptions, Personal Space, Seat Arrangement.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1092956

References:

[1] Thomas C. Greene, Jeffrey D. Fisher, Andrew Baum, Paul A. Bell. Environmental Psychology. Published by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990.
[2] Katz, N, Animals and men, Longmans, Green, New York, 1937.
[3] Hayduk LA, Personal space: Where we now stand. PsychologicalBulletun, 1983,94,pp. 293-335.
[4] Sommer,R,Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of Design. EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1969.
[5] Kitakawa, "Personal space and seating behavior in the classroom”Experimental Social Psychology, 1998, 38(2),pp. 125-135.
[6] Dykman, B, &Reis,H, "Personality correlates of classroom seating position,”.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1979, 79,pp. 346-354.
[7] Okada & Takahashi. New Architecture 13 on the scale of construction. AkirakuniShrine, Jan. 1988.
[8] Hartnett, J.J., Bailey, K.G., & Gibson, F.W. JR, "Personal space asinfluenced by sex and type of movement.” Journal of Psychology, 1970, 76, pp. 139-144.
[9] Hall, E.T,The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966.
[10] Aiello,J.R. Human spatial behavior. In D. Stokols& I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (Vol.1). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
[11] Burgoon,J.K, "Non-verbal signals ” In M.L. Knapp & G.R. Miller, (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication, Beverly Hills: Sage, 1985.
[12] Patterson, M.L. Presentational and affect management functions of nonverbal involvement. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 1987, 11, pp.26-32.