24 REFLEXION | 2021-22 | AIA Utah the shifting external environment.3 Therefore, these shared neural pathways are two-way circuits that can be tapped to recall past experiences formed under similar conditions. Exposure to this emerging neural framework gives architects cause to reassess. Rather than rate the wellness or “suitability” of the built environment by the assorted attributes that we incorporate into buildings (function or objectdriven design), architectural design should explore how to generate and sustain cognitive experiences within defined environments (subject-driven). How can we imbue our interior architecture — in hospitals, classrooms and workspaces — with an essential quality that the observer will experience as an extension of himself? That is, how can we create places that invite the mind and body to encompass their surroundings through interconnected space? Even Stephen Kellert, who laid the foundation of biophilic design by identifying the attributes of nature that the built environment should include, was a vocal critic of the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED certification system, where buildings achieve sustainability ratings based on a checklist of discrete interior features. In a 2014 interview with The New York Times, Dr. Kellert said: “Good design has an atomic quality. When things are organised in a coherent and integrated way, you get these emergent properties, so the whole is better than the sum of its parts.”4 Considering that natural environments provide the ideal cognitive setting for our biology, largely because we automatically consider them cognitive extensions of our self, how can contemporary buildings come to elicit such a sublime experience: one where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? The cognitive properties of environmental context may hold the answer. Spatial Cognition — the measure of time and self Research in neuroscience has uncovered a fascinating connection between our ability to map space and the way we form memories. This connection between space and memory is a fundamental building block that gives rise to environmental context, which, in turn, regulates the signal strength of sensory input, particularly visual input. Our memory is a living repository of spatial maps. Photo by Alejandro Alvarez on Unsplash This is why nature imagery staged in isolation on the walls results in two-dimensional décor that doesn’t alter the observer’s spatial assessment of interior space. On the other hand, biophilic “Open Sky CompositionsTM” — multisensory images set within a virtual skylight framework — do encompass additional structural and contextual cues. These multimodal cues engage a part of the brain that effectively alters the observer’s visceral assessment of interior space. This area of the brain is the cerebellum, typically involved in spatial cognition and depth perception. Neural research has long confirmed that the strength of the visual cortex’s signals is context-dependent, a highly flexible and dynamic process. According to neuroscientists Stephen L. Macknik and Susana Martinez-Conde, authors of the book Sleights of Mind, the intensity of visual signals is fluid, malleable, and highly responsive to contextual cues.5 In other words, the environmental context in which sensory input takes place, shapes our perception of the input. We already know that 50% of our neural tissue is directly or indirectly related to vision, revealing that our psychophysiological relationship to visual space is of far-reaching consequence. Humans’ cognitive representation of “space” is deeply embedded in our minds. Indeed, Dr. Jennifer Groh notes that the shared neural pathways in our brain that give rise to abstract thought, spatial cognition, and the way we map our sense of space, may also be responsible for the nature of human thought itself.6 Making Space book cover © 2014 Belknap Press © 2015 Antonio Mora Far from philosophy or metaphysics, Dr. Groh’s scientific assessment of the interconnected nature of our neural networks reflects the plasticity inherent in the neurobiology of cognitive perception. Its implications for architectural design are vast — ranging from how enclosed interiors dampen cognitive restoration and emotional balance to how staging the proper spatial reference frames in windowless spaces can give rise to salutogenic perceived open space, thereby advancing the use of more therapeutic design principles in the built environment. This observation is also echoed by environmental psychologists such as DeLong and Lubar, who have long suggested that humans perceive a strong relationship between the space that surrounds them and the passage of time. In their research, it has been shown that larger spaces slow down perceived time while smaller spaces speed it up.7
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODQxMjUw