چكيده لاتين :
Objective and Background: Human requires meaning understanding for perception of the environment. Perception is the process by which we select and interpret environmental stimuli to achieve meaningful experiences. In this process, the mind, as an audience, looks for certain dimensions of the subject to find meaning and concept. Every phenomenon, transfers its message through meaning, when it is in the scope of human perception. The first deliberate or unconscious attempt by human beings is based on the creation of a kind of alignment between their mental states and environmental forces arising from the phenomenon. Only in this case effective communication with the environment and a meaningful experience are possible. In other words, human tries to create a personal identity of architectural space in his mind. Therefore, the audience's atmosphere affects our sense of environment by the organization of elements. Therefore, cognition of latent signs in the environment, contributes to meaning perception by the audience. Hence, in environment psychology, the process of perception, finding meaning determinants will help architects to design. Previous studies in the field of humanities and psychology related to meaning have been carried out rarely; with regard to the extent of the factors influencing the formation of meaning, so far, no research in the field of architecture and environmental sciences has examined the these variables. In addition, the influence of these factors and their interactions, prioritization and measurement of their importance are not observed. The purpose of this study is to investigate factors affecting the creation of meaning in the minds of individuals, to rank these factors to find the most effective priorities, to find the means of communication, and interaction of these factors on each other, and to show how they optimally function.
Methods: This research is applied and it is descriptive from research design viewpoint, which is carried out in a subgroup of the Delphi-type survey method. In the theoretical section of the research, internet resources, archives, and documentary studies have been used to for finding meaning determinant. In this regard, 28 factors affecting meaning were categorized in five sub-criteria. They included 20 “personal factors” in the three sub-criteria of “social and predestination”, “personality” and “adventitious” and 8 “environmental factors” were categorized in two sub-criteria of “physical environment” and “behavioral environment”. Then, according to TOPSIS requirements, a questionnaire has been developed including 71 pair comparisons in terms of two 9-degree spectra for determining modeling and ranking meaning determinant.
Findings: The statistical population of the study consisted of all faculty members and post-graduate students of Shiraz universities. In this research, a questionnaire was used for data collection. To eliminate the risk of sampling errors and increasing the validity of the research, a questionnaire was distributed among the 340 members of the available statistical population through a computer or face-to-face visit. Data were analyzed from 203 returned questionnaires via TOPSIS technique and Shannon entropy method. The results showed that the factors of “identity and personality” (Ci= 1.00, Di+= 0.00, Di-= 0.20) in personality sub-criteria and “the type of human relationship with the environment” (Ci= 1.00, Di+= 0.00, Di-= 0.26) in behavioral environment sub-criteria ranked first. There is no significant difference between personal and environmental criteria in the meaning formation that shows they are not given priority in terms of the meaning formation and they have the same effect. According to the information, attitudes of males and females (Sig= 0.283, H0 result=Not reject), academic rank (Sig= 0.501, H0 result=Not reject) and type of university (Sig= 0.953, H0 result=Not reject) are almost identical and they have the same viewpoint in identifying various factors. Finally, a systematic and comprehensive model of the factors influencing the creation of meaning was developed using Vensim software.
Conclusion: 28 effective factors on the meaning, which, 20 “personal factors” in the three sub-criteria of “social and fate”, “personality” and “Acquisition” and 8 “environmental factors” were categorized in two sub-criteria of “physical environment” and “behavioral environment”. Then, the cause and effect model, by forming an interconnected structure of factors, indicates the way relationships and factors interact with each other, depending on their priority. According to the model, each factor influences several factors. The two factors of “Identity and character” and “Type of human relationship with the environment” have a centrality in the loop of influencing factors, which is evidence of their power of influence among the determinants, because they are directly and indirectly involved in the formation of meaning in the mind. On the other hand, the influence of factors such as “Depth of human presence”, “Experiences and skills”, “Family”, “Job”, “culture” and “sense of place”, which are influential in other priorities, are well known.
By analyzing these relationships, we conclude that everything that human encounters during his/her life, both consciously and unconsciously, is the source of meaning for him/her. Therefore, designers can increase the quality of architectural space and more effectively communicate with audience by considering and targeting each of these factors. According to the discussion above, architecture separated from its functional aspects conveys meaning; it acts as a mediator for determining the meaning and it can affect their perceptions and behaviors as space users forming the individual's environmental behavior.
