Aleksandra Lis , Magdalena Zienowicz , Zygmunt Kącki , Paweł Iwankowski , Dorota Kukowska , Vlada Shestak
{"title":"入夜后的公园照明--是路线还是地点?人们在公园夜景中的感受(实验)","authors":"Aleksandra Lis , Magdalena Zienowicz , Zygmunt Kącki , Paweł Iwankowski , Dorota Kukowska , Vlada Shestak","doi":"10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The objective of our study was to verify: (1) whether adding ambient lighting in addition to path lighting has a positive impact on preferences, sense of safety and related feelings experienced by park visitors after dusk (H1) and whether this impact is differentiated by the features of the space (H2); (2) what features of the park space may influence the feelings tested (RQ1).</p><p>For this purpose, we conducted an experiment in the Botanical Garden in Wrocław, where 114 study participants – randomly divided into two groups (experimental and control) – assessed nightscapes based on 13 variables (feelings). The experimental factor was the addition of ambient lighting (in addition to path lighting also present for the control group). The experiment was based on assessments made in three different places in the park – an open space, semi-open space and non-closed space. Thanks to this, we were able to check whether the features of the space differentiate the effects of the experimental factor and then consider their impact on people's feelings.</p><p>The research found that the impact of the experimental factor (ambient light) is not obvious – it was only apparent in some cases. This factor increased preference for corridor landscapes (semi-open and semi-closed space), but lowered preference in the open landscape. The experimental factor had the strongest effects in the semi-closed, least lit space, and enhanced preferences, surprise and fascination.</p><p>Moreover, comparison of the ratings of these three places showed that some spaces were rated as the safest while others were assessed as the most attractive. The safest turned out to be the semi-open space with typical park lighting, with the highest path illumination intensity, whereas the least safe was the semi-closed space with the least lighting. When it came to most of the other dimensions related to attractiveness and desire to stay in the area (mystery, contact with the surroundings, willingness to spend time there, surprise, fascination and contemplation), the place with an open view, visually attractive landscape and subtle linear point lighting was rated the highest. The remaining spaces were rated lower.</p><p>The findings of the experiment indicate that (1) adding light does not always increase preference for a particular space – sometimes it lowers it, thus indicating the benefits of darkness and natural night light in park landscapes; (2) there are differences between the features of safe nightscapes and attractive and leisurely landscapes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54744,"journal":{"name":"Landscape and Urban Planning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Park lighting after dark – is it a route or a place? How people feel in park nightscapes (experiment)\",\"authors\":\"Aleksandra Lis , Magdalena Zienowicz , Zygmunt Kącki , Paweł Iwankowski , Dorota Kukowska , Vlada Shestak\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The objective of our study was to verify: (1) whether adding ambient lighting in addition to path lighting has a positive impact on preferences, sense of safety and related feelings experienced by park visitors after dusk (H1) and whether this impact is differentiated by the features of the space (H2); (2) what features of the park space may influence the feelings tested (RQ1).</p><p>For this purpose, we conducted an experiment in the Botanical Garden in Wrocław, where 114 study participants – randomly divided into two groups (experimental and control) – assessed nightscapes based on 13 variables (feelings). The experimental factor was the addition of ambient lighting (in addition to path lighting also present for the control group). The experiment was based on assessments made in three different places in the park – an open space, semi-open space and non-closed space. Thanks to this, we were able to check whether the features of the space differentiate the effects of the experimental factor and then consider their impact on people's feelings.</p><p>The research found that the impact of the experimental factor (ambient light) is not obvious – it was only apparent in some cases. This factor increased preference for corridor landscapes (semi-open and semi-closed space), but lowered preference in the open landscape. The experimental factor had the strongest effects in the semi-closed, least lit space, and enhanced preferences, surprise and fascination.</p><p>Moreover, comparison of the ratings of these three places showed that some spaces were rated as the safest while others were assessed as the most attractive. The safest turned out to be the semi-open space with typical park lighting, with the highest path illumination intensity, whereas the least safe was the semi-closed space with the least lighting. When it came to most of the other dimensions related to attractiveness and desire to stay in the area (mystery, contact with the surroundings, willingness to spend time there, surprise, fascination and contemplation), the place with an open view, visually attractive landscape and subtle linear point lighting was rated the highest. The remaining spaces were rated lower.</p><p>The findings of the experiment indicate that (1) adding light does not always increase preference for a particular space – sometimes it lowers it, thus indicating the benefits of darkness and natural night light in park landscapes; (2) there are differences between the features of safe nightscapes and attractive and leisurely landscapes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Landscape and Urban Planning\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Landscape and Urban Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624000975\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Landscape and Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624000975","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Park lighting after dark – is it a route or a place? How people feel in park nightscapes (experiment)
The objective of our study was to verify: (1) whether adding ambient lighting in addition to path lighting has a positive impact on preferences, sense of safety and related feelings experienced by park visitors after dusk (H1) and whether this impact is differentiated by the features of the space (H2); (2) what features of the park space may influence the feelings tested (RQ1).
For this purpose, we conducted an experiment in the Botanical Garden in Wrocław, where 114 study participants – randomly divided into two groups (experimental and control) – assessed nightscapes based on 13 variables (feelings). The experimental factor was the addition of ambient lighting (in addition to path lighting also present for the control group). The experiment was based on assessments made in three different places in the park – an open space, semi-open space and non-closed space. Thanks to this, we were able to check whether the features of the space differentiate the effects of the experimental factor and then consider their impact on people's feelings.
The research found that the impact of the experimental factor (ambient light) is not obvious – it was only apparent in some cases. This factor increased preference for corridor landscapes (semi-open and semi-closed space), but lowered preference in the open landscape. The experimental factor had the strongest effects in the semi-closed, least lit space, and enhanced preferences, surprise and fascination.
Moreover, comparison of the ratings of these three places showed that some spaces were rated as the safest while others were assessed as the most attractive. The safest turned out to be the semi-open space with typical park lighting, with the highest path illumination intensity, whereas the least safe was the semi-closed space with the least lighting. When it came to most of the other dimensions related to attractiveness and desire to stay in the area (mystery, contact with the surroundings, willingness to spend time there, surprise, fascination and contemplation), the place with an open view, visually attractive landscape and subtle linear point lighting was rated the highest. The remaining spaces were rated lower.
The findings of the experiment indicate that (1) adding light does not always increase preference for a particular space – sometimes it lowers it, thus indicating the benefits of darkness and natural night light in park landscapes; (2) there are differences between the features of safe nightscapes and attractive and leisurely landscapes.
期刊介绍:
Landscape and Urban Planning is an international journal that aims to enhance our understanding of landscapes and promote sustainable solutions for landscape change. The journal focuses on landscapes as complex social-ecological systems that encompass various spatial and temporal dimensions. These landscapes possess aesthetic, natural, and cultural qualities that are valued by individuals in different ways, leading to actions that alter the landscape. With increasing urbanization and the need for ecological and cultural sensitivity at various scales, a multidisciplinary approach is necessary to comprehend and align social and ecological values for landscape sustainability. The journal believes that combining landscape science with planning and design can yield positive outcomes for both people and nature.