Mapping Memories of the Home Environment

Presented by:Paul Nakashima

UCI Undergraduate Research SymposiumMay 14, 2005

Why Research Memories of the Home?

Why Research Memories of the Home?

Much research on other aspects of housing Doyle (1992): “much has been

written, for example, about the economics of housing, the construction and design of housing… the marketing of housing. But little has been written about the meaning of housing”.

Why Research Memories of the Home? (Cont.)

Potential to use information to build homes that are more receptive to inhabitants’ cultural values

Why Research Memories of the Home? (Cont.)

Much new housing being rapidly developed with little concern for people who will eventually inhabit this space

Why Research Memories of the Home? (Cont.)

Lack of connection between designers and social scientists Designers (physical aspects) Social Scientists (social, cultural

aspects)

Why Research Memories of the Home? (Cont.)

Home memories help bridge gap between physical, non-physical features: Memories we have of our homes often

include both of these aspects i.e. remembering physical dimensions of

the home and the objects kept within this space, as well as those who lived there

Why Research Memories of the Home? (Cont.)

Once we understand aspects of home that people value, we can begin to translate into more meaningful design

Data Set

Participants: UCI students (both current and past)

Open-ended essay to express memories of home most significant to participants Limited prompting Participants free to express feelings Fairly open guidelines, general structuring

(minimum of 2-3 pages of text, submit sketches, drawings, pictures)

Data Set (Cont.)

5 general guidelines: Write about the house you remember most

vividly, and/or have strongest emotional relation to

What was your age when you were in the house? Where was this house located? What else comes to mind when you think of this

house? Who or what are they? What about the house is most prominent in your

memory?

Data Set (Cont.)

Composition of Data Set: Responses from students

analyzed in detailStudents from Spring 2004Students from Fall 2001

Data Set (Cont.)

Responses selected based on: Clarity of descriptions Detailed expression Intriguing medium of expression

Analysis

General categories used to classify the kinds of memories people expressed: Physical Sensorial Social Emotional Socio-physical/Cultural

Analysis (Cont.)

Form of representation used by participants: Text Plans/drawings Collages and other expressions Etc.

Physical Aspects

Features of physical environment that are most memorableValues given to particular spaces/areasHow are these areas describedWhich features most prominent/most elaborately described

Sensorial Aspects

Sensory experiences within home: Audio Visual Olfactory/Smell Tactile Other

Is there recollection of views, outdoor environment, surroundings, etc.

Social Aspects

People recollected Who?

Social environment as influence of satisfaction with homeConnection of social, physical (does it exist?)

Emotional Aspects

Kinds of emotions expressed towards home Intensity of emotions Positive, negative, both

Consideration from participant’s point of viewDesire for similar living environment (or for something different) expressed

Socio-Physical/Cultural Aspects

Are there feelings expressed that combine two or more of the other features i.e. socio-physical

Are cultural values/expressions includedKinds of activities associated with home (cultural, religious, other)

Research Findings

• Both the physical and non-physical elements of the home valued

• Many sections of home were associated with positive emotions

• Conversely, some sections of home that were connected with negative emotions

Research Findings (Cont.)

Some participants expressed a longing for their home Seen with those who could not visit

home often Human qualities associated with

some people’s homes

Research Findings (Cont.)

In contrast, other participants wanted to separate themselves from their homes Sense of dread associated with

coming back to their home See their home as inanimate “object” Dissatisfaction with this environment

Research Findings (Cont.)

Satisfaction not limited to spatial aspectsIt is hard to separate memories of home into distinct categories i.e. many social and cultural memories

are tied in with physical aspects of the home and the arrangement of objects within this space

Research Findings (Cont.)

This a great exercise in understanding people’s needs prior to housing construction Can administer a similar free-form

expression of memories of home to people who are going to live in a house to be built

Conclusion

There is no one set design that can be applied to satisfy every person. However, we can see that: Good design should be linked with

consideration of the future inhabitants While consideration of social and

cultural aspects is important, they are not completely independent of design

Conclusion (Cont.)

People involved in the construction/modification of their residence Remember home in greater detail

Conclusion (Cont.)

Involvement of future residents in design process of new homes

Conclusions (Cont.)

Disconnection with home: No real “living” in home Personalization of space limited

Conclusion (Cont.)

Research is more than finding future resident’s preferences Obtain customized information about

each person’s experiences/background

Conclusion (Cont.)

Effective design of homes can be executed by: Taking future residents into

consideration Getting future residents involved in

design process, if possible Can allow clients to express

memories/feelings associated with their homes (in similar fashion) to begin to understand what they value

Conclusion (Cont.)

Future Research Memories of home using different

demographics Applying similar info towards design of

future homes effectively Interviewing residents before/after design of

homes (based on the memories of homes and what they value in this environment) Attempt to see how effective the application of

this information is

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to my faculty mentor and advisor:Sanjoy Mazumdar, Ph.D

&

Valerie Jenness, Ph.DSocial Ecology Honors Research Seminar Section Leader

The many respondents in the “My Home as I Remember it” Project

Whose responses were compiled and analyzed for this project

My fellow students in the Social Ecology Honors Research SeminarFor their constructive criticism and support throughout the year

UROP (UCI Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program)For funding this project

For more information please contact:

Paul Nakashimapnakashi@uci.edu

University of California, Irvine