A Test of Photovoice and the Zaltman Metaphor

TEST PATTERN: A TEST OF PHOTOVOICE AND THE ZALTMAN METAPHOR

ELICITATION TECHNIQUE AND A SEARCH FOR PATTERNS IN LANDSCAPE

ENCLOSURE PREFERENCES

KATHERINE LINCOURT

(Under the Direction of KATHERINE MELCHER)

ABSTRACT

Landscape architects may be able to improve communication with clients and community members and generate better data for research and design projects by changing the way they use the images and photographs generated by others. This thesis explores two methods that rely on images generated by and interpreted by study participants: Photovoice and the Zaltman

Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET). To test the methods a problem was generated from

Christopher Alexander et al.’s (1977) Pattern Language and nine study participants were evenly divided into three arms (ZMET, Photovoice, and a control group using language-based interviewing) and asked about their perceptions and preferences for ‘gardens’ and ‘enclosure’

(Pattern 173 – Garden Wall). The interviews were coded to create themes, which are discussed relative to Pattern 173 and the design of enclosed garden spaces. Additional information is provided on my experience with the methods, the impact of changes to the methods, participants’ responses to the study arms, and suggestions for researchers. Implications for landscape architecture and potential future applications for the methods are discussed.

INDEX WORDS: Landscape Architecture, Zaltman, ZMET, Consumer Research,

Subconscious, Values, Photovoice, Participatory Research, Photography,

Interviews, Pattern Language, Enclosure

TEST PATTERN: A TEST OF PHOTOVOICE AND THE ZALTMAN METAPHOR

ELICITATION TECHNIQUE AND A SEARCH FOR PATTERNS IN LANDSCAPE

ENCLOSURE PREFERENCES

KATHERINE LINCOURT

BA, Boston University, 2001

A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

ATHENS, GEORGIA

2011

Katherine Lincourt

TEST PATTERN: A TEST OF PHOTOVOICE AND THE ZALTMAN METAPHOR

ELICITATION TECHNIQUE AND A SEARCH FOR PATTERNS IN LANDSCAPE

ENCLOSURE PREFERENCES

KATHERINE LINCOURT

Major Professor: Katherine Melcher Committee: Douglas Pardue Ian Firth Melissa Freeman

Electronic Version Approved:

Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia August 2011

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to Frances Hopkins, Victor Wiley, and Drew Hicks.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

As a landscape architecture student, I’ve enjoyed seeing how different personalities and world views are expressed in the projects that are turned in. It’s interesting to see the designs that people come up with, but it’s more interesting when they belong to people you know and you get to witness the process of creation.

In coming up with an idea for thesis, I decided I wanted to try to somehow get at this hidden side of the images we create… Though I’m not sure how much of this original intent is obvious from the research that follows, I think it is only right to acknowledge it here with special thanks to all of my amazing classmates. (I feel very blessed to have gotten to spend this time with you, and I will sincerely miss getting to see you all everyday!!) What is good in this thesis belongs to you. Thanks so much for your help, time, patience, and ideas about enclosure. You guys are the best!!

Thanks also to my professors and, of course, the members of my thesis committee, especially Katherine Melcher, for all of their help and support.

Finally, all of my love and thanks to my family and my friends… I couldn’t do anything without you.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v

LIST OF TABLES ...... viii

LIST OF FIGURES ...... ix

FORWARD ...... 1

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 2

A basic framework ...... 5

This study ...... 7

2 PHOTOVOICE ...... 12

Theory ...... 13

Methodology & analysis ...... 16

Previous use ...... 18

3 THE ZALTMAN METAPHORE ELICITATION TECHNIQUE (ZMET) ...... 20

Theory ...... 21

Methodology ...... 26

Analysis...... 28

Previous use ...... 29

vii

4 THE STUDY ...... 31

Study design ...... 33

5 STUDY RESULTS ...... 39

The themes ...... 40

6 METHOD RESULTS ...... 61

Participants and their ratings ...... 61

My experience with the methods ...... 64

Study limitations ...... 72

7 CONCLUSION ...... 74

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 82

APPENDICES

A SUPPORTING TEXT ...... 91

B STUDY DOCUMENTS ...... 99

C ADDITIONAL QUOTES AND IMAGES ...... 108

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1: Image creation and image interpretation ...... 6

Table 2: SHOWeD vs. PHOTO ...... 18

Table 3: ZMET concepts & premises ...... 22

Table 4: The 11 ZMET steps ...... 27

Table 5: Questions used during the Photovoice interview...... 35

Table 6: Positive and negative feelings related to enclosure ...... 41

Table 7: Uses for enclosure - in general and in studio ...... 43

Table 8: Environmental conditions and enclosure ...... 57

Table 9: Participant time by study arm ...... 62

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1: Tuning Signals ...... 1

Figure 2: Test Card F ...... 2

Figure 3: Test Card A ...... 12

Figure 4: Test Card B ...... 20

Figure 5: SMPTE color bars ...... 31

Figure 6: ITA Picasso test card ...... 39

Figure 7: Rest and activity ...... 45

Figure 8: Landscape clearing ...... 45

Figure 9: Urban clearing ...... 46

Figure 10: The Ecology Garden at UGA ...... 46

Figure 11: The Spring Site [adjacent to E. Campus at UGA] ...... 47

Figure 12: Welcoming arms...... 47

Figure 13: The Serpentine Garden ...... 49

Figure 14: The South Campus Oval (SCO) ...... 50

Figure 15: SCO view 2 ...... 50

Figure 16: SCO view 3 ...... 50

Figure 17: Open path ...... 51

Figure 18: Enclosed path 1 ...... 51

Figure 19: Enclosed path 2 ...... 51

Figure 20: Secret garden ...... 52

Figure 21: Threshold ...... 52

Figure 22: Natural materials ...... 54

Figure 23: Character and enclosure ...... 55

Figure 24: Camellia Walk arbor ...... 58

Figure 25: East Campus tracks ...... 60

Figure 26: The RCA Indian Head test pattern ...... 61

Figure 27: Ryoji Ikeda’s “test pattern [n°3]” ...... 74

FORWARD

Figure 1. Tuning Signals - the first test pattern (or test card) broadcast by BBC 1 1

This thesis is named for the test patterns used to calibrate television sets and video equipment and also for Christ opher Alexander et al.’s (1977) Pattern Language. This is because, when I think about this work and what I wanted to get out of it, I see it as a kind of calibration. The main difference is that instead of working with things like brightness and contrast , this work plays with different research methods. Instead of a TV set or video camera, this work has adjusted me. And instead of a broadcast TV test card, like the one presented in

Figure 1, there is whatever lies at the bottom of Pattern 173 - Garden Wall.

1 This image, the associated description, and those that follow are all taken from Wikipedia’s (2011) Test Card entry. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_card .

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Figure 2. Test Card F

Much of landscape architecture practice relies on the effective communication of ideas through images - from the initial presentation of design concepts to the final construction documents used for design implementation. Because success depends in large part on the ability to communicate graphically, landscape architects expend lots of energy mastering graphic conventions and working on hand and computer graphic skills, but this emphasis on visual communication is slightly one-sided. Relatively little has been done to examine how we might better communicate with others using the images that they create. Although some landscape architects use images generated by clients and community members as part of the design process, this is something that has been done largely informally.

This thesis looks at different methods that may allow landscape architects to make better

use of the images that are generated by others. It presents a preliminary exploration of two

visual research methods that were taken from the social sciences and consumer science,

Photovoice (Chapter 2) and the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET; Chapter 3).

Both of these methods are based on participant-generated photographs, where the participant

assigns meaning(s) to the images, but this initial similarity masks substantial differences in the

methods’ theoretical backgrounds and intents. ZMET is based on research and theory from a

number of fields including neurobiology, psychoanalysis, linguistics, and art theory and is

designed to try to tap into the consumer subconscious (Zaltman 1997). While Photovoice is a

participatory action research (PAR) technique traditionally used to stimulate conversation,

empower community members, and create materials that can be used to garner support and

resources (Wang and Burris 1997). These methods’ similarities and differences point to an

interesting opportunity for researchers - since they suggest that relatively minor changes in these

research methodologies may lead to vastly different types of information.

This study tests Photovoice and ZMET against a theoretical landscape architecture

problem generated from Christopher Alexander et al.’s (1977) Pattern Language , Pattern 173 -

Garden Wall (see Chapter 4).

Nine landscape architecture graduate students were evenly divided into three study arms

(Photovoice, ZMET, and word-based interview) and asked to reflect on their perceptions and preferences for the enclosure of gardens, where enclosure was defined very broadly: “so along with things like walls and gates, you might think about enclosure from trees, shrubs, fences, adjacent buildings, adjacent hills, etc.” and gardens was similarly expanded to “smallish, tended

landscapes - so instead of just picturing a vegetable or flower garden, you might think about the

average American yard, small park, or plaza” (see Appendix B pp. 101-2 for full participant

instructions). 2

Individual interviews were conducted in each of the study arms, and a brief final survey was given to study participants to gather information on the time demands of the study, their overall satisfaction, willingness to participate in a similar future study, comments, and suggestions (see Appendix B pp. 103-7 for the instruments and final survey).

Ideas and examples generated during the interviews and evolving research theories were

carried through the process and introduced in subsequent interviews in order to generate a more

comprehensive and nuanced understanding of study participants’ preferences and perceptions

both as individuals and as a group. This more journalistic interviewing style provided for a

better understanding of: 1) gardens and enclosure and 2) how the methods work in combination,

but it reduced my ability to 1) compare the methods and 2) determine how the different study

arms contributed to the final results since it was not possible to say what the methods would have

done without such interference. 3

Each interview was taped, transcribed, and coded for themes, and basic statistics were

performed on the quantitative data provided by study participants on the final survey. The

results of these analyses are provided in Chapter 5, which provides the interview themes, and

Chapter 6, which presents data on the study participants, their ratings of the methods, my

experience with the methods, suggestions for researchers interested in doing similar work, and

study limitations. In both instances I have tried to present the findings with supporting quotes

2 The loose definitions assigned to these terms largely reflect the way these ideas are presented in Pattern 173. Since the original pattern seemed unsure what scale, context, and definition made the most sense; leaving enclosure and gardens relatively open-ended in this study seemed like a good way to let participants think about and frame the discussion in a way that made sense to them. Though some interviewees did frame the discussion around gardens - in the way the term is usually defined, for the most part the discussion ended up being more about enclosure in the landscape. 3 This decision and a supporting theoretical framework are discussed to a greater extent in Chapter 4 (pp. 30-3).

and images taken from the interviews so that the reader can judge the strength of the argument

for him- or herself. The concluding chapter, Chapter 7, provides a general theory of enclosure,

discusses how the ideas presented by study participants relate to Pattern 173, and suggests

possible future uses for these methods in landscape architecture.

In reading and interpreting the results, it is best to think of this study as an example of

how these methods can be applied by landscape architects. Though the methods are compared to

each other, it is not a true methods’ comparison aimed at determining which method works best;

and though it does provide results for ‘gardens’ and ‘enclosure’ that have implications for Pattern

173 and design in general, these should not be seen as universal laws or truths. Instead the

results show how these methods can be used to capture the ideas of a group of individuals and

generate themes that can inform the design process.

The rest of this chapter will attempt to provide a general context for this thesis by: 1) introducing a basic framework for thinking about the use of images in research and 2) discussing the potential benefits of this type of research.

A basic framework

One way to think about the use of images in research is to group methods based on who

generates the images (e.g., the researcher or the participant) and who interprets the images (the

researcher or the participant). A basic matrix would look something like Table 1. (Here, the

person providing the image is bolded, the person interpreting it is italicized, and common

methods are presented in regular font).

Table 1. Image creation and image interpretation Researcher Researcher Researcher Participant

Studies based on documentation & Photo-elicitation 4 analysis OR the cultural/historical

analysis of art Participant Researcher Participant Participant

Studies based on the analysis of Autodriven photo-elicitation, 4 participant drawings & photographs Photovoice, ZMET

By far the most widely adopted methods are those that use researcher-generated images

(Row 1) because these methods give the researcher more control in focusing studies.

Researchers can use their own images to collect data and document issues (Row 1, Column 1) or frame the topic when collecting data from others (Row 1, Column 2).

In landscape architecture many successful studies belong in this category. For example,

William Whyte’s work in The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980) and the studies that have followed in its footsteps demonstrate an effective use of images generated and analyzed by researchers (Row 1, Column 1); while numerous studies using standardized base maps and photographs in conjunction with surveys and short interviews show how researcher-generated images can be used with study participants (Row 1, Column 2) 4 to determine things like place

perceptions, best paths, typical behaviors, and visual preferences (e.g., Lynch 1960; Tveit 2009;

Zeisel 2006).

In comparison, research using participant-generated images (Row 2) has been slow to take hold and develop. Early research attempts focused on participant-generated images that were then interpreted by the researcher (Row 2, Column 1). For example, Sanoff and Barbour

4 The term ‘photo-elicitation’ is frequently applied to methods that use images in conjunction with surveys or interviews. ‘Photo-elicitation’ can refer to research where the researcher or the participant generates the images. To differentiate between these techniques, researchers will sometimes refer to participant-driven photo-elicitation as ‘autodriven photo-elicitation’ (Clark-Ibanez 2007; Guillemin and Drew 2010).

(1974) examined students’ drawings of their “dream schools,” and Kevin Lynch used freehand-

area-map drawing during interviews to gather some of his data for The Image of the City (1960).

Although these kinds of studies tend to produce interesting data, unresolved interpretation issues

- including how to compensate for different levels of skill and comfort with generating images -

have kept them from achieving wider use (Zeisel 2006).

Newer research with participant-generated photos has side-stepped these issues by

focusing more on using images generated by participants and interpreted by participants (Row 2,

Column 2). 5 ZMET and Photovoice are just two of the methods that belong in this category.

Many other variations exist including: autodriving (Clark-Ibanez 2007; Heisley and Levy 1991; 6

Samuels 2007), the forced metaphor-elicitation technique (FMET; Woodside 2008), video

diaries (Brown et al. 2010; Holliday 2004, 2000; Noyes 2004), and research using visual

narrative art (Megehee and Woodside 2010).

Many researchers also design individual projects that fit into this category that are not

based on any particular method. For example, in landscape architecture, Frances Downing’s

(2000) Remembrance and the Design of Place posits the existence of archetypal “domains of

place” that form the foundation of design. In this research Downing had participants (student

designers and design professionals) supply images of meaningful places which were then used to

feed into discussions and exercises - including an image sort and quick designs based on a

fictional character, an action for the character, and one of the designer’s memorable places.

5 Studies where the images are interpreted by the researcher (Column 1) are inherently about the images that are generated; while studies where the images are interpreted by the participant (Column 2) are much more about the dialogue that develops around the images. In these types of studies the images are central to the methods, but they are more of a communication tool than they are the object of study. 6 This article provides a good overview of the history of visual research in multiple disciplines.

This study

The work presented in this thesis extends previous landscape architecture research on participant-generated and -interpreted images by: 1) adopting research methods that are relatively established and well-known in the larger research community and 2) discussing the methods themselves.

Established methods. The informal everyday use of images generated (and interpreted)

by clients and community members and the creative independent research that already exist

within the profession (e.g., Downing 2000; Marcus 1995) undoubtedly contribute to landscape

architecture and should not be discounted, but the adoption of tools that have been established in

other fields provides researchers with a general context for their studies that can lead to better

communication across disciplines and greater credibility. The use of established methods helps

generate a common language for researchers, and it can help reframe issues in a way that both

parties understand. 7

The continuing study and wider application of these methods might therefore help landscape architects make more solid connections to related research within the profession (e.g.,

Hou 2005) 8 or in different fields and/or help support fundraising efforts or grant applications that require scientific data collection (e.g., community needs assessments).

Mixed methods. The use of mixed methods can also help create a stronger foundation for landscape architecture research. In theory, the use of multiple methods can increase the validity of a study by: providing a kind of methodological check, shoring up the weaknesses in one method with the strengths found in another, or collecting information on different aspects of

7 For example, the introduction of common economic measures and cost-benefit analysis has helped environmental scientists create an argument for the value of environmental services that is meaningful to people who believe in and value these methods. 8 See page 19.

the same issue and creating a more nuanced understanding of the study topic (e.g., Caracelli

2006). Mixing methods also, theoretically, gives researchers a way to compare and think about the methods they select for their research and these methods’ strengths and weaknesses.

Many researchers who use participant-generated and -interpreted images seem to recognize this since these methods are frequently used in concert with other methods (Bagnoli

2009; Kyle and Chick 2004; Snell and Hodgetts 2007). For example, in addition to freehand- area-map drawing, Kevin Lynch (1960) had participants modify standard base maps and narrate walks through the city; and Claire Cooper Marcus talked to participants about images that they generated to reflect their feelings about their homes in combination with photos that she took of their houses which she then used to “facilitate a dialogue between person and house” for House as a Mirror of the Self (1995, p. 9). However, many of these mixed methods studies give little or no indication of how their different methods contributed to their results or the study more generally (e.g., Belk, Ger, and Askegaard 2003; Kyle and Chick 2004; Snells and Hodgetts

2007).

This thesis demonstrates one possibility for discussing the performance of methods in a mixed method study. It does not attempt to provide information on how each method contributed directly to the results for enclosure and gardens, but it does provide information on the time demands placed on participants in each study arm, participants’ ratings and views of the methods, and more general information on the performance of these methods in this study.

Ultimately, the usefulness of any method will depend strongly on the person using it, the study topic, and the application, but this type of reporting can help researchers and practitioners better understand the methods available to them and how their own experiences and study design decisions impact method performance, which might, in turn, help unlock additional benefits.

Additional benefits. A fair amount of literature supports the use of images in qualitative research with studies finding that the use of images can help reduce the stress or strain of the interview process , bridge cultural gaps between the researcher and the researched, and help

interviewees elaborate on a topic by triggering meaning (Collier 1979; Cooper and Yarbrough

2010; Samuels 2007; Zeisel 2006). Participant-generated research methods may provide a

further advance for researchers interested in “broadening the scope of data access… [and]

opening up the complexities of the phenomenon being researched” (Guillemin and Drew 2010,

177). In addition, these types of methods may help participants to actively engage with the

research and think about how the themes of the research appear in their day to day lives (Heisley

and Levy 1991; Samuels 2007), unlock the door to unconscious thoughts (Zaltman 1997), or give

researchers a greater ability to see their research from multiple perspectives by ‘making the

familiar strange’ (Mannay 2010).

This study represents a small step toward improving communication through images. In

reality both ZMET and Photovoice may do better when paired more closely with landscape

architecture problems that better match their underlying theories. For example, Photovoice

might be particularly well suited to landscape architecture problems that revolve around

community design - especially projects that would benefit from an inventory of neighborhood

characteristics; while ZMET might perform better with research and projects geared toward

creating or evaluating designs for individual landscapes - since this would be more comparable

to the product analysis and development work it was designed for.

Additional studies and projects that use these methods or test variations of them should

help improve communication around client and community photos and help landscape architects

see more of the benefits that these methods promise, create better designs, and understand others’ perceptions of their designs and the landscape.

The next two chapters provide a closer examination of the theories, techniques, and previous use of Photovoice and ZMET.

CHAPTER 2

PHOTOVOICE

Figure 3. Test Card A. The first test card broadcast on the BBC network.

“Photographs, belonging to the photographers and to the people depicted and displayed in the community’s public spaces, may bear witness to otherwise individualized, yet truly public, issues.” – Wang & Burris (1997, 384)

Photovoice was developed in the early 1990s by Caroline Wang, DrPH, and Mary Ann

Burris, PhD, who wanted a way to understand the everyday “health and work realities” of

Chinese village women (Wang 1999; Wang and Burris 1997). The method is highly participatory and is designed to help participants: 1) assess and record their community’s strengths and concerns, 2) create a dialogue and common understanding of personal and community issues, and 3) involve policy makers (Wang 1999). Traditionally, subjects are recruited and trained, there is a period for photograph taking, and there is a group discussion where participants select photographs for discussion, contextualize and tell stories about their photographs, and help codify issues, themes, or theories. Published studies span a wide range of

topics and a diverse group of participants - including vulnerable populations (Baker and Wang

2006; Catalani and Minkler 2010; Cooper and Yarbrough 2010; Dixon and Hadjialexiou 2005;

Osseck, Hartman, and Cox 2010). Researchers have suggested that the greatest benefit of

Photovoice is its ability to build social connections and empower study participants (e.g., Foster-

Fishman, 2005; Wang & Burris, 1997). Recent work by Downey, Ireson, and Scutchfield (2008) also suggests that the products of Photovoice sessions may be used to help foster a larger community dialogue.

Theory.

Wang and Burris developed Photovoice using previous work in health education based on

the ideas of Brazilian educator Paulo Freire, feminist theories, a community-based approach to

documentary photography, and their own experience trying to adapt their ideas to the Yunnan

Women’s Reproductive Health and Development Program (Wang 1999; Wang and Burris 1997).

All of these influences reflect an interest in the knowledge of individuals and their everyday

realities.

Paulo Freire’s ideas have been widely influential in education and related fields;

including the philosophy of education and health education research (Wallerstein and Bernstein

1988) that directly influenced Wang and Burris (1997). 9 Freire “emphasized the importance of

providing people with the opportunity to speak from their own experiences, of helping them to

see connections among these experiences, and to discover, through the sharing of these

experiences, the root causes for some of their problems” (Cooper and Yarbrough 2010, 645). By

translating their individual issues into wider cultural concerns, Freire felt communities could

9 He is probably best known for his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed , which is available in both English and Spanish and has sold over a million copies.

develop a critical consciousness and develop a vision for future action (Purcell 2007). He used visual images (line drawings and photographs) to help create community dialogues, but did not have community members take their own photographs. Photovoice can therefore be seen as taking the concept “one step further so that the images of the community are made by the people themselves” (Wang and Burris 1997, 370).

Feminist theories created a similar push toward individual knowledge and everyday experiences in the social sciences. Wang (1999) calls attention to three themes that Weiler

(1988) identified as characterizing feminist methodology. The themes are 1) “an appreciation of women’s subjective experience as researchers, advocates, and participants,” 2) “a recognition of the significance of women’s experience,” and 3) “political commitment” instead of “disinterested scholarship or objectivity” (pp. 185-186). These themes support study methods that work with participants (not on them), are based on everyday experience, and attempt to improve the quality of life and health of study participants and their communities (Wang 1999).

Wang and Burris also acknowledge photographic studies and projects by individual photographers that impacted their development of Photovoice. Their 1997 article, “Photovoice:

Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment,” briefly runs through projects in photography research from Walker Evans, Dorothea Lange, and Ben Shahn’s work for the

Farm Security Administration (Hurley 1977) to Worth and Adair’s research for (1972) Through

Navajo Eyes and the Mekaron Opoi Doi project with the Kayapo Indians (Turner 1991);10 before

turning to contemporary photographers Wendy Ewald, Jo Spence, and Jim Hubbard. Ewald,

Spence, and Hubbard have taught photography to people all over the world, including: school

children, Appalachian youth, homeless children, and community groups, and used the

10 A series that demonstrates the shift from outsider/researcher focused image generation and interpretation to participant driven generation and interpretation.

photographs taken by these groups to raise awareness, improve understanding, and solve problems.

Together these three influences help support what Wang identifies as the key concepts in

Photovoice (Wang 1999, 2006). Originally five key concepts (1999), Wang’s most recent article

(2006) uses only the first three. The two discarded concepts are still presented as important considerations, but this shift seems to suggest less emphasis on action and may reflect the wider application of Photovoice to different types of studies.

The first of the original five key concepts, images teach, rests on the idea that images

“contribute to how we see ourselves, how we define and relate to the world, and what we perceive as significant or different” (p. 186). The second, pictures can influence policy, builds off the first concept and research findings that suggest images play an important role in framing cultural discussions and setting the public agenda (Cohen 1983); while the third, community people ought to participate in creating and defining the images that shape healthful public policy , argues that public policy should reflect what the public considers important. Together, these three concepts suggest that methods like Photovoice that use photographs taken and interpreted by community members provide important tools for generating meaning and framing public discussions.

The two discarded concepts emphasize the importance of action and researcher planning.

The fourth of the original five, the process requires that planners bring to the table from the outset policymakers and other influential people to serve as an audience for community people’s perspectives, reminds researchers that meaningful change relies on making the right connections.

Finally, the fifth, Photovoice emphasizes individual and community action, reflects the method’s

origins as a participatory action research technique designed to move the results of the work directly into informed action that can feedback into the participants’ communities.

Methodology & analysis.

Photovoice consists of several stages. Traditionally, subjects are recruited and trained, there is a period for photograph taking, and there is a discussion where participants select photographs for discussion, contextualize and tell stories about their photographs, and help codify issues, themes, or theories. Seven to ten people has been suggested as the ideal group size

(Wang 2006), but a synthesis of published studies found a range from 4 to 122 study participants

- with a mean of 20.9 and a standard deviation of 25.1 (Hergenrather et al. 2009).

Studies vary in how long the process continues, how many rounds of photograph collection and discussions are performed, and in the amount of participant involvement (Catalani and Minkler 2010; Hergenrather et al. 2009). Some projects have displayed very high levels of community participation, for instance Lykes, Blanche and Hambler (2003) trained a core group of participants “to assume all roles within the research process” (p. 84) and participants gained technical research skills (including data recording and analysis, financial accounting, and computer skills). While, on the other end of the spectrum, a number of research studies have modified Photovoice to do individual interviews where participants have no contact with each other (Baker and Wang 2006; Hou 2005; Oliffe et al. 2010; Samuels 2007; Thompson et al.

2008). Catalani and Minkler’s (2010) review of Photovoice studies in public health found that more participatory projects (with greater participant involvement, more rounds of picture taking, and stronger ties between the researcher and the community) result in better project outcomes and higher levels of empowerment; though the authors acknowledge that “flexibility in the levels

of participation according to the specific skills that different partner groups offer, the varying needs of different contributors, and the ethical challenges inherent in particular cases may enable broader applicability of this approach” (p. 448).

Workshops. Photovoice studies usually start with a workshop (or series of workshops) where things like photographic technique, ethical issues involved in photography, for example,

“when picture-taking is appropriate” and “respecting people’s choices about their inclusion in a photograph” (McIntyre 2003, 52), and the study itself are discussed. Photo assignments may be generated either by the researchers or by the study participants. There is no set format, and the assignments may be the same for the entire study or change to capture additional information. 11

Discussion. Focus group or individual discussions allow participants a forum to discuss their photos, issues, themes, and theories. Depending on the number of participants/photographs, it may be necessary to limit the discussion to a subset of the photographs. 12 Different researchers

have used different sets of questions to guide these discussions. Wang (1999) suggests using the

acronym SHOWeD to help participants frame the stories they tell (see Table 2); while other

researchers have used a different mnemonic, PHOTO (Graziano 2004; Hergenrather et al. 2009;

Hussey 2006; Mamary, Mccright, and Roe 2007), and still others have designed questions

specific to their studies or let the participants guide the discussion (McIntyre 2003).

11 My favorite wording comes from Oliffe et al.’s (2010) study of the smoking habits of fathers. Here, subjects were asked to “imagine that they were contributing photographs to an exhibition titled Smoking Through the Eyes of Fathers. ” 12 In Nowell et al.’s (2006) research, after each person in the study presented their photos, group members were each given five tokens to use to vote on the photos they wanted to discuss further and photos receiving the most tokens were then discussed.

Table 2. SHOWeD vs. PHOTO SHOWeD PHOTO What do you See here? Describe your Picture What is really Happening here? What is Happening in your picture? How does this relate to Our lives? Why did you take a picture Of this? Why does this situation, concern, or strength exist? What does this picture Tell us about your life? How can we become Empowered through our new How can this picture provide Opportunities for understanding? 13 us to improve life? What can we Do about it?

Analysis. Group discussion is often the only analysis used on a Photovoice project, though separate analyses are sometimes performed. In Hergenrather et al.’s (2009) review, it was also common for researchers to perform an independent analysis and present their results to study participants to “confirm accuracy and make modifications” (p. 694). There has also been some attempt to link Photovoice with other analysis techniques; including Haque’s (2010) use of concept mapping.

Previous use.

Photovoice has been used in a wide range of studies in the social sciences and health and education research; from examining political violence (Lykes, Blanche, and Hamber 2003), discrimination (Graziano 2004), infectious disease epidemics (Mamary, Mccright, and Roe

2007), and chronic health problems (Baker and Wang 2006) to investigating the development of

Heavy Metal communities (Snell and Hodgetts 2007). Research has involved a diverse set of participants; including vulnerable populations such as adolescents (Wang 2006), seniors (Baker and Wang 2006), the homeless (Dixon and Hadjialexiou 2005; Wang, Cash, and Powers 2000), people living with HIV/AIDS (Hergenrather, Rhodes, and Clark 2006; Rhodes 2006), and underserved communities across the world (Catalani and Minkler 2010).

13 The question for the ‘e’ in SHOWeD appears in Hergenrather et al.’s (2009) review, but not in Wang’s (1999) original mnemonic or most recent article (2006).

The technique has also been used in at least two landscape architecture applications and in several studies related to landscape architecture. Jeffrey Hou, PhD, (2005) used Photovoice in individual interviews with a small group of elderly, Asian American gardeners to gather information for a design project in Seattle; and Allegra Churchill received a 2010 ASLA Student

Award for her project Flood, Flow, Flux: Livelihoods on the Kafue Flats, Zambia which used

Photovoice in conjunction with quantitative data to “create fresh understandings of the complex ecological, economic and social repercussions of a dam on a dynamic floodplain environment in

Zambia” (American Society of Landscape Architects 2011). Related studies have looked at the physical characteristics of neighborhoods (Nowel et al. 2006; University of Ottawa 2010) and

“the formulation and reformulation of place and identity within contexts of everyday life”

(McIntyre 2003, 47).

Finally, Photovoice has been adapted for use outside traditional research applications. It has been used as a learning tool for middle school science students (Cook and Buck 2010), to foster student engagement in middle school and high school English classes (Zenkov and

Harmon 2009), and adopted by non-profit groups in the UK ( http://www.photovoice.org ) and

Canada ( http://www.photovoice.ca ). There is also some indication that Photovoice may also be a useful method for developing pamphlets and other materials for larger community discussions

(Downey, Ireson, and Scutchfield 2008).14

14 In this study, researchers used Photovoice to develop pamphlets and investigated how the distribution of these pamphlets at community forums contributed to forum conversations. Findings suggest that “deliberative environments, such as forums or community discussions, can be enhanced by presenting visual prompts of local areas taken by community members…” and “Pictures and narratives from Photovoice projects can be a springboard for fostering dialogue in a community about local needs and assets.”

CHAPTER 3

THE ZALTMAN METAPHOR ELICITATION TECHNIQUE (ZMET)

Figure 4. Test Card B. Used behind the scenes (not broadcast).

“Probably 95% of all cognition, all the thinking that drives our decisions and behaviors, occurs unconsciously… That’s not to say that the 5% we’re privy to is unimportant – just that marketers overemphasize its importance, because it’s so visible and easy to access. ZMET gets at the thinking that’s not so visible or easy to access.” – Gerald Zaltman (quoted in Morse 2002, 26)

“The implications of the Deep Design Process on the future role that architecture plays in shaping human experiences are dramatic and far-reaching. Never before have we tapped the unconscious and conscious essence of the end-user experience to design spaces that contribute so profoundly to our client’s core objectives.”- Louis Astorino (quoted in Astorino Press Release 2011)

Gerald Zaltman developed the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) in the early 1990s when he was working as a professor at the Harvard Business School (Catchings-

Castello 2000). It is a patented technique (Zaltman 1997) so most ZMET studies are performed by trained researchers at Olson Zaltman and Associates ( http://www.olsonzaltman.com/ ); though

there are a fair number of published studies by both Zaltman researchers and others academics interested in the method. 15 ZMET relies on research and theory from a number of fields including neurobiology, psychoanalysis, linguistics, and art theory (Zaltman 1997), and the process used varies across studies, with some steps added and others omitted, but the method always involves pictures collected by participants as the basis for semi-structured interviews. 16

The method has been used extensively in consumer research, adapted for academic studies, and used to help resolve conflicts and gather information for building designs.

This chapter will provide an overview of the theory behind ZMET, its methodology and

analysis, and its uses.

Theory.

In an early article, Gerald Zaltman describes nine premises that form the foundation for

ZMET (Zaltman 1997). For the purposes of discussion I’m going to break these up into four

general concepts. 17 The first basic concept is that visuals are important ; this is supported by two

premises (see Table 3).

The first premise, thought is image-based, not word-based, challenges the assumption

that words are the foundation of thought. 18 Zaltman supports this premise using research that shows images can be experienced as conscious thought (Damasio 1994) and that images are used in information processing (Kosslyn 1994). He then uses this premise to argue: “that by

15 Academic research with ZMET is not restricted. 16 At least in published research. OZA apparently also does some studies using image banks. 17 NOTE: These conceptual divisions are mine, not Zaltman’s. 18 This argument may be slightly controversial - depending on the way one defines thought. It is possible to argue that ‘conceptual thinking’ is based on language (Vygotsky 1986), but this is a rather narrow definition. Using a broader definition and including things like unconscious thought, spatial recognition, etc. this is almost common sense. As Zaltman’s article points out using this quotation from Edelman (1992, p. 108): “Conceptual capabilities develop in evolution well before speech.”

developing methods for engaging and/or monitoring imagic activity more directly, managers and customers can be moved closer to the way their thought occurs and thereby provide more complete representations of their thoughts and accounts of their behaviors” (p. 425).

The second premise pushes the importance of Table 3. ZMET concepts & premises visuals further with the help of scientific studies that Concept 1. Visuals Are Important have tried to quantify the importance of verbal 1 Thought is image-based, not word based. messages in human communication. This research 2 Most communication is nonverbal. Concept 2. Metaphors Are Important suggests that somewhere between 7 and 30 percent of 3 Metaphor is central to thought. communication is contained in verbal language 4 Metaphors are important in eliciting hidden knowledge. (Birdwhistell 1970; Mehrabian 1971); leaving the Concept 3. Senses, Emotions, and the Unconscious Are Important remaining percentage to spatial cues, temporal cues, 5 Cognition is embodied. eye contact, gaze, pupil dilation, touch, and 6 Emotion and reason are equally important and commingle in decision paralanguage. Further, when verbal and visual making. 7 Most thought, emotion, and learning information is contradictory, nonverbal cues are often occur without awareness. believed over verbal ones (Knapp 1980), and visual Concept 4. The Mental Model 8 Mental models guide the selection representations are more likely to be internalized and processing of stimuli. 9 Different mental models may interact. without logical scrutiny and counterarguing (Andersen

2008).

Together these premises suggest that verbocentric methodologies (like surveys and focus groups) could be enriched “with techniques that accommodate nonverbal expressions of perception, learning and thought” (Zaltman 1997, 425).

The second basic concept is that metaphors are important. This concept is supported by premises three and four. Zaltman supports the third premise, metaphor is central to thought,

with work in linguistics, philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience that suggests metaphors are critical in structuring and expanding our ideas about the world (Allbritton 1995; Burgess and

Chiarello 1996; Gibbs 1992; Glucksberg 1991; Goldman 1986; Honeck 1996; Lakoff and

Johnson 1980). The basic idea is that metaphors allow us to couch one thing in terms of another, and this provides a way for us to “project structure, make new connections, and remold our experience” (Johnson 1987, p. 169). 19

The fourth premise, metaphors are important in eliciting hidden knowledge , finds some support in psychotherapy, where therapists have used metaphors to help patients uncover unconscious experiences (Ingram 1994; Kopp 1995). Zaltman (1997) uses this research and premise three to argue that “consumers are likely to process information metaphorically even when that is not the communicators intent” and that “methods designed to elicit and analyze metaphors systematically could significantly augment knowledge gained from more literal, verbocentric approaches” (p. 425).

The third basic concept supports well rounded research by arguing for the importance of

the senses, emotion, and the unconscious . This concept pulls together the fifth, sixth, and

seventh premises.

The fifth premise, cognition is embodied , argues that physical embodied knowledge is the basis of our understanding of abstract concepts (and the link between the two is accomplished through metaphor which allows us to couch the abstract idea in terms of the physical one). This is known as the ‘embodied cognition thesis.’ This premise suggests that the abstract concept of

‘enclosure’ would be meaningless without a connection to an embodied experience. Zaltman

19 Readers interested in metaphor may also be interested in philosopher Susanne Langer (who is often cited in discussions of metaphor), and podcast listeners might enjoy Radiolab’s Words episode: http://www.radiolab.org/2010/aug/09/ (skip ahead to minute 11 for the most relevant information on recent work with metaphors).

uses it to suggest that metaphors related to the senses and spatial orientation are likely to exist, and these may provide further insights for researchers.

The sixth premise, emotion and reason are equally important and commingle in decision making, reflects current scientific thinking that sees reason and feeling as necessary (and connected) components of decision-making. 20 This premise supports the use of methods that attempt to collect rational and emotional information from study participants.

Finally, the seventh premise, most thought, emotion, and learning occur without

awareness, sees consciousness as “the end result of a largely unconscious system of neural information processing (LeDoux 1996) and associated implicit learning (Seger 1994)” (Zaltman

1997, 427).21 This premise is, somewhat disconcertingly, supported by research on memory

distortion which suggests “what is remembered is a creative product of prior experience, current

beliefs, and future preconscious plans” (Zaltman 1997, 427; see also Nisbett and Wilson 1977,22

Wegner and Wheatley 1999).

Together these premises support the use of projective techniques in ZMET and the

importance of studying “unconscious but accessible events and processes” (Zaltman 1997, 427).

Originally developed in clinical psychology, projective techniques are used to try to obtain

information that people are unwilling or unable to disclose (Khoo-Lattimore, Thyne, and

Robertson 2009). Word association tests, sentence completion, non-directive questioning, and

20 The original Zaltman article gives a good description. Interested pop science readers may also enjoy Jonah Lehrer’s (2009) How we decide. 21 See Wilson’s (2002) Strangers to ourselves: Discovering the adaptive unconscious for an easy-to-read overview. 22 Nisbett and Wilson’s (1977) article is the classic (and often repeated) example. This experiment had to do with the positioning of identical nylon stockings on a display board. Despite the fact that the stockings were the same, the right-most stocking was chosen four times more than the other stockings. Study participants justified their preferences based on stocking qualities and “denied that the position of the stocking had any influence whatsoever on their choice” (Gardenfors 2000).

the Rorschach test are all examples of projective techniques. All of these techniques provide a neutral stimulus that subjects give meaning to - with the idea that the meanings they assign reflects their personality and cultural values (Heisley and Levy 1991). “Because pictures are so basic, information rich and attribute-laden, they can be associated with multiple related higher- order constructs” (Coulter and Zaltman 1994, 502); so many different ideas can be projected onto them. In ZMET, the photographs that participants collect are used to look for underlying meanings and metaphors.

The last concept is essentially a way of understanding thought: the mental model . It is supported by the final two premises. The eighth premise, mental models guide the selection and processing of stimuli, argues that we see the world through the lens of mental models and that we look for evidence that conforms to our existing models.

Zaltman argues this literally - mental models are defined as clusters of neuronal groups that connect related ideas (Eimas and Galaburda 1990) and the claim that we ‘look for evidence’ to support our models is backed with research on eye movements (Kosslyn and Koenig 1992) and eye focus (Hochberg 1972). “Thus, what we know – our mental models – and how what we know is represented by metaphor literally influences what we sense, and what we sense influences what we know” (Zaltman 1997, 427).

Zaltman uses premise eight to argue that “research methods need to go beyond identifying relevant constructs” and look for the underlying structure of the mental model (p.

427).

With premise nine, he adds an important dimension, namely that different mental models may interact , and that they should be considered “fluid and connected” (Millgram 1997) - not static. Constructs that are part of any one mental model may be associated with additional

mental models and gain in significance as the number of mental models that connect to it increase. Zaltman uses this premise to argue that there are “core constructs” or “deep metaphors” that are central to thought. 23

The mental model can be seen as the foundation for the use of consensus maps as a tool

to analyze the data generated by ZMET interviews. These ‘maps’ are visual representations that

attempt to demonstrate: 1) how different mental constructs are connected and 2) which

constructs are the most significant. (Additional information on consensus maps is provided in

the analysis section (below) or see Christensen and Olson 2002 or Zaltman 1996).

Methodology.

ZMET uses small populations and somewhat lengthy, semi-structured interviews to

gather information. Validation studies suggest that four to five interviews using ZMET capture

up to 90% of the information provided in additional interviews (Zaltman and Coulter 1995), but

published studies usually have slightly larger samples with eight to sixteen participants (Khoo-

Lattimore, Thyne, and Robertson 2009; Vorell 2003) and one published study used responses

from 33 participants (Chen 2006).

Though relatively uncommon in ZMET studies, some researchers have applied selection

criteria to their study populations. Ling et al. (2009) had an initial group of subjects take a

Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) “because high involvement often correlates with high

product knowledge and expertise… thus the highly involved respondents are likely to have

elaborate and complex mental models” (p. 955). And Khoo-Lattimore et al.’s (2009) study of

23 In 2008 the Zaltmans’ released Marketing metaphoria: What deep metaphors reveal about the minds of consumers , which posits the existence of 7 universal, deep metaphors: balance, transformation, journey, container, connection, resource, and control.

housing preferences used respondents that had recently put an offer in on a house that they were buying for themselves (and not as an investment) since previous research on housing preferences have used intended or hypothetical choices – and it has been argued that the hypothetical homebuyer does not have a sound idea of his or her priorities and considerations until confronted with concrete alternatives in a real home buying process.

In each study, participants are given instructions (usually about seven days prior to a scheduled interview) that ask them to: 1) focus on a specific thing and 2) collect pictures (usually

8 to 11) related to these ideas (Christensen and Olson 2002; Khoo-Lattimore, Thyne, and

Robertson 2009; Ling et al. 2009). The interview is semi-structured – following a series of steps predetermined by the researcher. Eleven steps are described in the ZMET literature, but the actual steps used vary across studies

(see Table 4 or Appendix A pp. 94-6 Table 4. The 11 ZMET steps 1. Storytelling 7. Opposite image for a complete, detailed description of 2. Missed issues and 8. Sensory images

24 images 9. The summary image these steps). 3. Sorting task 10. The vignette 4. Metaphor elicitation 11. Mental map (or A qualitative technique called 5. Metaphor elaboration consensus map) 6. Representative image laddering is used throughout the interview to gain additional insights. This technique uses a series of probes, mainly asking “why is that important to you” (Thyne 2001). Originally developed for use with the Kelly Repertory

Grid technique, laddering tries to move the participant along a ‘ladder of abstraction’ (Miles and

Rowe 2004).

Most studies report interviews lasting between 1.5 and 2.5 hours, and some report compensation for study participants.

24 NOTE: 14 steps are listed in the patented ZMET process (Zaltman 1995), and the three additional steps focus specifically on the study participants’ views of the company producing the product under study.

Analysis.

Analysis varies across studies, though most authors report transcribing the interviews and

performing some kind of coding to generate common themes. 25 These themes are sometimes reported informally with supportive quotes, but more structured consensus maps are also common.

Consensus maps performed on data sets can be seen as representing “(a) most of the thinking of (b) most of the people (c) most of the time” (Coulter and Zaltman 1994, 505; for an example of a consensus map see Appendix A p. 97). Usually they are generated with the help of computer programs that: 1) keep track of the number of times a concept is mentioned and how it connects to other concepts and 2) aggregate this data for multiple participants. 26 Instead of displaying all of the data collected in every interview, most consensus maps have a cutoff point.

For example, Ling (2009) required that one-third of participants mention a concept before it was considered a theme and a relationship between two themes had to be mentioned by three participants before they were mapped.

It is important to note that consensus maps contain three types of constructs: originating constructs, destination constructs, and transmitters (or constructs that act as middle men; Coulter and Zaltman 1994). It is often recommended that these maps are read from the central construct to the destination construct so “those constructs considered most essential will be identified first, allowing the reader to quickly grasp the emphasis and flow represented within each mental map”

(Sugai 2005, 648).

25 At least one group of researchers has asked participants follow up questions during analysis to check their results (Joy et al. 2009). 26 OZA has also developed proprietary software that creates their consensus maps.

Another common way of displaying data is using the composite images generated by participants during the interview process and accompanied by quotes from the participants (for an example summary image see Appendix A p. 98). In addition, there have been nonverbal sensory dictionaries “made up of the pictures and sensory data that different consumers use to convey the constructs” (Coulter and Zaltman 1994, 506) and interactive computer programs

(Zaltman 1996). And, in their 2001 article on the value of advertising, Coulter, Zaltman, and

Coulter used the themes that were generated by ZMET interviews to create their own conceptual metaphors. The positive values reported by participants were described as the hostess, teacher, counselor, enabler, magician, performer, and engine; and the negative values were described as the omnipresent being, nosy neighbor, con-man, seducer, and evil therapist. This article also attempted to quantify the tone of the interview and broke participants into three groups for further analysis.

Previous use.

ZMET is best known in consumer research; but previously published studies span a wide range of topics including: what women think about nylons (Zaltman and Coulter 1995), perceptions of advertising (Coulter, Zaltman, and Coulter 2001), consumer home choice (Khoo-

Lattimore, Thyne, and Robertson 2009), comparing black and white student subcultures in a university setting (Vorell 2003), the influences of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) behaviors among high-risk young adults (Calder and Aitken 2008), sport tourist loyalty (Chen 2010; Chen 2006), the meaning of the internet (Joy et al. 2009), the adoption of 3G Mobile banking services (Lee et al. 2003), and feelings of powerlessness among women in 12-step recovery programs (Matheson

2005).

Though no landscape architects appear to have adopted this method, it has been used by architects. A Pittsburg architecture firm, Astorino, has used ZMET data in their designs for the

“Children’s Hospital of Pittsburg, a condominium complex, a residential home, and a city park”

(Conley 2005, 39) and have patented a version of the process.27 In a press release (Astorino

2011), Louis D. Astorino, the company’s chairman is quoted as saying:

“Deep Design resonates with - and builds upon the visual metaphors that people use to convey their most personal needs. In a pediatric hospital environment, our research uncovered that at its most basic level, healing is really about transformation. We found that this transformation, from sickness to healing, consists of three key domains: connection, control and energy. The interpretation of these powerful themes will be seen and felt in the material, shape, space and colors that will become the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh.”

Physical design features include a “Transformation Corridor” that “expresses the evolution of

healing through design elements suggestive of change or transformation ” (Astorino 2004, p. 7;

emphasis added); lounges, a fitness center, and a healing garden designed to help hospital users

renew their energy ; a greater emphasis on patient privacy and homelike fabrics and colors to

increase feelings of control; and a color palette of Grass Green, Robin’s Egg Blue, and Sunshine

Yellow was introduced to respond to connection “and its corresponding dimension of ‘escaping’ through color” (p. 8).

27 “The deep design filter method for design” (Astorino 2006).

CHAPTER 4

THE STUDY

Figure 5. SMPTE color bars

“The interpretive approach argues that not everything that is important can be measured with precision and that trying to do so is a distracting a nd inappropriate task. Similarly, searching for universally applicable social laws can distract from learning what people know and how they understand their lives” - Herbert & Irene Rubin (1995, 35)

The final shape of this study owes a lot to the books an d articles I read to prepare for my interviews; especially Herbert and Irene Rubins’ (1995) Qualitative Interviewing and an article by Moisan der, Valtonen and Hirsto (2009) titled, “Personal interviews in cultural consumer research - post-structuralist challenges.”

The Rubins’ book argues for a “flexible, iterative, and continuous de sign process” where the questions, topic, and types of people interviewed can all be changed to adapt to new information. The ability to adapt one’s work is very enticing, especially to someone new to research, since it is almost impossible to determine w here methods are weak without testing

them to find out. It is also probably very enticing to people who are drawn to qualitative research in general since the beauty of this research is its unpredictability and openness.

The Rubin’s model is based on an interpretive approach (see the top of this chapter) and feminist techniques of interviewing. The authors argue, “Qualitative research is not looking for principles that are true all the time and in all conditions, like laws of physics; rather, the goal is understanding of specific circumstances, how and why things actually happen in a complex world” (p. 38). This argument can be pushed (and is pushed) further by authors who suggest that it is not just circumstances that are complex and relative - but the meanings that we ascribe to these circumstances.

As the title of their article suggests, Moisander, Valtonen and Hirsto (2009) discuss personal interviews in the context of post-structuralism.28 From this perspective, the meaning of an interview is constructed during the interview as a collaborative process. As the authors describe it:

“Meanings are not constructed “out there” in the marketplace. They are rather produced collaboratively in the course of the interview by the interviewer and the interviewee, who are guided, constrained and enabled by the particular discursive resources (cultural discourses and practices) that are available in the situation” (p. 339).

This idea is also frequently presented in books on interviewing, for example:

“Meaning is not merely elicited by apt questioning nor simply transported through respondent replies; it is actively and communicatively assembled in the interview encounter. Respondents are not so much repositories of knowledge - treasures of information awaiting excavation - as they are constructors of knowledge in collaboration with interviewers”(Holstein and Gubrium 1995, 4).29

28 Post-structuralism largely centers around the production of meaning in cultural products (e.g., texts). 29 NOTE: The cultural construction of the meaning is not universally agreed on in qualitative research. For example, methods like ZMET are built on the idea that people are communicating a personal truth. Post-structuralists would argue that this is impossible since the very act of communicating would shift the idea toward a meaning that was culturally constructed.

If people’s ideas are relative, method performance is relative, and the truth of the process is relative, studies become more like design problems. Rather than trying to determine universal truths, the best method of design, or the single best design for a space, it makes more sense to focus on how well a design captures a particular time, population, designer, and set of ideas. In this chapter I will try to paint a clear picture of all of the variables that helped contribute to this study by discussing study design, protocol, and analysis. It’s worth highlighting that both the methods and Pattern 173 are taken far from their original context in this study. Photovoice was designed to work as a participatory action research technique, but here there is no link to individual empowerment or the larger community. ZMET was originally designed to tap into deeply held personal meanings, but a post-structuralist position suggests that this is impossible. 30

Finally, the patterns in Pattern Language are not meant to be isolated, but viewed as a whole, and this study pulls just one pattern for discussion. These modifications may mean that the methods are less effective or that the pattern is less robust than they would be in other settings, but all research is about trying out new things and both Photovoice and ZMET were developed from similar thefts and adaptations so perhaps this study is closer to them in spirit than it would otherwise seem.

Study design.

This study was originally designed to see: 1) how ZMET and Photovoice would perform on a landscape architecture problem and 2) if the methodological and theoretical differences in the methods would be enough to produce different results 3) even when the methods were

30 If the truth is constructed in a cultural context, then visuals used in research cannot provide “first-person accounts that help researchers reveal personal and unique meanings” - instead they become mechanisms for generating cultural talk (Moisander 2009, 342).

performed by a relatively untrained qualitative researcher. 31 The basic idea was to run three

study arms - ZMET, Photovoice, and a control arm using word-only (verbocentric) interviews to

help provide a baseline.

Since these methods (especially ZMET) are time consuming, a lot of other decisions were

made to try to increase my chances of getting study participants. I decided to leverage my social

capital and recruit from friends and acquaintances,32 and I decided to use a more theoretical question that would not require people to: go to a specific place, have any specific knowledge, or complete their participation within a certain time period. I also wanted to pick a topic that was widely applicable to different groups of people that might benefit them or interest them in some way.

To generate my theoretical question, I turned to Christopher Alexander et al.’s (1977)

Pattern Language. Pattern Language sets up various patterns that the authors argue contribute to effectively designed spaces. It also grades its’ recommendations with asterisks to indicate how good the authors believe the pattern is; setting up a series of potential design questions for researchers who are interested in studying these patterns.

Pattern 173 - Garden Wall - was selected because of its low certainty rating on the asterisk system, 33 its obvious connection to landscape architecture, and its potential interest to people outside the profession who might be able to use the discussion and ideas related to it to

31 Since most landscape architects do not have a background in qualitative research, this (theoretically) provides a good test of how the methods might be expected to perform in typical practice and research. 32 Originally, I intended to recruit people from within the department and from Oconee County Jazzercise (where I teach aerobics several nights a week). Ultimately, I decided I did not have enough time to complete a matching set of non-LA interviews so this part of the study was dropped, but there are a few comments in the results and conclusion section that will discuss my limited interactions with non-landscape architects for this thesis. 33 It was given one asterisk, which signifies “we believe that we have made some progress towards identifying such an invariant: but that with careful work it will certainly be possible to improve on the solution. In these cases, we believe it would be wise for you to treat the pattern with a certain amount of disrespect - and that you seek out variants of the solution which we have given, since there are almost certainly possible ranges of solutions which are not covered by what we have written” (p. xiv).

improve their own gardens (see Appendix A pp. 92-3 for the full text of Pattern 173). ‘Garden

Wall’ was used to develop instructions for the study (see Appendix B), but the recruitment email and instructions provided no reference to the original pattern or Christopher Alexander.

Study methods. Both ZMET and Photovoice were modified slightly for this study. The

Photovoice arm was run as individual interviews instead of as a focus group (or groups) to provide for an easier comparison to ZMET. Though this is not completely unorthodox, it is a significant change (for a full discussion see page 68). I also did not perform any type of the traditional participant training; 34 the participants were allowed to collect photographs in addition

to taking their own (to reduce the burden on study participants and better match the ZMET arm);

and I modified the traditional Photovoice questions to more directly relate to the topic (see Table

5).

Table 5. Questions used during the Photovoice interview Describe your picture. What is happening in your picture? Why did you take a picture of this? What does this picture tell us about enclosure? How can this picture be used as an opportunity to improve small gardens?

In the ZMET arm I selected six of the eleven exercises mentioned in the ZMET literature: storytelling, missed issues and images, the sorting task, metaphor elicitation, metaphor elaboration, and the summary image.35 Some of these steps would be very strange to leave out

(particularly the first two, storytelling and missed issues and images, since they set up the remaining steps). Additional steps were chosen based on my own interest, their relative popularity in the literature, and the promise of interesting visuals.

34 Since all study participants were well versed in taking pictures and the images were not being used outside the study. 35 NOTE: ZMET studies typically select several exercises instead of performing all 11.

Briefly, in the steps that were selected: participants describe their images ( storytelling ) and any ideas they had that they could not find images of ( missed issues and images ) and the missed issues and images are written on blank sheets of paper and added to the original pile of photos so that they can be used during the subsequent steps. During the sorting task, the participants group their images in whatever way they see fit and discuss the sort. The metaphor elicitation task is similar, but creates a forced sort. Here, three images are grouped together, and the participant must sort them so that two are placed together and the third cast aside. In the metaphor elaboration step, the participant is asked to expand the frame of selected photos and describe what could be added to the photos to reinforce or negate their meaning. Finally, the summary image step has participants create a single image (using Photoshop software and digital copies of their images) that represents their ideas about the study topic. (Additional information on these steps and the ZMET steps that were not chosen for this study is provided in Appendix A pp. 94-8).

The individual interview was left relatively unstructured. After welcoming and thanking participants, this interview was designed to ask people what decisions they had “come to about enclosure in gardens” (see Appendix B p. 105 for this interview protocol and pp. 103-4 the protocols for the ZMET and Photovoice arms). The original questions developed for the individual interview to keep the conversation moving had to do with things like the participant’s definitions for gardens and enclosure, how the variables they identified related to each other, and how these variables could be used to drive better design.

All of the study arms were also asked questions about themes and examples that were generated in previous interviews. Over the course of the interview process, this list grew to include: safety, movement, the elements (i.e., weather), intimacy, control, juxtaposition, culture,

darkness, form, the ideal garden space, participant’s use of enclosure when designing for studio projects, and their take on unusual examples that were generated in other interviews.

The more active or journalistic interviewing style adopted in this study and the decision to pull themes, issues, and topics through the process greatly impacted study results. This choice allowed me to learn more about how different individual’s preferences and perceptions were seen by the group as a whole and achieve a more nuanced understanding of the themes and ideas generated by study participants. The change also blurred the boundaries between the study methods; showing how the methods function in combination, though this means I cannot say how the methods would have performed or what information they would have generated without this researcher interference and it pushes the methods further from their original format.

Procedures. I recruited study participants from students in the 3 rd year of the Masters of

Landscape Architecture program at the University of Georgia (UGA) using a recruitment email

approved by the UGA IRB (see Appendix B, p. 100). This email gave a brief description of the

study arms and an estimation of the time required for participants, but withheld information

about the topic of the interviews (and associated photo assignments) in an attempt to standardize

the amount of time participants in each arm had with the topic before their interview. People

who were interested in the study were asked to respond and say which arm (or arms) they would

be interested in participating in since allowing people to select their own study arm seemed like

it would not only increase peoples’ willingness to participate - but provide some indication of

how the increased time commitments required by the photo arms (and ZMET in particular)

would affect interest in these methods.

I met with potential participants to answer questions and go over the study and had them

fill out consent forms before providing study instructions. My original goal was to meet back

one week later for the interview - but this was flexible and more often than not changed to accommodate peoples’ schedules. The instructions were relatively consistent across the study arms (see Appendix B pps. 101-2). The ZMET and Photovoice arms received the same instructions, and this differed from the one provided to the control arm by only two sentences related to the collection of pictures. A very small inducement to participate was provided in the form of food and/or beverages during the interview, so many of the interviews were held in or near restaurants in downtown Athens.

All of the interviews were taped with permission, and a final survey was used to collect data on: how participants viewed the process, the time they spent preparing, if they would participate in a similar study again, and general comments. Participants could chose to fill out a paper copy or an online survey. In addition I tracked the time between the consent and interview, the length of the interview, and my time on study (including: scheduling, transcription, and analysis), and kept notes on the interviewing process.

Analysis. To generate results for the methods, basic statistics were run on the quantitative data provided by study participants on the final survey and to determine average interview times and additional time spent by the researcher. The method results also include: an overview of free responses to questions asked on the final survey, my experience with the study methods supported with text from the interviews, and suggestions for researchers interested in doing similar work (see Chapter 6). Chapter 6 also includes basic information about the study participants and a discussion of study limitations.

To generate results for the study topic, the interviews were transcribed and coded for themes. These are presented in Chapter 5.

CHAPTER 5

STUDY RESULTS

Figure 6. The ITA Picasso test card

“Every citizen has had long associations with some part of his city, and his image is soaked in memories and meanings.” Kevin Lynch (1960, 1)

The way people defined and talked about enclosure during the interviews was often fundamentally different. Though there were some areas of agreement (e.g., some kinds of spaces are generally agreed on as being physically enclosed), a lot of the rest of people’s ideas - how they defined the feeling of enclosure, what kinds of things disrupt enclosure, the role of culture in creating enclosure, if paths and thresholds can be enclosures… these kinds of things all changed from person to person.

In this chapter I will present common themes that appeared during the interview process.

It’s possible, perhaps likely, that participants in the process may not agree with all of these ideas, but I hope that they will see themselves and their perceptions and preferences represented at least some of the time.

The themes.

In this section, I have relied heavily on the issues and themes that I asked people about during the interview process (see pp.36-7). These have been slightly reorganized and combined with additional themes from the interview transcripts. They are presented as: the feeling of enclosure, uses for enclosure, the importance of juxtaposition, forms and materials, environmental conditions, cultural variables, and personal variables and safety . In an effort to keep this chapter concise and readable, I have tried to limit myself to presenting a few examples for each point. Additional quotes and participant images are provided in Appendix C pp. 108-22.

The feeling of ‘enclosure.’ Study participants attached a number of feelings to enclosure. This section will talk first about just the feeling of the word, the connotation of

‘enclosure,’ before describing the types of feelings related to enclosures themselves.

On the whole study participants felt ‘enclosure’ had a positive or neutral connotation.

For people with a positive association, too much or a negative type of enclosure was often considered something else:

I was thinking of enclosure as a positive thing when I came here, and I didn’t even consider a negative aspect of it. I guess I didn’t think of that as enclosure. The only negative thing I was thinking about enclosure was if there wasn’t enough. You know like the lack of that barrier between you and the activity or you and the pathway or whatever.

I guess it was last week when I was like, ‘I’m having trouble with the negative aspects of enclosure because it gets to entrapment almost to me.’

Only one participant reported a negative association with the word, and her interview provided a stark contrast from the others. For this participant, enclosure was linked more with feeling

‘closed off’ or ‘closed in’ and the effective design of enclosed spaces was usually discussed in terms of meeting a functional requirement with the enclosure while maintaining or highlighting the openness or connectedness of the space as much as possible.

…you know the idea of like the traditional yard fence that closes you out and really focuses your attention like inside the space whereas a more perforated enclosure would allow you to like see out and sort of bridge between spaces… Participants who had neutral responses to the word linked their association to the context of the enclosure, and here the link to gardens helped push ‘enclosure’ more toward the positive:

In a garden setting I think it’s positive. In general - like in the built environment in general - I think it’s more of a neutral thing ‘cause it’s very dependent on… like if I were in a city like an alleyway in a city that I’m not familiar with for example that’s a very enclosed space and if I don’t know anything about the city… if that’s the first time I’ve gone through that alleyway… I’d feel very uncomfortable. It would be a negative thing…

Regardless of their initial feeling toward the word, study participants generated a number of feelings that could be attached to enclosed spaces (both positive and negative). For the most part, both the positive and negative feelings of enclosure were related to the closed side of enclosure. Things like intimacy, privacy, and security or entrapment, confinement, and claustrophobia.

Table 6. Positive and negative feelings related to enclosure Positive Negative Protection and intimacy: Entrapment: I mean I lived in Paris for quite a while, and I’m I can remember walking through here – just feeling almost thinking of when I was there sometimes the like I shouldn’t… (A) I shouldn’t be there – we’re entire city would feel like an enclosure to me - like in someone’s house and (B) it’s just like I – I don’t a sort of protection - and then within that entire feel safe. I feel like I’m entrapped. city scale there were moments of intimacy whether it be just this little public courtyard that you would Refuge makes it sound like a safety blanket - like, just kind of come across or if you were just walking ‘Oh I can go there for safety,’ but sometimes it’s down a street at night and feeling sort of that sense actually the exact opposite. If you feel trapped it’s of intimacy with the space… a scary sensation that you’re all of the sudden enclosed and you can’t get out. Order: Disorder: I think enclosure gives the feeling of order. Like we I’m thinking now of the Five Points area or like Ike were talking about the demarcation of a boundary and Jane’s maybe where they have that outdoor and your place. seating area, but somehow it’s like too much for it to be comfortable. […] Either it’s not enclosed enough or it’s not – There’s too much traffic or too much noise… It fights against this kind of feeling of being comfortable I guess.

Study participants also suggested that you have to be inside the space in order to know if it is enclosed or not.

When designing, it’s more… Okay - you can’t really feel the space, but then once the space is built, and then when you are in it, you can feel it - if it’s enclosed or open.

I started looking through books and magazines for pictures, and there were things that I thought maybe would give me a sense of enclosure if I was there, but I was really hesitant to choose that not having experienced it firsthand.

I feel like in order to be – and I guess it makes sense – but like to have enclosure you have to be kind of inside the space… like looking at a space from the outside it’s hard to say whether or not that would create a sense of enclosure.

Vertical elements and/or a ceiling aren’t necessarily enough to provide the feeling of enclosure.

…Even though really you’re enclosed in a forest setting because you’ve got lots of trees and underbrush and everything around you - so you’ve got stuff around you - to me that doesn’t seem enclosed in a garden sense because it’s all the same everywhere. But when you go and you like walk into that clearing or even are viewing that little clearing that space inside there feels - that’s what I think of as enclosure ‘cause you can actually feel it - like notice it. You notice that you feel it versus it just being the case.

Even though it’s literally an enclosure, it just seems like delineation rather than actual creation of a feeling of enclosure…

Uses for enclosure. Many of the uses participants described for enclosure were related

to the boundaries that create these spaces and their role in: providing safety and control,

buffering, defining the space and its ownership, screening and providing privacy, and framing

the space or directing attention; though participants also mentioned using enclosure to create

different types of experiences and as a way of creating spots for resting.

When asked whether they thought about and used enclosure in studio projects,

participants brought up some of the same uses, but frequently placed more emphasis on trying to

create a certain feeling for the space. Table 7 provides examples from both the general

discussion and the participants’ discussions of enclosure in studio.

Table 7. Uses for enclosure - in general and in studio. Boundaries - maintaining safety and control In general: If it’s for Alzheimer’s patients then you would have - you want to have more like enclosed spaces so they won’t wander off and get lost. […] It’s more about controlling the space so […] the patients that are using the space can be outside but not hurting themselves. In studio: Definitely the first thing that comes to mind is that Small Urban Space [project]– which was across from the church, and when I was designing that I was trying to make it like a very kid friendly place […] And I think - just being at the corner of the street I was definitely thinking about trying to enclose it.

Boundaries - buffering or separating activities In general: We both agreed that the front porches that were either higher or had a rail on them were better than the front porches that were at ground level and didn’t have a rail. So I think maybe for the same reason. You know – because you want that feeling of… you want that buffer from the pathway which in the case of the front porch was the street or the sidewalk and you know yourself. In studio: I definitely tried to have different levels of enclosure to where you had that one space that was definitely more defined and then you had the next layer where you had people that could easily pass through and then the third layer which was definitely active – a lot of people walking up and down. So I think it’s kind of layers.

Boundaries - Defining a space or its ownership In general: The way it’s set up - it makes the grassy area feel like it belongs to the people of that building and so I guess part of that sense of enclosure is actually the ownership […] of the place and I almost feel like a trespasser if I go up the sidewalk, and I’ve never actually been up there just because of that. In studio: Our last studio for the design I had a sun room, arbor, and, of course, vegetation to define the space. Boundaries - screening and creating privacy 36 In general: I liked this ‘cause it’s definitely partially defined by the trees – which is kind of nice not to see… These buildings weren’t as cute as some of the others… I mean you can try to create enclosure by putting up a trellis or something to kind of block views into your living space… Boundaries - directing attention or framing views 36 In general: … it kind of like focuses you and you’re more directed in what you should be doing.

36 Not discussed in studio context…

This was a hike and bike path in Augusta and you really wanted… There was a river on one side and a canal on the other side and you really wanted to see these pretty places. You could hear the water moving and the river. […] there would be periodic openings where you could see out and have that view, and so I think it’s very much like a window - where if you have a small framed view you appreciate it much more than if there’s - you can just see everything - so I think enclosure is important for that.

Resting/meditative Spaces In general: Sometimes seeking a space has a meditative kind of effect that can protect me from kind of unhealthy thoughts or ways of being. I find that – that’s why I seek enclosure in the Founders Garden 37 before I do things that make me nervous because I find my brain going over – thinking about things in a nervous way or not a productive or big picture way of thinking about things – and so I seek these places to go and change my kind of frame of mind, and it generates a new kind of thought process that’s more holistic and more big picture… like I can then examine why it is that I’m doing this interview or presentation in a bigger sense […] It just gives me more perspective… In studio: But the tower project – I thought about it – I mean I think everyone probably thought about it to an extent because you had that space at the tower and so I think a lot of people utilized that for people watching space.

Experiences In general: …In a garden setting it’s like - I think of it as an experiential thing […] so I’ve kind of concentrated - with most of these I’ve concentrated on the positive type or what I prefer - what I think is a pleasant sense of enclosure in a garden. In studio: If we’re working on an entire neighborhood development […] as the designer I can’t influence people’s private spaces of their own homes, but I have control of the public spaces - the public domain - and so how do I want that to feel. And I guess I start again to think about those spaces as enclosed spaces sometimes or sometimes you want to not make it enclosed - if you really want to make it a community space where everyone feels welcome you want to purposely avoid having a sense of enclosure to some degree.

The importance of juxtaposition. Enclosure was often described relative to something else - as a series of spaces, a closed space with an open view, or an open space after being cramped. Different or unusual materials or a strong contrast between spaces was also seen as helping to reinforce the sense of enclosure.

37 The Founders Garden is a garden on the UGA campus that is associated with the landscape architecture department.

A number of examples generated by study participants had views or vistas out or were areas for resting that looked out on activity. These types of spaces not only provide some sense of the opposite, but something to engage people and keep the space from becoming too boring.

You do have these other spaces that end up being for other people that don’t have – maybe don’t have children and just want a nice resting space, and so on the other side it is very active… so you’re watching people walk by, you’re watching people bicycle, and then you also have a ton of boats lining – you know – the edge, and you can watch the people working on their boats and going off to sail.

Figure 7. Rest and activity

Even as we sit here at the window - you know we’re in an enclosed space right now, but then there’s all this… noise and such that’s going on outside, and I can see it and everything, but I still feel this sense of security even though that is going on outside. It gives you something kind of almost to define the space a little bit more.

Several people talked about travelling through more confined spaces and reaching clearings, where the clearings were then defined as enclosure.

There’s nothing much to it… It’s just a carved out open field in the middle of woods… so you can just picture that… But it’s funny ‘cause I was thinking – it’s definitely a very open space, and I feel really open and free when I’m in it […]but it’s still very enclosed ‘cause you know you go through trails to get to it and there’s all of a sudden this clearing, but there is that sense of you know protection, and it is very – it seems very impermeable – just visually. I feel – I mean I feel like it’s its own little world when I’m in there. And I think – I mean that’s just another type of enclosure.

Figure 8. Landscape clearing

It’s completely open… in terms of a roof or things like that, but it still feels enclosed - especially I guess one of the other reasons that it has a sense of enclosure is that it’s in a more urban area and so actually the emptiness of it to some degree. It’s again that juxtaposition. You don’t expect there to be this giant empty square in an urban setting and so the emptiness of that square compared to the buildings on either side really emphasize the space.

Figure 9. Urban clearing

Interestingly, the study participant who had a negative reaction to the term ‘enclosure’ brought up the same concept, but described the resulting space as the lack of enclosure.

We do a lot of camping so I know it’s a larger scale landscape, but I was just thinking how a lot of the trails and paths that I like to walk are when you’ve been really hemmed in - you know - but you’re gaining in elevation or whatever and then you get to the top and you can see everything and so it’s the lack of enclosure…

Spaces or design elements that were different or unusual from their surroundings were linked to reinforcing a sense of enclosure, or, if they were imbalanced - creating a negative sense of enclosure.

But again on some level I think it has to do with all of the trees are the birch… [K: Yeah… ] the birch and… [K: It does seem to make like kind of a clear line between here and there…] Well and it’s so naturalized – or it feels so much more naturalized compared to all of the other spaces around it…

Figure 10. The Ecology Garden at UGA

This one is the spring site and to me it’s just this sad piece of enclosed trying-to-be-nature in the middle of a parking lot and roads. It feels almost like it’s caged. I don’t know – it’s somewhere between enclosed and caged. It’s like it must be controlled and to control it we’re enclosing it with cement – lots and lots of pavement and cement.

Figure 11. The Spring Site [adjacent to E. Campus at UGA]

Forms and materials. Enclosure was commonly described in terms of a single space, but some participants also linked enclosure to paths and thresholds. The shape of the space, the overhead plane, and the proportions were all seen as playing into the sense of enclosure.

Circular, arched, and rectangular spaces were often linked to enclosure (especially in single spaces):

There’s something about this arc here that feels like the… almost welcoming… It’s like enclosing the guest as they come up so it – it brings the garden to a point [K: mmm]. I kept finding, and it’s… you actually don’t see it as much as I expected to in these images, but I kept finding that this shape felt very enclosed to me even if – like in this situation – where it’s not – what it’s making is not an enclosed space in itself – there was something about that shape that made it feel enclosed…

Figure 12. Welcoming arms

Some participants also suggested that enclosed spaces needed or were helped by having a

‘back.’ For example:

It’s like prospect refuge 38 … It’s like having a solid thing at your back and your vantage point open to the front - I think is part of how I think of enclosure.

Maybe I still have that kid part of me that desires that - having something behind you whether it be this little enclosed blanket - that protection that that provides - but still having this visual - this part of that enclosure that I can still kind of look out on.

A number of proportions were mentioned including height to width, open space to closed, and the relative height of vertical elements. It was very common for participants to define enclosure as needing to be closed (physically or visually) on the majority of sides, and several people suggested that having variation in the vertical elements composing a space increased the sense of enclosure.

Height to width: I really like walls in my enclosure and of a certain height like 6 to 8 feet – depending on the size of the space…

Open to closed: I was thinking [these] are just so perforated that it seems like a view plain. It doesn’t mark a line of enclosure to me.

…it’s three sided and you can have a roof or not […] Three sides not four otherwise it sort of feels confining and not a solid roof

Height to height: Another thing that would take away from the enclosure - make it feel more open - was if there were no trees and it was just the waist height to knee height vegetation - kind of like if that was all the same height so… Though what’s interesting is that it would also take away from this level of enclosure if all you had were trees with no groundcover to me that would become more open too… that would make the trail seem even more open… so I think it’s the mix of the two in that scene that makes it feel enclosed.

38 In these interviews, ‘prospect refuge’ was almost always used to describe a single space that was closed with a view. This is a little different from ‘prospect refuge’ theory and may reflect a shared class background and the definition of enclosure in class projects.

If I wanted to do like a planometric of it, I could have this wall be […] medium height, and this wall be sort of low-ish. I guess variety in wall heights.

Overhead structures were also associated with enclosure, but not seen as a necessary

component, and one participant specifically rejected solid roofs in her definition of garden

enclosures. Because darkness is strongly associated with enclosure and can be tied to more

negative perceptions of safety (see environmental conditions below), it’s possible that overheads, especially solid overhead structures, may have a stronger influence on how closed a space feels than an equivalently sized wall would in the same space.

Topographic depressions were linked to both positive and negative experiences of enclosure. The ambiguous nature of these spaces is typified by respondents’ reactions to the section of the Founders Memorial Garden with Serpentine walls.

Figure 13. The Serpentine Garden

Pro: The Serpentine walls are why this feels enclosed - that and the height change because you have the Serpentine walls on either side again with height changes going up and then at one end you also have the steps going up to the Founders house.

Con: I have to say I do not feel enclosed in that space. The reason being because of its topography - where if you are down low on that grass side - feeling if there’s people above you looking down… Yes it’s enclosed, but it’s a provocative enclosure if that makes sense […] I guess it’s the voyeurism aspect too - that kind of plays into it. So like I say even though yes - physically looking at it there’s a defined boundary or whatever - it’s an enclosed space, but the feeling that goes with that to me is this kind of negative feeling of enclosure… 39

There was also some suggestion that areas that were unusually high relative to their surroundings (i.e., ‘islands’ or hills with steep drop offs) might contribute to a sense of enclosure in some places, but this idea was controversial. This argument may reflect an underlying disagreement about whether the separation and delineation of space is enough to create enclosure

(without some degree of vertical surrounds). During the interviews this was most frequently discussed relative to the South Campus Oval.

Figure 14. The South Campus Oval (SCO) at UGA

Pro: I really like this, and a lot of it is because you have this wall and the ground goes… You know – it has a lot of topography going for it so it… Here it looks like it’s this lawn separated from the sidewalks and yet in other places it’s almost not separated at all, but just because of having this here and having a step or two – the change in it – it feels very enclosed. […]to me it’s interesting because it feels very enclosed even when you are walking past it – it feels very enclosed and yet you are still very open to everything that’s going on around you.

39 The Serpentine Garden was a controversial example in the study not only because of topography, but also because it lacks a ‘back’: “It is [enclosed], but I don’t think I ever use it in a way that creates like that cozy sense of enclosure to me because if you are down in it – you’re like… I mean it has the three walls, but there’s people going through the third wall if you are sitting facing up the terrace, and if you are sitting with your back to the wall of the terrace then there’s stuff going on behind you so that to me doesn’t seem enclosed.”

Con: Initially I would say no, but it is a strongly defined space, and there is that one really big tree there. […] I can see like if you were sitting next to that tree or under the tree leaning up against it or something I could see… You’re in the shade - you’ve got some ceiling and cover too because of the tree branches and you’ve got a defined edge to the larger space that you’re in - so maybe… but for this project I certainly wouldn’t have taken a picture of that if I were walking by it to give you as an example of enclosure. I think it’s more just a defined space that you could go to. Like it’s more of like a destination point on that whole plaza area that would be nice to be up on, but I don’t really think it’s enclosed.

Figure 15. SCO view 2 Figure 16. SCO view 3

Paths and thresholds were not always mentioned in the interviews, but there were a number of proponents for these spaces. Narrow, defined paths are more frequently cited, and contrast and variation seem especially important in these types of landscapes.

Figure 17. Open path Figure 18. Enclosed path 1 Figure 19. Enclosed path 2

I also feel like on a path you can have enclosure without - like at different height levels so to me that’s like no enclosure [Figure 17] and then these are kind of [Figures 18, 19] - just with having the vegetation even if it’s below your knee height having that kind of enclosure as you are travelling through a space [...] but in a path situation that has - like you start getting some amount of wall… and these are taller than I think they need to be, but even like if those trees weren’t there and it was just like the taller stuff on either side - this kind of feels enclosed compared to that. […K: Do you think that if you are traveling on a path enclosure has to do with variance in like what happens on the path?...] For me I think on a path it’s the change. It’s like when there’s a contrast. So even in - no matter how long you’ve been walking on it when there’s a change it’s like you’ll notice it… like when you pass through that - that phase of the experience. I keep going back to Paris ‘cause to me that was like - when you’re walking down the streets and it’s just building façade after building façade and to me that street path was an enclosure… even more so at night too when no one was there and it was just you and the ambiance of a street lamp. It was a very intimate… it was like you owned that space and those walls definitely defined it, and it was just through walking around… so I don’t think enclosure is just always a resting point - a stopping point […] There definitely is that path component to it - I think - and maybe too […] that path component like having that sense of opposite makes you understand the clearing better even though both the path and the clearing can both be enclosure.

Thresholds, gates, and windows were described as visual cues that indicate enclosure or

as a kind compression of the elements of enclosure into a single moment. They were also

frequently mentioned in relation to Secret Gardens.

It’s enclosing this garden which it’s – I can never get into it, but it seems like this place I want – it’s just like – I want to be in it. […] I think the other thing about it is that it’s enclosed even more by that fence that goes all the way around the beach area that you can never… They never open up. So there’s some type of like secret garden aspect of this to me. It’s like this place we’re just not allowed to go…

Figure 20. Secret garden

That’s actually one of the gates that leads into the garden and that I felt like was almost enclosure because it was - it has a tree that arches up over it - so when you are walking through the gate you have a barrier on either side of you and something over your head and there’s that sense - for enclosure you have to have openness to feel the enclosure - there has to be that juxtaposition and [laughs] that sort of is the epitome of it to me ‘cause you can see the brightness on the other side - where one side’s dark - one side’s bright - one side’s enclosed feeling - one side’s open feeling - so it really emphasizes the enclosure sense.

Figure 21. Threshold

Participants’ often juxtaposed man-made elements and natural elements in their discussion of enclosures. Though solid, man-made materials help define these spaces, they were often seen as too harsh or rigid, and natural materials were frequently described as important elements for softening or humanizing enclosures. This same idea also seemed to apply to elements that are not alive, but flexible or moveable.

Natural materials (larger scale):

Figure 22. Natural materials

This picture was just showing that - that when you’re like in a urban setting that you’re very enclosed by the buildings […] - so that’s an enclosure, but the layers of vegetation humanizes the landscape and maybe makes you not notice - gives more interest so you don’t notice the buildings as much maybe.

Natural materials (smaller scale): …we never had fences growing up, and so I always thought of that as something really unique to our neighborhood and so I started thinking about like why - like what was special about that and I think that it fostered a greater sense of community between the neighbors […] It’s kind of this understood agreement who manages what and then same with our neighbors over here. We kind of chose this line of trees as the division… so I just felt like it made you work with your neighbors and there was some give and take to it as opposed to where there’s houses smashed together where everyone has their wooden fence and you can’t see your neighbors and it’s like, ‘You’re tree is hanging over my fence!’ and it’s like much harsher boundaries.

But I think the reason why I like […] this kind of enclosure is that it’s not like a built wall. It’s not like you’re… If this were like a stone cone or whatever that you walked into that would be a completely different feeling I think. So the fact that it’s alive makes me feel comfortable with that kind of - that amount of enclosure.

Flexible or moveable artificial materials: Like I said I don’t have a picture of this one, but further down some of these streets you wouldn’t just have awnings going across it - you would have merchandise for sale – like scarves – I think it was mainly scarves, and so they’d be hanging on clotheslines, and I really like how that defined a sense of enclosure. It’s enclosure, but it’s kind of free and flowing. Softer, I don’t know… colorful…

…Here you have a degree of control ‘cause you can move the tables, you can move the chairs, but you can’t move like the planting boxes. I think that it helps to have some flexibility within some boundaries just like anything.

There was some suggestion by study participants that the shapes, forms, and materials that create enclosure can be cheated or compensated for by hinting at the missing elements. The use of cultural cues, the visual connection of elements, and the manipulation of a space’s character were all seen as ways of defining a space that were sometimes capable of replacing actual physical boundaries or material requirements:

Actually that was something I wanted a picture of and forgot to say it… not Walkers,40 but do you know how both Five Guys and Ben and Jerry’s have a metal fence that’s not [K: like a bar kind of thing?] It’s a bar - exactly… but the thing with it is that it’s just a single line. It doesn’t have three sides to it like most patios would - it’s just that one line and yet that still even though it’s one line but because it’s parallel to their space it still feels enclosed… …even though there’s a lot of space in between those - that’s to me, and I’ll probably say this again, [pause] with enclosure I think for me the space needs to be defined like visually even if there isn’t something physically there. This one was kind of a side just like a last minute thrown in thing as I was going through my pictures, but it’s something that’s made out of stone […] I’ve said before and I might say it again too - that this real tight sense of enclosure - like when it’s physically close - walls are close to you - it would make me feel uncomfortable - I wouldn’t like it… But I think because of what this is and it’s got that playful quality about it and it’s like you’re entering the mouth of this like monster - it adds…- It’s different than if it were just like a box that had a hole in it that you walked into.

Figure 23. Character and enclosure

40 Restaurant/pub in downtown Athens.

Environmental conditions. Enclosures can obviously be used as a way to address environmental conditions such as the weather and noise; and this was something that participants talked about, but it was often not seen as an integral part of the experience of enclosure. Greater importance was placed on conditions that impacted the visual aspect of enclosure (e.g., darkness).

One theory that emerged toward the end of the interview process is that environmental conditions that do not affect you in an obvious physical way (e.g., noise, smells) are more disruptive to the emotional feelings generated toward an enclosure; while conditions that are more physically imposing (e.g., wind, rain) are more disruptive to the physical feelings that are related to being enclosed. It’s possible, then, that the lower importance placed on these elements suggests more of an emphasis on the physical feeling of enclosure in answering these questions.

The lack of emphasis on protection from environmental conditions probably also reflects

that participants expect less protection and security from outdoors spaces - even enclosed ones.

As one participant commented:

My ideas for outdoor enclosure - again as I keep saying are sort of delineated spaces that are an entity in and of themselves; whereas for an interior space I feel like a roof is pretty essential. I guess for an interior space I do think of it as protection from the elements either a roof or tall walls that can barricade you from winds things like that…

In general, there does seem to be a preference for increased levels enclosure in outdoor

spaces that are more directly related to living spaces, particularly those that you have to reach by

travelling through a house (i.e., backyards, rooftops, balconies). For example:

…at the front of my house I would have a partial enclosure – like an enclosure on one or two sides - or three sides with a view out to whatever was in front – whether that was… cause I like street activity - I like to watch it, so… And then in the back it would be more enclosed – It would have enclosure on four or five sides - including the top…

This was even true for the study participant who disliked enclosed spaces:

I’m very torn between the more urban - very little if any kind of yard - where it might just be a decently sized, enclosed - I don’t know - balcony or roof top or some sort of thing like that - where it’s more like a garden room, where it would feel very connected to the interior of the house, but be enclosed for privacy from other urban dwellers looking in on you… Or it could be a farm, where it would be very open.

Table 8 presents an overview of participant comments related to environmental conditions. It’s worth noting that many participants felt that natural sounds and visuals could be used to fight or soften unpleasant sounds or visuals, just as natural materials can be used to balance the harshness of man-made elements (text that demonstrates this has been bolded).

Table 8. Environmental conditions and enclosure Noise: I think it would still feel enclosed even with all the buses and cars and traffic, but it definitely takes away the feeling of solitude that I think enclosure can give you. I don’t think it takes away the enclosure itself. If you can still hear traffic and the noise is still really loud […] the traffic, people, sirens… then I’d probably still feel not enclosed - even if physically it’s enclosed. I’d probably still feel kind of exposed to that noise element. If it’s blocked… if the noise is blocked. If […] I can hear the water – or birds chirping – then I would feel more enclosed. I wouldn’t even mind if […] the sound is from nature – I still think it’s enclosed. But if the sound is manmade, then I don’t feel enclosed [K: Do you think that hearing like traffic […] fights a sense of enclosure?] Well - I zone it out. I guess when I’m there like… They say that visual - like having sight lines to the cars makes a big difference, and in the garden because you can’t see it you sort of block it out more, and I do think that the buses and the trucks especially the trucks you can hear a lot more than just cars, but I still find that when I’m back there if you hear bees flying past or you hear birds chirping or you see a squirrel - your mind is sort of on things other than the cars and so you’re not focused on them. The elements: If it were really windy and instead of the road being there it was just open and the wind front came in - came at you from the side - I’d probably still feel the solitude aspect of traveling along that little nature path, but it probably wouldn’t feel as enclosed because you’re not as protected from the wind - like it’s getting at you. So yeah physically to me - that would be a physical aspect of enclosure or that would change the sense of enclosure.

I feel like for me a sense of enclosure isn’t defined by protection from the elements… because if that were the case almost none of the spaces I’ve shown you would’ve been - because every place would’ve had to have had a roof of some sort and I don’t find that there are that many landscapes that have roofs. […] A fenced in area is completely enclosed to me [pause] - very harshly enclosed sometimes - but it doesn’t have a roof. Darkness: I actually think for me what gives me the greatest sense of enclosure is actually how dark it is compared to its surroundings. If the glass weren’t tinted glass I don’t think it would feel as enclosed or appear as enclosed. […] You know you always hear about people saying that the darkness is closing in on you. I think people say that for a reason. You can just think of night and day in general, and if I were to think of what one is more enclosing to me - I would say night - just because maybe your visual - going back to the visual part - your visual senses are kind of skewed a little bit and everything seems a little bit more - you have to be kind of more aware of your surrounding and there’s this sense of this blanket of darkness kind of around you…

Cultural variables. Interactions with other people can contribute to (or detract from) the sense of enclosure. For example:

Figure 24. Camellia Walk arbor

Okay this is an area of the Founders Garden where there’s that one bench with the arbor, and I always think of that place as being enclosed because you are completely surrounded by shrubs and you have an arbor over your head and again the sense of darkness… It’s much cooler than the rest of the garden. But I think one of the major factors that contributes to that is actually the isolation feeling because if you are on that bench back there and somebody sees you - they walk away. It’s sort of this area that people know not to disturb you or not to sit too close or whatever. I don’t know how, but the space sort of asks for that alone time, reflection, all that stuff…

I don’t think I have a picture of it, but like in England, you obviously have enclosed spaces by fences in pastures, but still the overall feeling is very open, and I feel like it’s not just open because of the actual space but because of the people, and so it’s not like over here where you might feel like you are trespassing of something. Over there, you feel able to - I mean you’re allowed to go - even though it’s private property, you’re allowed to go walk through the spaces. It’s kind of weird. They’re like enclosed, but open. …the other example I can think of is like a Parisian café, which actually isn’t enclosed at all – you are kind of enclosed by other people on like the Champs-Elysees or something. You know… You’ve got just wide open – you’ve got a building to your back, but then you’ve got this sidewalk that’s[…] much wider than the sidewalk we’re on now. There’s nothing on the sides except maybe like a velvet rope or something, and you’re just enclosed by other tables and your own sense of self importance.

Culture also helps give definition to the materials we use to create boundaries. As one participant described it:

We have a very defined line between private and public in the United States, and we have to do things like no trespassing signs to delineate these different spaces. Put up giant fences… Put up giant tree barriers… whereas in Europe they have much more subtle cues with plantings and material changes that people pick up on and actually respect. And I think that’s a cultural thing as well.

Personal variables and safety. Personal variables impacted the desire to be in an enclosed space and also the level of comfort with being in an enclosed space. It’s important to note that the same feelings of being tired, vulnerable, or uncertain that can make an enclosed space more appealing, can also make being in an enclosed space more intimidating.

…in fact in areas that I think I maybe don’t fit in I might seek enclosure to make me feel more comfortable you know… Like if I’m at a club – like a redneck sports club or something where everybody’s drinking and swearing and making me feel all uncomfortable in my like urban boy’s skin – I might seek a corner or a booth or someplace out of the way where I can watch but not necessarily participate…

[BUT] High heels and a dress… Oh yeah definitely I would feel more vulnerable. This is better [indicating pants and sneakers]. That’s why people go hiking in their hiking clothes not in a dress and high heels.

Most participants judged the safety of enclosed spaces by the legibility of the space (e.g., way finding, knowing where you could exit the space, and visibility) and/or cultural cues or signs. For example:

…it has to do too with how far the light reaches and you feel like safe and sheltered within that space - […] outside that - who knows what’s out there - it’s dark and scary…

Way finding… yeah, that’s actually another safety feature too. I mean if people know their… where they are in the space then they probably feel more confident.

And then this is the bridge where the homeless people live. I just didn’t want to get too much closer… And it’s enclosed because it’s going into that bridge and you have the hills and the trees, but it’s foreboding because of what I know comes after that and the smells and the poverty and the sadness…

If you see an official kind of control then you have an assumption of a degree of safety, whereas if you see a more vernacular kind of control that assumption of safety is less true – I think - even though both places may be inhabited by the same people. You know like the people who control the space under the bridge can be seen here too, they’ve been walking by as we’ve been sitting here talking, Figure 25. East Campus tracks and yet I feel much more comfortable here than I would down there because of who has control of the space…

The concluding chapter will return to these themes and examine them in the context of

Pattern 173 and the existing literature. The next chapter discusses research findings for the methods, including participant ratings, and provides more context for the findings by discussing the participant population and study limitations.

CHAPTER 6

METHOD RESULTS

Figure 26. The RCA Indian Head test pattern

This chapter describes the study participants, their ratings of the methods, and comments

about study participation. It also presents my thoughts on the methods, recommendations for

people interested in similar research, and study limitations.

Participants and their ratings

Of the 3 rd year MLA students who received the recruitment email (n=13), 10 people offered to participate (76.9%). 41 The final sample was 9 students and consisted of 8 women and

1 man, all residents of the United States, aged 25- 36. Of the nine study participants, two

41 Of the aerobics instructors who received the recruitment email (n=13), only 2 people responded with interest (15.4%). Since I decided to drop this arm of the study, I do not know with certainty if I could have achieved similar participation rates with additional effort, but the initial difference is striking. Whether this is due to the MLA students being more sympathetic to thesis research (since they were working on their own), having more free time and less commitments, or some other unknown reason… this may indicate that these types of studies may require either greater inducements to participate or more effective recruitment tactics in the general population.

(15.4%) asked to be placed in the regular interview arm, two asked to be placed in the

Photovoice arm, and the remainder offered to help with any of the arms (55.6%). 42 This seems

to indicate that while all three methods are acceptable to most people, the shorter methods are the

more attractive ones.

All 9 participants filled out the final survey, which asked them which study arm they

participated in, how much time they spent preparing for the interview, if they would consider

participating in a similar future study, and left additional space for comments on any of these

questions and for general comments.

The amount of time reported by study participants for each arm are provided in Table 9

along with the minimum time estimates given to participants in the recruitment email. 43

Interview times were similar across the study arms. This was partially due to a change in the

ZMET arm (see below) which shortened the length of the ZMET interviews and partially due to

the decision to ask participants about issues and themes generated during previous interviews

which should have helped regulate interview times.

Table 9. Participant time by study arm Method Participant Interview time Total (preparation Minimum estimate preparation time + interview) provided Regular 40 minutes (+ 17) 1 hour, 13 minutes 1 hour, 53 minutes 1 hour interview (+ 15) (+ 12) Photovoice 2 hours, 15 minutes 57 minutes (+ 23) 3 hours, 12 minutes 1 hour, 40 minutes (+ 78) (+ 98) ZMET 2 hours, 20 minutes 1 hour, 30 minutes 3 hours, 50 minutes 2 hours, 20 minutes (+ 35) (+ 30) (+ 62)

42 Of the two aerobics instructors who volunteered, 1 asked to be placed in the regular interview arm and the other said she would do any of the study arms. 43 NOTE: Some participants gave a range of times (e.g., 1-2 hours) instead of a single number. These statistics use the maximum time. Standard deviation is given in parentheses (in minutes).

Participant ratings of the methods. Participants in all of the study arms rated the experience highly. On a scale with “1 = Awful ” and “10 = Awesome ☺,” eight of the 9 study

participants who completed the final survey rated their experience a 9 (n=3) or a 10 (n=5). The

lowest rating, a 7, belonged to a participant in the ZMET arm who explained the rating in the

additional space provided: “ Keys locked in car. end of story. :-P.” There were four other written

responses to this question, 3 for the Photovoice arm and 1 for the regular interview arm.

Photovoice: “I think as a designer it was helpful to think through the experience of (an enclosed) place and how that can inform certain decisions (materiality, scale, etc.) when trying to design for that specific experience.”

“It was interesting to explore my idea of enclosure through everyday experiences and photography. It made me think about the idea more deeply than I have in the past and made me focus on what the idea visually looked like when I had generally thought of it as more of a feeling.”

“I felt like this method gave me a chance to really explain myself and my opinions. I felt like the moderator would be able to get a good understanding of my opinions. Having to put together photos to bring made me think about the issues ahead of time.”

Regular interview: “The interview was structured in a way to make it feel less like a question and answer format -- instead it was more comfortable and conversation- like.”

When asked if they would participate in a similar study in the future (again using a 10 point scale

with “1 = Never!” and “10=Absolutely”), 8 participants gave either a 9 (n=2) or a 10 (n=6). One

participant in the ZMET arm answered this question with a 5 and explained the answer with: “ I

might participate in a similar study if it were on a topic that I personally found interesting. ”

General comments tended to focus on new directions for similar studies. One participant

suggested the interview environment could have been taken advantage of: “ …it would have been

interesting to have maybe chosen one ‘enclosed’ place in Athens and conduct the interview

within that space and discuss the experience as it’s occurring.” Others suggestions included

using standardized images to compare the responses or sharing the photos collected during the interviews with the study participants so they could “ see what other people thought and chose .”

My experience with the methods

This section is broken into four pieces. The first deals with study procedures, the next two look at how changes to Photovoice and the selection of ZMET steps impacted the study, and the final section discusses differences in the methods.

Procedural comments. There are certain procedural decisions I made in this study that I think could be made better. Some of these may seem obvious, but I have decided to include them here for people, who like me, are not always able to see the obvious.

Writing the recruitment email: I spent a lot of time thinking about it as a research tool,

what I wanted to include in it, and writing text that would get it past the IRB, but I should have

spent a lot more time thinking about how the audience would read it. Instead of thinking about

what I would want to know as a study participant, I made my decisions for what to include based

on rather abstract ideas. For example, I made the decision to leave the study topic undisclosed

until the consent process in an effort to give all of the study arms the same amount of time to

think about the issue. This ended up making no difference at all since I ended up pushing back

meetings to accommodate rainy days (which were bad for the photo arms) and busy schedules.

The readability was further damaged by hasty changes to the document in response to IRB

comments that were focused on getting approval quickly.

The end result was a recruitment email that didn’t do a very good job recruiting people.

Many of the people who I talked to about this email admitted that they did not finish reading it or

had just glanced over it, and I got several responses from people who were confused about what I was asking them to do.

Though many researchers probably understand this intuitively, this study clearly demonstrated to me that study documents that are intended for participants really should be written for participants. As tempting as it is to make quick changes and speed up the IRB turnaround, it is ill advised. Also I would suggest moving detailed data that needs to be included to a chart or table instead of describing it in the text.

This study was also designed to have very basic controls for confidentiality (e.g., the tapes of the audio recordings were destroyed after data analysis and the transcripts were de- identified). At the beginning of the study I thought this would be enough to protect my subjects, but in conducting the study, I’ve found that the examples people give and the pictures they provide are highly personal. 44 People who know my study participants could read the de-

identified transcripts or look at the photos provided and have a reasonable idea of who was

interviewed and/or who took the pictures. Even using some of the examples provided during

previous interviews, participants often guessed who provided them accurately.

Because of the nature of this study, I do not think that this represents a serious threat to

any of my participants, but I would caution people interested in doing future research similar to

this - particularly studies involving photos - to think carefully about what procedures they can

put in place to help further ensure their subjects’ anonymity.

In performing this study, I also chose to leave out anything like the traditional Photovoice

workshops which cover things like composing photos and the ethical issues related to taking

pictures. I decided not to include these since most of the recruitment population is camera savvy,

44 A finding that is congruent with previous research that suggests using photography in research helps study participants couch the research in terms of their day to day lives (Heisley and Levy 1991; Samuels 2007).

and I did not think taking pictures of the landscape would create any issues. In retrospect I think it would have been good to include some type of material (e.g., handout) on ethical issues related to visual studies since two of my participants reported incidents taking pictures for this study.

Certainly providing a handout on this type of thing wouldn’t hurt, and it might make people feel better or more confident facing these types of issues.

One of the nice things about this study was that everyone I interviewed had access to many of the same places so there were lots of images and examples that were common to the entire group. These examples gave me an opportunity to see where peoples’ views converged and diverged. Though I did not introduce pictures from earlier interviews in the discussion, like my study participants who suggested this in their comments (above), this is something that I think could potentially add to similar studies, particularly when participants do not share the same background. This is likely one of the benefits of a more traditional Photovoice study.

Finally, all of the arms of this study were run at the same time. This decision probably helped maximize participation, but it also made it more difficult to determine how each study arm contributed to the results. Researchers interested in running similar studies might consider staggering the arms to provide a clearer sense of how each contributed to study findings.

Changes to Photovoice. Many of the changes made to the Photovoice methodology were minor, but even these small changes have some research implications. Participant workshops (or even handouts related to the topics covered in these workshops) may be an important component of the method (see above); while allowing participants to use photos they collect in addition to the photos they take may be neutral or positive for some types of studies.

Instead of limiting participants to photographs they took specifically for this study, I let participants bring in photographs and images that they collected (to better match ZMET and

make it easier to participate). Participants in both the ZMET and Photovoice arms did this in different, but effective, ways. Of the six participants in the two photo arms, two brought in pictures that they took specifically for the exercise and the remaining four brought in pictures that they had stored on their computers and/or taken from catalogues and magazines. 45

A study that relied solely on found or gathered images would probably be less textured

and nuanced since the participants who took their own pictures helped ground the study by

providing examples that were both familiar and interesting; but participants who had not taken

images specifically for the exercise had also obviously thought about the topic, collected their

images with care, and had interesting things to say.

The set of questions 46 generated from the PHOTO and SHOWeD mnemonics had both good and bad points. Having a set of questions for participants to look at did sometimes seem to jog participant’s memories and remind them of points that they wanted to make, but participants also sometimes seemed to find the questions confusing and/or weren’t sure how literally they should take them. For example:

“Should I actually try to describe each one of these pictures? Or just the pertinent things in… I mean… Do you need the description as much to be able to put the comments together? I guess that’s my question more than anything else.”

“’Why did I take a picture of it?’ well I don’t know… I find myself more and more… it’s probably a bad habit… taking a picture of almost everything because I feel like as a designer I do want to try to draw on that past memory”

45 NOTE: Allowing participants to bring in pictures they did not take increases the chances that you will get images in unexpected formats. It is worth discussing with participants ahead of time what picture format they are planning on bringing in - particularly if you are planning on doing any exercises with the photos. It is also a good idea to figure out how you are going to number the photos ahead of time. For example, if you are planning on using digital images in exercises, it may be best to see if you can get the participants to number or label their images for you ahead of time since this much more time consuming than jotting a number down on a physical photo. 46 These were: 1. Describe your picture?, 2. What is happening in your picture?, 3. Why did you take a picture of this?, 4. What does this picture tell us about enclosure?, and 5. How can this picture be used as an opportunity to improve small gardens?

Clearer wording might help make the questions more useful - so instead of ‘Describe your picture’ it could be ‘Describe why you brought this picture in to discuss.’ I also think that there are probably too many questions. The effort to make the process simple and separate out different aspects of why a person would bring in a photo seems instead to complicate the issue.

Two or three questions that were more conceptually different might be more effective.

In an individual interview format it may also be best just to leave out the typed set of questions entirely. The first step of ZMET is actually quite similar to Photovoice - since it too is asking people to discuss their photos, and this is something that really takes very little from the researcher. All of the participants in these arms seemed to come in with an agenda of things to talk about; half of the participants in these arms brought in typed sheets with notes to discuss.

Letting them take the initiative and adding questions along the way is probably the simplest thing to do.

Changing Photovoice to individual interviews was the biggest change to the method.

Although it has been previously adapted for use with individual interviews, this change obviously reduces the ability of Photovoice to build social capacity and common group values.

On the other hand, it’s possible that the shift to individual interviews may have helped uncover more uniquely held data, since focus group discussions can neglect unique information in favor of commonly shared information (Larson, Foster-Fishman, and Keys 1994; Winquist and Larson

1998). It would be interesting for additional studies to look at this change in methodology and ways it might be mitigated or enhanced.

The ZMET steps. Of the six ZMET steps I used in the study, the first two, storytelling and missed issues and images, accounted for most of the new data. These steps are what participants seemed to expect, and they often transitioned between them on their own. For

example, reaching the end of her photos, LA5 offered, “ And so then I didn’t find - I didn’t find pictures of various landscapes. But…” and LA7 said, “ There were more - other spaces too if you want me to go over them, but I don’t have any pictures of them .” For some reason, Photovoice participants did not make this transition to missed images, 47 but I think this could be an easy and worthwhile addition to a Photovoice study.

The sorting task was also helpful. It didn’t seem to provide a lot of new information or variables, but it did help clearly lay out some of the earlier points made by the study participants and help demonstrate which points they found to be the most salient. For example, LA7 sorted her pictures into five groups: 1) darkness, 2) fences + walls, 3) material change, 4) natural, and

5) shape, roof, and other. 48 While almost all of these categories were things that were brought up in the previous steps, seeing the sort helped me see LA7’s conceptual divisions more clearly, and, in particular, the clear division between material changes in man-made elements (folder 3), natural elements (folder 4), and a space that was in between (folder 5; see previous footnote).

Steps 4 and 5, metaphor elicitation and metaphor elaboration, often seemed to bring out physical differences between the photographs. In the first of these steps, I selected three images and the participant was supposed to group two of them together and set the third aside. Here are some common responses:

“The knot garden goes. The other two feel similar in the fact that they’re bounded by brick walls and have semi organic turf spaces and shape and have quite a bit of naturalized plants”

“These two and that one? I’d probably put these two together because they have like as far as like the architecture that’s made by the elements in them… These two also have a

47 Perhaps because there is no other exercise waiting for them at the end? 48 Other here represents a few photos where enclosure is made by a topographic change and one place where the space was defined by newly planted trees that weren’t mature. “It has a very man-made feel and so I didn’t want to put it in the natural category, but yet the things that were defining it were natural materials…”

ceiling. This one doesn’t have a ceiling to it - so these have kind of four walls and a ceiling, and I’m imagining those have walls or something vertical there to.”

In the 5 th step, the participant expands the frame on a selected image and discusses what could be added outside the picture that would reinforce or contradict the picture’s meaning. This exercise produced statements like:

“I think if you made it bigger it would feel happily enclosed or if you took lattice and put it around the top so you could see out of it - it would look better ‘cause then it gets to the proportions about that… It’s so tall in there, but it’s really small”

“Okay so I can do both - negate and add to it. Going back to something we were talking about earlier - if it were - if there were more trees - like more vertical trees that had canopy on them that added more shade to this it would probably feel more enclosed.”

Overall, these steps didn’t feel like they added a lot to the study because the physical differences that were mentioned here were usually already part of the discussion.

It’s possible that the reason these steps didn’t contribute more is because they were used on a population of designers who are trained to search for and identify physical markers that contribute to the feeling of a space. Doing similar exercises with a population that was not trained in design may generate similar data but add more to the study if these ideas are new to the discussion.

These steps might also be more helpful on different types of studies with more focused and specific design questions like coming up with the ideal soda can or helping someone design a specific type of garden in a specific location.

Also it’s worth noting that both of these steps are supposed to be used in conjunction with laddering techniques where the researcher repeatedly asks questions like, “Why is that important to you?” with the idea that you move up or down the ladder of abstraction. For example, a respondent who reported liking chocolate might be pushed up the ladder to enjoying the taste of chocolate and then to her memories of sharing chocolate with a loved one and ultimately to a

sense of belonging. In this study, I kept looking for opportunities to ladder off of things, and often felt that the questions would just be silly. It is possible that my lack of training in this type of methodology means that I missed a lot of these hidden opportunities to learn more about the associations people have between the physical elements of enclosure and more abstract values and beliefs.

The final step I chose for this study, summary image, was never completed according to the methodology. Frequently this boiled down to technical difficulties related to the images and/or bad planning on my part. The basic idea behind the summary image step is for participants to use: Photoshop, digital versions of their photos, and cropping, resizing, and positioning to generate an image that represents their ideas. All of the participants in the ZMET arm did something different in place of the summary image step. One participant drew a summary image, one chose a representative image and discussed what would make it a better overall representation of her ideas, and the third restated her views of enclosure in gardens.

If I did a similar study again, I would probably not even attempt this step; but if I did want to use it, I would definitely schedule this as a second interview. In all of my ZMET interviews, an hour or more had elapsed before I reached this step and the process was starting to wear on people a bit. Though this step can produce pretty images, it is at a significant cost and should probably only be used with additional inducement for participants and on a fresh day.

Differences in the methods. The biggest differences in the methods were between the photo arms and the regular interview process. As previously mentioned, participants in the photo arms had more of an agenda during the interview process and set ideas that they wanted to convey; while participants in the regular interviews often provided interesting and insightful ideas, but generally these arose over the course of discussion.

The picture arms also tended to come up with more concrete examples, while the regular interview arms tended to provide more abstract ones. This is probably because participants in the photo arms could easily flip to a specific photo to help answer questions, but participants in the regular interview arm had to think up their response without similar visual aids. One of my favorite conceptual examples (campfire circles) came from an individual interview and some of the more poetic passages in the transcriptions like this excerpt:

It’s like that first spot or desk you choose when you walk into a classroom… It’s interesting no one’s going to choose to go to the front of the room and sit center stage unless they just really love that, but… I mean that’s interesting too - the classroom enclosure too and the psychology that goes on behind that of wanting that sense of security or just kind of awareness or people watching or whatever and how people adapt that landscape to suit their enclosure needs.

The one exception to this rule is that the immediate surroundings often became part of the interview process in all of the study arms; something that could potentially be used to greater advantage in a future study (as one of the participant comments (above) suggests).

In combination with the photo arms, the regular interview arm appears to offer valuable information at less cost to the participants - which may make it an attractive option for studies that need to be completed relatively quickly or might otherwise suffer from low participation rates. This finding appears to be congruent with Downey, Ireson, and Scutchfield’s (2008) study which found pamphlets developed using work with Photovoice could be used to facilitate discussions at community forums.

Study limitations.

There are a number of limitations that should be kept in mind with this study. My sample is small and relatively uniform in terms of age, gender, race, and occupation - variables that may

well contribute to substantial differences in underlying landscape preferences (Manzo 2005;

Tveit 2009; Virden and Walker 1999).49

I am also very similar to my study participants and a group insider. This status can create

research advantages (e.g., I may have been able to obtain more privileged information than a

group outsider or had an easier time understanding participant meanings since there are fewer

cultural and linguistic barriers), though it also means that I might have missed or neglected

themes and issues that I share and take for granted as a group insider and it might have caused

my participants to rate the methods and experience higher than they would have otherwise. 50

In a recent article (2010) Mannay argues that visual methods may help ‘make the familiar

strange’ and allow greater distance for researchers who are insiders. 51 Based on my experience

with the methods, I think that this is a possibility, but I do not feel I can argue this point with any

certainty since all of my research was conducted with a group where all the members share the

same relationship to me. 52

Self selection into study arms by some study participants may also have skewed the study results.

49 It’s very possible that the positive response toward enclosure (both as a word and in a garden context) reflects a regional bias or a studio bias. Since the one person who reported a negative association is from a slightly different region of the country and has a slightly different studio background. 50 This has been extensively discussed in qualitative research. For a recent article see Dwyer & Buckle 2009. 51 This article reports her experience with photo-elicitation, mapping, and collage to “suspend my preconceptions of familiar territory, and facilitate an understanding of the unique viewpoints of mothers and daughters on the margins of contemporary Britain” (2010, 91). 52 Additional research with something like my original study design - including a second group, where I am also an insider but for different reasons, would probably help clarify this point.

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSION

Figure 276. Ryoji Ikeda’s “test pattern [n°3]” 53

Most research is not on something as flat as a TV test pattern, most methods are more difficult and cumbersome to adjust than brightness and contrast, and, when it comes to capturing and conveying the ideas that are presented to them, the average researcher is probably both a little better and a little worse than a trusty TV set.

53 From the artist’s website: “Through a real–time computer programme, Ikeda's audio signal patterns are converted into tightly synchronised barcode patterns on the screens. Viewers are literally immersed in the work, and the velocity of the moving images is ultra–fast, some hundreds of frames per second, providing a totally immersive and powerful experience. The work provides a performance test for the audio and visual devices, as well as a response test for the audience's perceptions.” http://www.ryojiikeda.com/project/testpattern/

The good thing about the analogy is that it links together a signal source, its output, and a mechanism for adjustment and it shows the intimacy of their connection.

Over time, I have come to see this project (and qualitative research) as something more like Ryoji Ikeda’s ‘test patterns,’ where the signal, the representation, and the mechanism for adjustment are all shifting, related, and inseparable from the artist. It is possible to view this as a collapse in the distinction between art and science - by boiling them down to their fundamentals - so that each of them becomes nothing more than an individual effort to get to at some kind of truth.

In this chapter I will present: a general theory of enclosure that represents my understanding after the interviews, the study findings for gardens and enclosure relative to

Pattern 173, the design implications of these findings, a discussion of how the methods and the study topic worked together, and possible future directions for the methods in landscape architecture.

The intent of this discussion is to provide an example for how these methods can work in the context of landscape architecture. I do not want to discount my study findings, but there is a limit to how far they should be taken from this context. My goal was not to come up with a universal theory or universal design guidelines, but to suggest a means for coming up with similar ideas that landscape architects might use in developing their own theories, determining what patterns exist in their clients’ and communities’ perceptions and preferences, and creating solutions that work for their projects.

A general theory. I have come to think that the most important thing about enclosure is

its dual nature. In the landscape, enclosure provides spaces that are between closed and open,

being indoors or outdoors, or in a space that feels private or one that feels public. Whether this is

defined by a single space that is opposed to something else, a series of spaces that unfolds in the landscape, a path that narrows and expands, or compressed into a single threshold; enclosures are, quite literally, neither here nor there, but a space that bridges the two. 54

By filling this gap, enclosure helps meet important physical and psychological needs, but

it also means that our relationships to these spaces are complicated. There are physical

sensations associated with different levels of enclosure and separate emotional reactions. These

spaces can be comfortable or confining, serene or boring, safe or unsafe; and the perceptions that

people have of the same space can change relative to cultural, personal, or environmental

conditions that impact their preferences for safety and security.

The trick to creating effective enclosed spaces seems to be leaving room for them to be

ambiguous (closed and open; flexible and fixed), but still defined enough that people can set

expectations for these spaces and define their role in the larger environment. Spaces that fail to

achieve this balance are likely to be seen as too closed (boring, confining) or too open (unsafe).

Enclosure and ‘gardens.’ Pattern 173 suggests that gardens and small parks should be

enclosed largely because of noise; saying, “Gardens and small public parks don’t give enough

relief from noise unless they are well protected” and:

“In a city, gardens and small parks try to solve this problem; but they are usually so close to traffic, noise, and buildings that the impact of nature is entirely lost. To be truly useful, in the deepest psychological sense, they must allow the people in them to be in touch with nature - and must be shielded from the sight and sound of passing traffic, city noises, and buildings. This requires walls, substantial high walls, and dense planting all around the garden.”55

54 In some ways this theory is similar to what Gordon Cullen (1971) presents in the Concise Townscape , though I would argue that his definition is more about spaces that contain; as he puts it, enclosure “embodies the idea of HERENESS” (p. 29). In my view, any space that we recognize as a ‘space’ creates a sense of hereness - and what makes enclosures distinct is that they must couple that ‘hereness’ with its opposite (i.e., openness). This is something Cullen hints at in his discussion, but he still seems to limit enclosure to a singular space (at least as a term). Interestingly his conception fits better with one of the Zaltman’s deep metaphors: container, than my own. 55 Full text in Appendix A pp. 91-2.

Though this study ended up coming at the issue from a slightly different direction, 56 it’s interesting to note that noise was given a relatively minor role in how people described the feeling of enclosure.

Based on participant responses, you could argue that for this group of people at least, adding a wall to reduce noise might create a more intimate or quiet space, but, by creating an enclosure, adding the wall would simultaneously create changes to the physical feeling of the space and its cultural, personal, and psychological meaning.

Creating a visual barrier between a garden visitor and the source of the noise would probably be seen as more important than buffering the noise itself and this is something that would have to be balanced against the actual feeling of the enclosure and whether it fit into the larger need for the space. For example, a less severe barrier combined with some source of more natural sounds (e.g., a water feature) may work better even with the associated city traffic than a more severe division using a garden wall. Alternatively, in spaces that function more as outdoor living ‘rooms’ a more solid, defined boundary may be seen as more desirable even without city traffic, since people may want more privacy for the activities associated with these spaces.

It’s also interesting to note that as far as enclosure and the feeling of enclosure was concerned, people equated urban plazas with forest clearings. To me this suggests that enclosure as a landscape element is not especially suited to helping foster the connection with nature that

Pattern 173 is after. This is not to say that enclosed spaces can’t generate a connection with nature and that using natural materials in them can’t evoke the sense of openness or relaxation people associate with being in nature; but it does indicate that the development of this connection

56 Perhaps because of the broad description of ‘garden’ in the instructions given to participants (gardens were defined as ‘smallish, tended landscapes’ and expanded to include ‘the average American yard, small park, or plaza’), many participants focused more on enclosure than on ‘gardens.’

is not necessarily bound up with the creation of enclosure. What enclosure seems to offer is a way to help focus and direct attention and create spaces that people feel are private and/or secure.

In a garden setting, the most effective enclosures are probably not only about nature, but about nature and culture. These spaces are in some ways ideally suited for the creation of enclosures since gardens echo the ambiguity of enclosure as they bridge the gap from wild to civilized (or from free to fixed). The combination of natural and man-made elements in these spaces can situate the space in a larger context - both in the world of man and in the natural world.

Enclosure and design. Participant responses suggest two other design considerations.

One is that enclosure is reinforced by contrast. The use of different or unusual elements, more severe contrasts in light and dark, topographic variation, and stark changes in the experience of constriction and openness along a path or in a space can be used to more clearly define these areas and help separate them from their surroundings; reinforcing the sense of enclosure. While physically enclosed spaces that lack this contrast are more likely to be seen as part of their surroundings and more open as a result.

This principle might be used effectively to create spaces that feel more enclosed or to open up spaces that feel too enclosed. For example, if a severe division is used to reduce street traffic and noise, using elements from the surroundings outside the wall might be used to help make the space feel more open and welcoming.

The interviews also suggest that enclosed spaces are frequently in a precarious position where small changes can make a difference in whether the space feels intimate and secure or confining and unsafe. Careful consideration of legibility - particularly as the space changes from

day to night - will be important in how it is viewed and used. In addition, cultural cues were very important in this group of participants’ feelings of safety and vulnerability; suggesting that these might be used to help make enclosed spaces that feel unsafe more secure.

The methods and the study topic together. I found the wide range of responses around

‘enclosure’ interesting, but one could also view this as a study limitation since it may demonstrate that the focus of the question was too broad. As one of my study participants put it:

…really if you just define enclosure as being four walls around you or like being surrounded by vertical elements everywhere around you - with landscape architecture at least you can do that in so many different ways when you start using plant materials and stuff like that… I think you would still get a wide range even if you just defined it that simply - and because it’s not defined that simply - it’s like of course people are going to go in all sorts of different directions…

Similar studies could undoubtedly find interesting information with much more focused research questions.

A few participants also reported difficulty with taking pictures of enclosure. For example:

I can see a picture of something that’s up close, but if I don’t know what else is around it… You know - if it’s wide open of if it’s… I don’t know… I think it’s kind of whatever it’s juxtaposed against - whether it’s like a small, open defined space and everything else seems really dense around it or… I mean I still think you can feel enclosed by having something physical like a wall and then still open space….

It was really hard to get the three with the view because I guess you have to take that from the outside - but then my definition was that you had to be inside… so that was hard to get […]So yeah – I think that was just… I think the three dimensionality. Enclosure to me is really three dimensional, and it’s really hard to capture that in some ways.

Future studies in landscape architecture that use these kinds of methods may well face similar concerns; though I think this points to the strength of these methods more than a serious weakness. ZMET and Photovoice don’t require having a perfect picture or even a good one.

The images are just a mechanism for having a conversation and trying to achieve a better shared understanding.

Future research/applications. Both ZMET and Photovoice have potential applications in landscape architecture research, practice, and education. As previously mentioned, the methods might perform best when they are matched with sympathetic projects in landscape architecture, and it would be interesting to see if this were the case. Additional tests of the different ZMET steps with different landscape architecture issues might also be interesting as would additional crosses between these methods (e.g., looking at how Photovoice might be improved with a sorting step) or studies that compared the results of these methods with different study populations.

Though it may be difficult to do full studies with these methods in landscape architecture practice because of the time involved, elements of these methods could be casually adopted with clients and community members (e.g., by doing simple exercises with the images brought in by these groups and seeing what, if anything, they contribute to the design process). These methods may also be particularly helpful for landscape architects working with community groups or the general public since they offer a way to think about, discuss, and build group preferences.

Finally, study participants all seemed to like the methods and several people thought that the photo arms could be a useful addition to the curriculum:57

I think we should be doing this during classes […] I think that it might help me design enclosure better. Just knowing what I like.

It was pretty funny to be like, ‘So that’s what I think - I should do that more often.’ I think it could almost be focus of a studio or some kind of values class or something - you know like these different elements of like what are all the different possibilities - outcomes of different decisions and that sort of thing. It would be really interesting.

57 The shift to an academic setting would not be anything new for Photovoice (Cook and Buck 2010; Zenkov and Harmon 2009).

It’s possible that these positive reviews are biased, but I also think that these types of projects might be a good addition to the curriculum, particularly for early studios since they could provide both an introduction to research and an exercise for thinking about landscape preferences.

Alternately these methods could be used to help evaluate the educational process. By having students repeat the process in their first and third years, these methods might function as a sort of pre- and post-test that could help the school evaluate how the curriculum shaped or changed their students’ way of viewing the landscape.

Landscape architects interested in these types of projects - particularly published research studies - should carefully consider participant confidentiality, inducements, and the inclusion of workshops or handouts. Staggered research arms may provide researchers with a better understanding of each method on its own, but mixing methods - particularly the use of regular interviews in conjunction with photo arms may increase participation rates and still provide interesting study results.

As designers, we are visual researchers, and it only makes sense to push the methods that are available to us and see what they can tell us to help us better design our world. This process is something that is highly personal and contextual, but the use of established research techniques and more emphasis on reporting our experiences with the methods we use, can help researchers understand their work and their ideas in a broader context.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, Murray Silverstein, Max Jacobson, Ingrid Fisksdahl- King, and Shlomo Angel. 1977. A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction . New York: Oxford University Press.

Allbritton, David W. 1995. When metaphors function as schemas: Some cognitive effects of conceptual metaphors. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10 (1):33-46.

American Society of Landscape Architects. 2011. Research: 2010 ASLA Student Awards. (accessed May 15, 2011), http://www.asla.org/2010studentawards/327.html .

Andersen, Peter A. 2008. Nonverbal communication: forms and functions . 2nd ed. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press Inc.

Astorino. 2006. Deep design filter method for design. U.S. Patent 7,031,888, filed April 7, 2004, issued April 18, 2006.

———. 2011. Astorino presents a groundbreaking research & design technique. (accessed July 9, 2011), http://www.astorino.com/news/release_detail.php?rid=9 .

Astorino, Louis D. 2004. Insight into architectural design. Pittsburgh Engineer (Spring):6-7.

Bagnoli, Anna. 2009. Beyond the standard interview: The use of graphic elicitation and arts- based methods. Qualitative Research 9 (5):547-570.

Baker, T.A., and C.C. Wang. 2006. Photovoice: Use of a participatory action research method to explore the chronic pain experience in older adults. Qualitative Health Research 16 (10):1405-1413.

Barnett, Julie. 2004. The Multiple Sorting Procedure. In Doing social psychology research , edited by G. M. Breakwell. Malden, MA: The British Psychological Society and Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Birdwhistell, Ray L. . 1970. Kinesics and context: Essays on body motion communication . Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.

Brown, Charis, Carolyn Costley, Lorraine Friend, and Richard Varey. 2010. Capturing their dream: Video diaries and minority consumers. Consumption Markets & Culture 13 (4):419-436.

Burgess, Curt, and Christine Chiarello. 1996. Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying metaphor comprehension and other figurative language. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 11 (1):67- 84.

Calder, Ngaia, and Robert Aitken. 2008. An exploratory study of the influences that compromise the sun protection of young adults. International Journal of Consumer Studies 32 (6):579-587.

Caracelli, Valerie J. 2006. Enhancing the policy process through the use of ethnography and other study frameworks: A mixed-method strategy. Research in the Schools 13 (1):84-92.

Catalani, Caricia, and Meredith Minkler. 2010. Photovoice: A review of the literature in health and public health. Health Education & Behavior 37.

Catchings-Castello, Gwendolyn. 2000. The ZMET alternative. Marketing Research 12 (2):6-12.

Chen, P. J. 2006. Sport tourists' loyalty: A conceptual model. Journal of Sport Tourism 11 (3/4):201-237.

Christensen, Glenn L., and Jerry C. Olson. 2002. Mapping consumers' mental models with ZMET. Psychology & Marketing 19 (6):477-501.

Clark-Ibanez, Marisol. 2007. Inner-city children in sharper focus: Sociology of childhood and photo elicitation interviews. In Visual research methods: image, society, and representation , edited by G. C. Stanczak. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Cohen, Bernard C. 1983. The press and foreign policy . Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Collier, John. 1979. Visual Anthropology. In Images of Information , edited by J. Wagner. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

Conley, Lucas. 2005. My dream home. Fast Company (95):39-39.

Cook, Kristin, and Gayle Buck. 2010. Photovoice: A community-based socioscientific pedagogical tool. Science Scope 33 (7).

Cooper, Cheryl M., and Susan P. Yarbrough. 2010. Tell me show me: Using combined focus group and Photovoice methods to gain understanding of health issues in rural Guatemala. Qualitative Health Research 20 (5).

Coulter, Robin A., Gerald Zaltman, and Keith S. Coulter. 2001. Interpreting consumer perceptions of advertising: An application of the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique. Journal of Advertising 30 (4):1-21.

Coulter, Robin Higie, and Gerald Zaltman. 1994. Using the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique to understand brand images. Advances in Consumer Research 21 (1):501-507.

Cullen, Gordon. 1971. The concise townscape . Oxford: Architectural Press.

Damasio, Antonio R. . 1994. Descartes' error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain . New York, NY: Avon Books.

Dixon, Matt, and Morgan Hadjialexiou. 2005. Photovoice: Promising practice in engaging young people who are homeless. Youth Studies Australia 24 (2):52-6.

Downey, Laura H., Carol L. Ireson, and F. Douglas Scutchfield. 2008. The use of photovoice as a method of facilitating deliberation. Health Promotion Practice 10 (3):419-427.

Downing, Frances. 2000. Remembrance and the design of place , Sara and John Lindsey series in the arts and humanities; no. 6 . College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.

Dwyer, Sonya Corbin, and Jennifer L. Buckle. 2009. The space between: On being an insider- outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8 (1):54-63.

Edelman, Gerald. 1992. Bright air, brilliant fire: On the matter of the mind . New York, NY: Basic Books.

Eimas, Peter D., and Albert M. Galaburda. 1990. Some agenda items for a neurobiology of cognition: An introduction. In Neurobiology of cognition , edited by P. D. Eimas and A. M. Galaburda. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Gardenfors, Peter. 2000. Intuition as implicit knowledge. In Intuitive formation of meaning: Symposium held in Stockholm, April 20-21 1998 , edited by S. Sandstrom. Stockholm: Kungl.

Gibbs, Rayond W., Jr. 1992. Categorization and metaphor understanding. Psychological Review 99 (3):572-577.

Glucksberg, Sam. 1991. Beyond literal meanings: The psychology of allusion. Psychological Science 2 (3):146-151.

Goldman, Alvin I. 1986. Epistemology and cognition . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Graziano, Kevin J. 2004. Oppression and resiliency in a post-apartheid South Africa: Unheard voices of black gay men and lesbians. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 10 (3):302-316.

Guillemin, Marilys, and Sarah Drew. 2010. Questions of process in participant-generated visual methodologies. Visual Studies 25 (2):175-188.

Haque, Nasim, and Scott Rosas. 2010. Concept mapping of photovoices: sequencing and integrating methods to understand immigrants' perceptions of neighborhood influences on health. Family and Community Health 33 (3):193-206.

Heisley, Deborah D., and Sidney J. Levy. 1991. Autodriving: A photoelicitation technique. Journal of Consumer Research 18 (3):257-272.

Hergenrather, Kenneth C., Scott D. Rhodes, and Glenn Clark. 2006. Windows to work: Exploring employment-seeking behaviors of persons with HIV/AIDS through photovoice. AIDS Education and Prevention 18 (3):243-58.

Hergenrather, Kenneth C., Scott D. Rhodes, Chris A. Cowan, Gerta Bardhoshi, and Sara Pula. 2009. Photovoice as community-based participatory research: A qualitative review. American Journal of Health Behavior 33 (6):686-698.

Hochberg, Julian. 1972. The representation of things and people. In Art, perception and reality , edited by E. H. Gombrich, J. Hochberg and M. Black. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Holliday, Ruth. 2000. We've been framed: visualising methodology. Sociological Review 48 (4):503-522.

———. 2004. Filming "The closet": The role of video diaries in researching sexualities. American Behavioral Scientist 47 (12):1597-1616.

Holstein, James A., and Jaber F. Gubrium. 1995. The active interview . Vol. Qualitative research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Honeck, Richard P. 1996. Introduction: Figurative language and cognitive science - past, present and future. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 11 (1):1-15.

Hou, Jeffrey. 2005. Speaking images: A case study of photovoice application in community design. In Visualizing Change: Association of Community Design Conference . New York, March 30-April 1, 2005.

Hurley, Forrest Jack. 1977. Portrait of a decade: Roy Stryker and the development of documentary photography in the thirties . New York, NY: Da Capo Press.

Hussey, Wendy. 2006. Slivers of the journey: The use of photovoice and storytelling to examine female to male transsexuals' experience of health care access. Journal of Homosexuality 51 (1):129-158.

Ingram, Joyce L. . 1994. The role of figurative language in psychotherapy: A methodological examination. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 9 (4):271-288.

Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Joy, Annamma, John Sherry, Alladi Venkatesh, and Jonathan Deschenes. 2009. Perceiving images and telling tales: A visual and verbal analysis of the meaning of the internet. Journal of Consumer Psychology 19 (3):556-566.

Kelly, George A. 1963. A theory of personality . New York, NY: W.W. Norton.

Khoo-Lattimore, Catheryn, Maree Thyne, and Kirsten Robertson. 2009. The ZMET method: Using projective technique to understand consumer home choice. Marketing Review 9 (2):139-154.

Knapp, Mark L. . 1980. Essentials of nonverbal communication . New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Kopp, Richard R. 1995. Metaphor therapy: Using client-generated metaphors in psychotherapy . New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel Publishers.

Kosslyn, Stephen. 1994. Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kosslyn, Stephen, and Oliver Koenig. 1992. Wet mind: The new cognitive neuroscience . New York, NY: The Free Press.

Kyle, Gerard, and Garry Chick. 2004. Enduring leisure involvement: The importance of personal relationships. Leisure Studies 23:243-266.

Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Larson, James R., Pennie G. Foster-Fishman, and Christopher B. Keys. 1994. Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67 (3):446-461.

LeDoux, Joseph E. 1996. The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life . New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Lee, Morna S. Y., Peter J. McGoldrick, Kathleen A. Keeling, and Joanne Doherty. 2003. Using ZMET to explore barriers to the adoption of 3G mobile banking services. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 31 (6):340-348.

Ling, I. Ling, Chun-Ming Yang, Yi-Fen Liu, and Yu-Hsuan Tsai. 2009. Penetrating adolescents' mental models of MP3 with ZMET. Adolescence 44 (176):949-963.

Lykes, M.B., M.T. Blanche, and B. Hamber. 2003. Narrating survival and change in Guatemala and South Africa: The politics of representation and a liberatory community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology 31 (1-2):79-90.

Lynch, Kevin. 1960. The image of the city . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mamary, Edward, Jacqueline Mccright, and Kevin Roe. 2007. Our lives: An examination of sexual health issues using photovoice by non-gay identified African American men who have sex with men. Culture, Health, & Sexuality 9 (4):359-370.

Mannay, Dawn. 2010. Making the familiar strange: Can visual research methods render the familiar setting more perceptible? Qualitative Research 10 (1):91-111.

Manzo, Lynne C. 2005. For better or worse: Exploring multiple dimensions of place meaning. Journal of Environmental Psychology 25:67-86.

Marcus, Clare Cooper. 1995. House as a mirror of self . Berkeley, CA: Conari Press.

Matheson, J. L. 2005. Using metaphors to explore the experiences of powerlessness among women in twelve-step substance abuse recovery, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

McIntyre, Alice. 2003. Through the eyes of women: Photovoice and participatory research as tools for reimagining place. Gender, Place and Culture 10 (1):47-66.

Megehee, Carol M., and Arch G. Woodside. 2010. Creating visual narrative art for decoding stories that consumers and brands tell. Psychology & Marketing 27 (6):603-622.

Mehrabian, Albert. 1971. Silent messages . Belmont, CA: Wadworth.

Miles, Susan, and Gene Rowe. 2004. The Laddering Technique. In Doing social psychology research , edited by G. M. Breakwell. Malden, MA: The British Psychological Society and Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Millgram, Elijah. 1997. Practical induction . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Moisander, Johanna, Anu Valtonen, and Heidi Hirsto. 2009. Personal interviews in cultural consumer research - post-structuralist challenges. Consumption Markets & Culture 12 (4):329-348.

Morse, Gardiner. 2002. Hidden minds. Harvard Business School Publication Corp.

Nisbett, Richard E., and Timothy D. Wilson. 1977. Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review 84 (3):231-259.

Nowell, Branda, Shelby L. Berkowitz, Zermarie Deacon, and Pennie Foster-Fishman. 2006. Revealing the cues within community places: Stories of identity, history, and possibility. American Journal of Community Psychology 37 (1/2):29-46.

Noyes, Andrew. 2004. Video diary: A method for exploring learning dispositions. Cambridge Journal of Education 34 (2):193-209.

Oliffe, John L., Joan L. Bottorff, Joy L. Johnson, Mary T. Kelly, and Karen LeBeau. 2010. Fathers: Locating smoking and maculinity in the postpartum. Qualitative Health Research 20:330-339.

Osseck, Jenna, Ashley Hartman, and Carolyn C. Cox. 2010. Photovoice: Addressing concerns of youth in a juvenile detention facility. Children, Youth and Environments 20 (2):200-218.

Purcell, Rod. 2007. Images for change: Community development, community arts and photography. Community Development Journal 44 (1):111-122.

Rhodes, Scott D. 2006. Visions and voices - HIV in the 21st century. Indigent persons living with HIV/AIDS in the southern USA use photovoice to communicate meaning. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 60 (10):886.

Rubin, Herbert J., and Irene S. Rubin. 1995. Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Samuels, Jeffrey. 2007. When words are not enough: Eliciting children's experiences of Buddhist monastic life through photographs. In Visual research methods: Image, society, and representation , edited by G. C. Stanczak. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Sanoff, Henry, and George Barbour. 1974. An alternative strategy for planning an alternative school. In Alternative learning environments , edited by G. T. Coates. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson, & Ross.

Seger, Carol Augart. 1994. Implicit learning. Psychological Bulletin 115 (2):163-196.

Snell, Dave, and Darrin Hodgetts. 2007. Heavy metal, identity and the social negotiation of a community of practice. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 17 (6):430- 445.

Sugai, Philip. 2005. Mapping the mind of the mobile consumer across borders: An application of the Zaltman metaphor elicitation technique. International Marketing Review 22 (6):641- 657.

Thompson, Noreen C., Edward E. Hunter, Lorraine Murray, Lisa Ninci, Elaine M. Rolfs, and Leonie Pallikkathayil. 2008. The experience of living with chronic mental illness: A photovoice study. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care 44 (1):14-24.

Thyne, Maree. 2001. The importance of values research for nonprofit organisations: The motivation-based values of museum visitors. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 6 (2):116-130.

Turner, Terence. 1991. The social dynamics of video media in an indigenous society: The cultural meaning and the personal politics of video-making in Kayapo communities. Visual Anthropology Review 7 (2):68-76.

Tveit, Mari Sundli. 2009. Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference; A comparison between groups. Journal of Environmental Management 90:2882-2888.

University of Ottawa. 2010. Project overview: My neighborhood, my voice. (accessed December 15, 2010), http://www.ottawakids.ca/en/myneighbourhoodmyvoice/.

Virden, Randy J., and Gordon J. Walker. 1999. Ethnic/racial and gender variations among meanings given to, and preferences for, the natural environment. Leisure Sciences 21:219-239.

Vorell, Matthew. 2003. Application of the ZMET methodology in an organizational context: Comparing black and white student subcultures in a university setting, Communication, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio.

Vygotsky, Lev. 1986. Thought and language . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wallerstein, Nina, and Edward Bernstein. 1988. Empowerment education: Freire's ideas adapted to health education. Health Education & Behavior 15 (4):379-394.

Wang, Caroline, and Mary Ann Burris. 1997. Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior 24 (3):369-387.

Wang, Caroline C. 1999. Photovoice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women's health. Journal of Women's Health 8 (2):185-192.

———. 2006. Youth participation in photovoice as a strategy for community change. Journal of Community Practice 14 (1/2):147-161.

Wang, Caroline C., Jennifer L. Cash, and Lisa S. Powers. 2000. Who knows the streets as well as the homeless? Promoting personal and community action through Photovoice. Health Promotion Practice 1 (1):81-89.

Wegner, Daniel M., and Thalia Wheatley. 1999. Apparent mental causation: Sources of the experience of will. American Psychologist 54:480-492.

Weiler, Kathleen. 1988. Women teaching for change: Gender, class, and power. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey.

Whyte, William H. 1980. The social life of small urban spaces . New York, NY: Project for Public Spaces.

Wikipedia. 2011. Test card. (accessed May 19, 2011 - June 22, 2011), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_card .

Wilson, Timothy D. . 2002. Strangers to ourselves: Discovering the adaptive unconscious . Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

Winquist, Jennifer R., and James R. Larson, Jr. 1998. Information pooling: When it impacts group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (2):371-377.

Woodside, Arch G. 2008. Using the forced metaphor-elicitation technique (FMET) to meet animal companions within self. Journal of Business Research 61:480-487.

Worth, Sol, and John Adair. 1972. Through Navajo eyes: An exploration in film communication and anthropology . Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Zaltman, Gerald. 1995. Metaphor elicitation method and apparatus. U.S. Patent 5,436,830, filed February 1, 1993, and issued July 25, 1995.

———. 1996. Metaphorically speaking: New technique uses multidisciplinary ideas to improve qualitative research. Marketing Research 8 (2):13-20.

———. 1997. Rethinking market research: Putting people back in. Journal of Marketing Research 34:424-437.

———. 1997. Rethinking market research: Putting people back in. Journal of Marketing Research 34 (4):424-437.

———. 2003. How customers think: Essential insights into the mind of the market . Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Zaltman, Gerald, and Robin Higie Coulter. 1995. Seeing the voice of the customer: Metaphor- based advertising research. Journal of Advertising Research 35 (4):35-51.

Zaltman, Lindsay. 2008. Comment on 'Using the forced metaphor-elicitation technique (FMET) to meet animal companions within self.'. Journal of Business Research 61 (5):488-489.

Zeisel, John. 2006. Inquiry by design: environment/behavior/neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape, and planning . Revised edition ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Zenkov, Kristien, and James Harmon. 2009. Picturing a writing process: Photovoice and teaching writing to urban youth. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 52 (7):575-84.

APPENDIX A

CONTENTS

Page

GARDEN WALL ...... 92

THE 11 ZMET STEPS ...... 94

ZMET CONCENSUS MAP - EXAMPLE ...... 97

ZMET SUMMARY IMAGE - EXAMPLE ...... 98

GARDEN WALL

173 Garden Wall * 58

…in private houses, both the HALF-HIDDEN GARDEN (111) and the PRIVATE TERRACE ON THE STREET (140) require walls. More generally, not only private gardens, but public gardens too, and even small parks and greens - QUIET BACKS (59), ACESSIBLE GREEN (60), need some kind of enclosure around them, to make them as beautiful and quiet as possible.

Gardens and small public parks don’t give enough relief from noise unless they are well protected. People need contact with trees and plants and water. In some way, which is hard to express, people are able to be more whole in the presence of nature, are able to go deeper into themselves, and are somehow able to draw sustaining energy from the life of plants and trees and water. In a city, gardens and small parks try to solve this problem; but they are usually so close to traffic, noise, and buildings that the impact of nature is entirely lost. To be truly useful, in the deepest psychological sense, they must allow the people in them to be in touch with nature - and must be shielded from the sight and sound of passing traffic, city noises, and buildings. This requires walls, substantial high walls, and dense planting all around the garden. In those few cases where there are small walled gardens in a city, open to the public - Alhambra, Copenhagen Royal Library Garden - these gardens almost always become famous. People understand and value the peace which they create.

…your garden or park wall of brick… has indeed often an unkind look on the outside, but there is more modesty in it than unkindness. It generally means, not that the builder of it wants to shut you out from the view of his garden, but from the view of himself: it is a frank statement that as he needs a certain portion of time to himself, so he needs a certain portion of ground to himself,

58 Full text taken from Alexander et al.’s (1977) Pattern Language, pp. 805-8

and must not be stared at when he digs there in his shirtsleeves, or plays at leapfrog with his boys from school, or talks over old times with his wife, walking up and down in the evening sunshine. Besides, the brick wall has good practical service in it, and shelters you from the east wind, and ripens your peaches and nectarines, and glows in autumn like a sunny bank. And, moreover, your brick wall, if you build it properly, so that it shall stand long enough, is a beautiful thing when it is old, and has assumed its grave purple red, touched with mossy green… (John Ruskin, The Two Paths , New York: Dutton, 1907, pp.202-205.)

This pattern applies to all private gardens and to small parks in cities. We are not convinced that it applies to all small parks – but it is hard to differentiate precisely between the places where a walled garden is desirable and the places where it is not. There are definitely situations where a small park, and perhaps even a small garden that is open to the rush of life around it, is just right. However, there are far more parks and gardens left open, that need to be walled, than vice versa, so we emphasize the walled condition. Therefore:

Form some kind of enclosure to protect the interior of a quiet garden from the sights and sounds of passing traffic. If it is a large garden or a park, the enclosure can be soft, can include bushes, trees, slopes, and so on. The smaller the garden, however, the harder and more definite the enclosure must become. In a very small garden, form the enclosure with buildings or walls; even hedges and fences will not be enough to keep out sound.

Use the garden wall to help form positive outdoor space – POSITIVE OUTDOOR SPAC E (106); but pierce it with balustrades and windows to make connections between garden and street, or garden and garden – PRIVATE TERRACE ON THE STREET (140), TRELLISED WALK (174), HALF-OPEN WALL (193), and above all, give it openings to make views into other larger and more distant spaces –HIERARCHY OF OPEN SPACE (114), ZEN VIEW (134)…

THE 11 ZMET STEPS

1. Storytelling. In this step, participants are asked to describe the pictures they brought in and

associated thoughts and feelings. Reflexive interviewing techniques (e.g., restating the

informants’ comments and summarizing) are used to ensure understanding and

comprehensiveness (Christensen and Olson 2002), but interviewers refrain from

interpreting the pictures (Khoo-Lattimore, Thyne, and Robertson 2009).

2. Missed issues and images. Before moving on, interviewers ask participants if there are any

ideas that are not reflected in the collection of pictures. These new ideas are added in the

form of “drawing notes” – so that they can be included in subsequent steps.

3. Sorting task. In this step, participants categorize the pictures and describe the sorting

process. Sometimes this step is also used to reduce the number of images people have

brought in – and researchers ask participants if any of the images “say the same thing and

could be put aside” (Zaltman 1997, 429).

4. Metaphor elicitation (also sometimes referred to as construct elicitation ). This step uses

the Kelly Repertory Grid technique (Kelly 1963), where images are analyzed in sets (which

can be generated by the participant or the researcher). For any given set, the participant is

asked to divide the images into two groups based on similarities and differences. 59 Usually

in ZMET the researcher picks three cards, and the participant must then come up with a

reason why two cards are similar to each other and different from the third. All of the

59 Readers interested in sorting techniques and the Kelly Repertory Grid may be interested in Chapter 12 - The Multiple Sorting Procedure (MSP) and Chapter 13 - The Laddering Technique in Doing Social Psychology Research (Barnett 2004; Miles and Rowe 2004).

images are eventually matched up in a set to try to get at all of the underlying similarities

and differences.

5. Metaphor elaboration. Based on art therapy techniques, this step has the interviewer select

two or three images and ask the participant to imagine “widening the frame of one of the

pictures in any direction or dimension and to describe what would enter the picture that

would reinforce (or sometimes contradict) its meaning for them” (Zaltman 1997, 429).

Zaltman (1997) argues, “This process of visual elaboration disrupts the equilibrium

established by the pictures and stimulates emotional responses that create existential issues

for the participant...” (p. 429).

6. Representative image. In this step, participants must choose a picture that best represents

their feelings and give a reason for the choice.

7. Opposite image. Here, the participant is asked to describe an image that has the opposite

meaning to the one chosen. (It has been argued that this step helps ensure trustworthiness

by incorporating negative case analysis (Khoo-Lattimore, Thyne, and Robertson 2009), but

both opposite image and representative image are often omitted in published ZMET

studies).

8. Sensory images. In this step the participant is asked to discuss “what does and does not

describe the concept in terms of colour, emotions, sound, smell, taste and touch” (Khoo-

Lattimore, Thyne, and Robertson 2009, p. 144). (This step is done without the

photographs).

9. The summary image. In this step, the participant creates “a summary image that represents

a visual overview of his/her thoughts and feelings” using the photographs they have

collected. This step often requires help from someone trained in creating digital images

and is sometimes scheduled separately from the other interview steps. Participants are

asked to describe the reasons for the decisions they make about cropping, resizing,

coloring, and positioning images.

10. The vignette. Research suggests that moving images may activate different areas of the

brain (Zaltman 2003), so in this step, participants are asked to come up with a vignette or

short movie that reflects their perspective on a topic.

11. Mental map (or the consensus map ). When placed during the interview “the researcher

reviews the previously discussed constructs and inquires if anything has been missed”

before creating a mental model (Ling et al. 2009, 954), but this step frequently occurs long

after the interview, when the researcher has had time to transcribe tapes and analyze the

results. 60

60 More information on consensus maps is provided in the Analysis Section of Chapter 4.

ZMET CONCENSUS MAP - EXAMPLE 61

61 This example is taken from Philip Sugai’s (2005) article, “Mapping the mind of the mobile consumer across borders: An application of the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique”, p. 647.

ZMET SUMMARY IMAGE - EXAMPLE 62

62 This example is taken from Coulter, Zaltman, and Coulter’s (2001) article, “Interpreting consumper perceptions of advertising: An application of the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique”, p. 15.

APPENDIX B

STUDY DOCUMENTS

CONTENTS

Page

RECRUITMENT EMAIL ...... 100

INSTRUCTIONS ...... 101

INTERVIEW INSTRUMENTS ...... 103

100

RECRUITMENT EMAIL

I am looking for volunteers to help me with my thesis, and I was wondering if any of you might be interested. Please don’t feel pressured!! I promise I won’t hold it against you if you don’t have time to participate. And, of course, you are free to change your mind about participating at any time.

My study is looking at how different interview methods compare so I am recruiting people to be in one of three study arms: normal interview, Photovoice, and ZMET. Everyone who participates will be given a topic to think about, meet me for an interview, and fill out an emailed survey. The main differences between the arms are:

1) participants in the Photovoice and ZMET arms will also be asked to take (or collect) photos related to the topic and 2) participants in the ZMET arm will do a series of exercises during their interview instead of answering more general interview questions.

The normal interview arm will require: one-on-one time with me (to pass out instructions, set up interview times, and do the interview; estimate that this will take at least 35 minutes – probably longer) and additional (personal) time for you to think about the topic (at least 20 minutes, probably more) and complete the exit survey (15 minutes or less). So participating in this arm will probably take at least an hour , and it might take a good deal more time depending on your interest in the topic.

The Photovoice arm has similar time requirements to the normal interview arm, but in addition you will need to take or collect photographs or images that represent your ideas. One-on-one time will again last at least 35 minutes, personal time required will probably run one hour or more, and completing the exit survey should take less than 15 minutes. SO participating in this arm will probably take at least an hour and 40 minutes , and it might take a good deal more.

FINALLY, the ZMET arm requires significant one-on-one time (at least one hour and 15 minutes) plus the time it takes to think about and collect photos related to your ideas (probably an hour or more) and fill out the exit survey (15 minutes or less). This arm will probably require participants to spend at least 2 hours and 20 minutes working on the project.

If you think you might be interested in participating, just send a reply to this email and let me know which group(s) you’d be willing to be placed in. And if you have any questions feel free to ask!! Thanks so much for your time!! - Kate

101

REGULAR INTERVIEW - INSTRUCTIONS

Before the interview we’ve set up, please think some about the enclosure of gardens . Enclosure is meant to be interpreted very broadly - so along with things like walls and gates, you might think about enclosure from trees, shrubs, fences, adjacent buildings, adjacent hills, etc. Similarly, gardens are meant to refer to smallish, tended landscapes – so instead of just picturing a vegetable or flower garden, you might think about the average American yard, small park, or plaza.

I am interested in what you think about enclosure, whether you like it or dislike it, and how your perceptions and preferences change. What variables do you think are important? Does it matter how the space is used? Does it matter if it is small or large? If the space is public or private? Urban or rural? Does it change based on what goes on in adjacent spaces? The region or place you are in? Or what the character of the space is (e.g., formal/informal)? And do these variables interact?

You can spend as much or as little time on this as you want. ☺ And the idea is to really focus on your thoughts and your preferences – so don’t feel like you need to answer the questions I have set here if they don’t fit into your ideas, perceptions, or preferences.

102

PHOTOVOICE/ZMET INTERVIEW INSTRUCTIONS

Take pictures related to your ideas or collect them from other sources (e.g., magazines, books, web searches). It’s okay if you can’t find all of the pictures you would ideally want to have. If there’s something you think is important, but couldn’t capture, we can still talk about it. ☺

103

INTERVIEW INSTRUMENTS

1. ZMET Interview [Interviewer will note interview start time, stop time, date, and whether the interviewee is a landscape architecture student or from outside the profession. Reflexive interviewing techniques (e.g., restating the informants’ comments and summarizing) will be used throughout to ensure understanding and comprehensiveness, but the interviewer will refrain from interpreting the pictures.] [Welcome and thanks]. There are 7 different exercises that we will do as part of this interview. Some of them should be fairly quick, but other ones will take more time. If you get tired of doing this, let me know and we can meet again another day or try to wrap things up. [Exercise 1. Storytelling ] So the first thing is to describe your pictures. Why did you choose these pictures? [Exercise 2. Missed issues and images ] Before moving on, are there any ideas that are not reflected in the collection of pictures? [New ideas are added in the form of “drawing notes” – so that they can be included in subsequent steps.] [Exercise 3. Sorting task ] For the next exercise, think about different categories - or ways - you could sort your pictures. [After the sort(s)] Do any of the pictures say the same thing? [Exercise 4. Metaphor elicitation. This step uses the Kelly Repertory Grid technique] For the next exercise, I’m going to put three pictures together, and your job is to divide them into two groups based on similarities and differences. [All of the images are eventually matched up in a set to try to get at all of the underlying similarities and differences.] [Exercise 5. Metaphor elaboration ] In this exercise, we’ll use two of your pictures [chosen by the interviewer] and for each one I want you to think about widening the frame in any direction or dimension and describe what would enter the picture that would reinforce - or contradict - its meaning. [Exercise 6. The summary image ] Okay, we’re almost there. In this exercise, we’re going to create a summary image that represents a visual overview of your thoughts and feelings using the photographs you’ve collected [using Photoshop]. You can crop, resize, color, and position your images, however you want. And as we go through, I’ll ask you why you’ve made certain design decisions.

104

2. Photovoice Interview [Interviewer will note interview start time, stop time, date, and whether the interviewee is a landscape architecture student or from outside the profession. Reflexive interviewing techniques (e.g., restating the informants’ comments and summarizing) will be used to ensure understanding and comprehensiveness.]

[Welcome and thanks]. So for this interview, we’ll go through each one of your pictures using typical Photovoice questions.

[Pass out sheet with questions to interviewee for their reference. These will be: 1. Describe your picture. 2. What is happening in your picture? 3. Why did you take a picture of this? 4. What does this picture tell us about enclosure? 5. How can this picture be used as an opportunity to improve small gardens?]

These are meant to be a starting place. So don’t feel like you have to answer these questions explicitly as we go through your pictures – but they are things to think about. As we go through, I will ask a few other questions, basically to make sure that I understand all of what you are saying.

105

3. Individual Interview [Interviewer will note interview start time, stop time, date, and whether the interviewee is a landscape architecture student or from outside the profession. Reflexive interviewing techniques (e.g., restating the informants’ comments and summarizing) will be used to ensure understanding and comprehensiveness.]

[Welcome and thanks]. So what decisions did you come to about enclosure in gardens?

[Depending on participant response… additional questions may be asked to try to gather more information on how the participant defined enclosure and gardens, how the variables they mention relate to each other, and how their preferences and perceptions can be used to drive better design.

Specific questions might include: How did you define garden for this project? Do you think your concept of enclosure would change if the space was [other than defined… urban, rural, public, private]? So far you’ve mentioned [x] and [y] do you think these variables interact? Do you think other people would have similar responses to enclosure? Or do you think your preferences are really personal? Do you think your ideas could be used to make better outdoor spaces? And if so how?]

106

4. Final Survey – internet form 63

63 NOTE: There was also a paper form with the same questions that is not reproduced here.

107

108

APPENDIX C

ADDITIONAL QUOTES AND IMAGES

109

The feeling of ‘enclosure.’

Another positive: …the comfort that the word of ‘enclosure’ just kind of forms in your head even before thinking of specific places of enclosure. Neutral: [K: Alright what about - do you think that you have a positive connotation to the word enclosure?] Again that’s when I said it was situational… If it’s enclosing a pit bull into a fenced area and keeping it away from my baby then yes it’s a good thing. If it’s keeping me in a fenced area and I can’t get out then it becomes a bad thing. Negative: You know I think my immediate reaction would be negative, but I think it’s such a powerful element in design making something feel scaled down for people - that it’s not this ever going on space so I don’t know why, but I think I do have a negative… Is there another word that would be more positive? Protection and Intimacy: I chose this magnolia tree because it’s a tree that a lot of people like to sit under. And it’s… it’s really easy to get under. The branches go the entire way around down to the ground to give it a really enclosed feel. […] And so again it’s darker than the surrounding areas, but the foliage is actually so thick that it almost creates a full barrier. It’s a greater barrier than the fences or something like that. The foliage is really dense… so I guess a sense of protection or isolation or something… [K: would you say that having a sense of enclosure increases a sense of intimacy or…] In a space? [K: Mmm. Or even the feeling of being bonded to a space makes you feel…] … like closer to it - more involved in it somehow - more related to it… Yes I do, and maybe that’s why I like enclosure in a garden setting because it does - it makes… I think they tend to be special places. […] I think any time you’re in a special place you feel some connection to it even if you don’t know anything about it, it’s not yours, you’ve never been there before, you’ve been there a million times before…. It doesn’t matter. So yes. I think that’s a good question to ask. Order: I like enclosures just because it gives you a sense of security or a sense of ownership of the space you are in if you can understand your relationship to that space… (Un)comfortable: …in areas that I think I maybe don’t fit in I might seek enclosure to make me feel more comfortable you know. …whereas I feel like my limited time in China – the sense of enclosure was totally different because no matter what you were surrounded with people and so it was claustrophobic in some situations (Un)safe: You could feel safe or unsafe if you were in a loud space with tons of people and you don’t recognize where the exits are and that sort of thing - you feel like stuck.

110

Too enclosed would be bad because then you’d have less of a chance of escape I guess – you know. You always see the dismay on the hero’s face when he thinks he’s got a way out and he goes and then there’s an enemy blocking it, and he’s like, ‘darn it! I’m trapped’…

Uses for enclosure. Boundaries - maintaining safety and control In general Somewhere like Big City Bread where you have that little outdoor patio or even with the children’s play area in Bodrum – I think you have – even just safety from – cars – so it’s defining safety in terms of that… so if you do have kids [K: They’re corralled. ‘Here you go.’] You can kind of keep ‘em in.

Boundaries - buffering or separating activities In general For me, personally, I always – if there’s one available – choose to sit further from the pathway. I don’t know whether that’s because… I don’t know – I like to have a buffer or something – you know. I guess I do… […] I do like to sit there at the bar though too which is also an enclosed space – but there is that rail there – you know – that gives that buffer. Boundaries - Defining a space or its ownership In general There’s a book […] the name of it is Safescape. It kind of recommends […] for private properties - more to define the boundary to have some kind of a gate, a fence… Not – ‘okay, stay out of my property’ – but more like a suggestion – ‘okay- this is my space’ so the criminals, bad people, will get the message. […] And then also lighting is very important. It doesn’t have to be overly bright… It can be just lights that accent certain features to give – to give people the impression that ‘hey people live here.’ Boundaries - screening and creating privacy In general And then like urban verses rural - if I’m in a park or… a state park or a city park the feeling of being a little bit enclosed in nature - surrounded by nature and having like cars screened and that sort of thing…

Bound aries - directing attention or framing views In general This one’s definitely more one sided and directing your attention to a certain… way. So this is kind of the idea like the borrowed scenery where your enclosure actually helps frame the view outside…

Resting/meditative Spaces In general …Enclosure suggests and I know there’s sort of this theory, but square shapes and round shapes tend to be more stationary you know like in a floor plan cause there’s a center and you’re right there;

111

whereas long shapes kind of connotate movement - so that to me kind of… Enclosure connotates to me sitting and resting… whereas movement - I think active. In studio [K: Do you think you usually think of it as a like pause - like your places for people to sit?] Yeah. It’s usually a stopping point.

Experiences In studio: Well the example that comes to mind […] is the Town and Gown where we created that kind of sunken patio with a canopy. We had these really long discussions about how big it should be and how far it should step down to be comfortable… I mean I guess it’s just like intuitively or something… I don’t know that I… I mean I guess you think about… like what is the… you know when I draw the space like what’s the actual size of it - how’s a person going to feel in it - like Spooner emphasized like going into the courtyard you know? What are the dimensions of this space? Do you feel comfortable here? We won’t get the tunnel project [K laughing] ‘cause that was me trying to use enclosure to make you feel uncomfortable. Not a pleasant experience. I think of designing as very experiential - I think like you do… like when you’re designing a place it’s not just the form - I mean I’m a very form based designer, but I think about like how the person is going to be experiencing the spaces and enclosure is definitely - especially in a garden setting - is a really good thing to have for many reasons[…] And because it’s also a contrast between... I’m big into contrasting things I think in my designs too and enclosure is a good way to do that - I mean you have to do that in order to make enclosure in the sense - in the way that I think of it. You always want to understand that relationship to how someone feels in a space and how that defines a space as to what it’s function is going to be and if it should be kind of out there and kind of more inviting enclosure or if it’s more of an intimate type setting enclosure. […] So yes I think big time studio projects I’ve kept enclosure in mind - not necessarily in the terms enclosure but how it’s manifested in a setting - that public private - the community aspect to enclosure…

Juxtaposition.

You have to have openness to feel the enclosure - there has to be that juxtaposition…

112

I think your resting point is right here - where you do get that vista, but it’s definitely… Obviously the gardens are very terraced so it’s just this constant enclosure stepping down from room to room… but, I don’t know, I do kind of like that sense of being enclosed but having that view off into the distance.

This is over by the doggy walk area, and I’ve always liked this part because of all the trees - create like a tunnel, and there’s something about it that – just in general. It feels enclosed because of that and because the path is narrow but also because you can hear the interstate over here and it feels like such a nice little safe place away from… You can hear it, but you know you’re far away from it and it’s this nice little enclosed wilderness spot so close to reality that I kind of like that so… so… yeah that’s about it…

Forms and materials.

Shapes: I guess like all the precedents that I think of are like the walled gardens that are very orthogonal so I guess I think of that as a very enclosed shape. Maybe that’s like more like a perceived shape - like if something’s more undulating maybe you don’t visualize that shape as well [K: Yeah like you could obscure it somehow] like in the arboretum - like the North Arboretum of the Founders Garden right like there’s vegetation all around you, but… so there’s kind of an enclosure I mean I know there’s a wall there too, but maybe the fact that there is some give and take to the forms… Again it’s completely fenced in, but it’s not even just that it’s fenced in - it’s that it’s a circle

113

Proportions: If you feel like there’s material on the majority of your sides it would feel more enclosed. Enclosure for me it’s got to be defined - not necessarily a hard edge but a defined edge to the space that’s enclosed - probably at least on three or four sides. [Height to height; vertical variation] You have varying heights of stuff that adds to it… Overheads: The tables here – which are right on a pathway and yet because they are separated and underneath something it feels very enclosed and separated from the rest. Okay -this is a view of the clubhouse at our complex, and it’s showing the portico - I don’t know what that would be called… but again another patio like area, but it doesn’t have a delineated edge besides the columns… still definitely feels enclosed. Compensating factors: [K: Do you think there’s a height limit? You know like how high do you think something has to be before you find it…] …to be its own space? I don’t know… These bricks are four inches and I find it to be high enough. The difference between the grass and the granite is almost negligible, but I still find it to be enclosed in some way. It’s its own entity. Needing a ‘back’: For some reason to me the blue stone patio at Founders doesn’t really seem enclosed even though it’s very enclosed because it has sort of these leaks of space all the way around it […] the pea garden does… It’s sort of… It’s a lot of different ratios… like if there’s a lot of people on the bluestone patio all at once and it’s all busy and people are coming and going… I guess it’s kind of like that on the terrace one, but you have a view out and there’s one wall and there’s sort of a back entrance that people don’t really come in.

I really liked this area because it’s – you have this stream – so it’s created a bit of a gulley and even though on… There’s a path that’s up on this side and there’s a path that’s over here – but because you’re at the bottom of it you’re kind of tucked in with these rocks…

114

And then this little garden area or courtyard. I don’t really know. But I always feel like this feels very enclosed, and once again I think it’s because you have the separation of heights more than anything else…

This one has more built elements to it, but it’s obviously in a garden or in an outdoor room, but this reminded me that enclosure… So I think in the landscape can be helped when you go down. So like this obviously steps down, but even if it were just topographically a bowl - I think that definitely adds to the sense of enclosure.

This one is the patio next to that space, and again it has a very defined edge through materiality with the brick versus the concrete and then there’s steps on either side of it and the steps also give it a really defined edge - like you were saying - height change. One set of steps leads down and then over here is the set of steps that leads up to the [club house]…

115

SOUTH CAMPUS OVAL (Cont). [Con] I don’t think so, and I don’t really remember a lot of trees like on the lawn. We did do a photography class on the lawn, and I think there’s a bit of topography to it and so I think maybe it felt comfortable if you were perched up on the higher part where you could kind of like look out at everybody walking by because you’d be above the paths and stuff - so you might feel a little bit more separated from them that way, but I feel like I mean you have a big view of everything - I don’t know if I feel enclosed there.

[Pro] Again - so remember how I said for me a sense of enclosure is a delineated, defined space… That’s a very defined space. There’s all this openness around it and then all of the sudden you have this oval that’s raised up and has its own - the sidewalk with the leaves in it… Everything about that space gives it ‘this is a space.’ It’s its own thing and to me that makes it feel enclosed. It’s open to the elements, but a lot of the spaces that I’ve shown you have been completely open to the elements. But it’s a completely delineated space unto itself.

[Con] I used to walk there all the time or pass that to go to Forestry class, and I’ve never thought of that or even thinking about it right now in my mind really as enclosure - maybe I think that goes back to you - ‘cause it’s elevated a little bit right? - I think that goes back to the topography part of that. I almost feel like that walkway is more enclosed than the actual - that central space - it’s more of a focal point - I guess looking in - but maybe it’s… There’s that long grand mall that’s connected to it of open space so… […] So yeah that’s an interesting space that’s been brought up and would never have crossed my mind to me. So, to me, no that is not enclosure.

Paths and Thresholds (cont). I think part of it is like the streets being narrow and so it forces sort of this intimacy between people…

The trees - create like a tunnel, and there’s something about it that – just in general – it feels enclosed because of that and because the path is narrow…

116

I should make another point too about these - is that all of these paths are really narrow - they’re all really meant for one maximum - two people standing next to each other so they are really narrow and then they also have stuff growing on either side of you. So the fact that you can’t fit a lot of people on it adds to that enclosure feeling a little bit - smaller space I guess. [Later in the conversation; K: This isn’t really related, but when you were pointing out the narrowness of this path… I was wondering if as you increase the path size if you can compensate by making - strengthening the…] Like making them either bolder or taller? [K nods] Yes. I think that’s definitely - like proportionally… Yes, I do…

Thresholds, gates, and windows (cont).

This one was for the larger sense of enclosure and just the way that the lake comes together and then the bridge. And it’s as much based on my knowledge of what’s on the other side of this bridge as anything else… So to me it was just… the three different… It was like bringing you in… The bridge is almost like a gate into these other enclosed areas behind – beyond…

It’s never felt like a space that was mine per se – because it goes with this building so strongly so I’d never really gone back here but I always loved looking into it. It was like the secret garden thing again.

I think like a portal or a place that leads to an enclosure has its own kind of feelings associated with it – like now I’m thinking of like the Secret Garden… You need a key to get inside… I don’t know that I have well developed thoughts on that… but I think that there is something like the denial of the experience of whatever’s behind the portal can lead you to want to see more…

117

…the view - whether you’re actually enclosed on this side of the wall or if it’s completely open - physically open - like nothing else around you just a wall - that in and of itself - kind of that image is like enclosure ‘cause there’s this wall and there’s this - […] basically a window to look through so I get a sense of enclosure…

This is a physical cue in the landscape that sets… It’s a boundary or whatever… This gate, this fence, this big line of prickly […] It makes you realize what’s on the other side and wanting to almost - if you’re curious enough - this is me… wanting to scale that thing, to get over it, and to see what is on that other side. You know it provokes the senses. And I think that’s what pretty much all enclosure is about - is how one perceives a space… […] It’s that - again ties back into the public private realm too - so… and I’m thinking too of the travels that I’m on or just anywhere across the United States - where you’re walking along… I’m thinking of London specifically and Paris had a lot of these too - is you’re walking along that street façade and there’s these big, beautiful, elaborate doors and gates and there are pockets where you can kind of peek between or see through and you see these private, internal courtyards. It’s like, ‘oh enclosure. I want to be a part of that - that space.’ But you know it was again that public private realm that you couldn’t access - denied space - it’s almost defensible space in a sense.

I just looked at that and the fact that that’s a gate and you can tell that there’s something behind it… and it’s completely closed… It’s not even one that’s been left partially open - you know like hinting at come on in - inviting you in… That alludes to enclosure even though I have no idea what’s on the other side of that… […] I think it might also be - not necessarily the color blue… but the fact that this is dark and then you can see there’s a lot more light on the other side too so you can tell that it’s a place that you can go into…

Natural materials (large scale):

118

like it’s a more open area. I can actually see the sky. Whereas in New York, if you go to Manhattan, all you see are skyscrapers. You can’t… It’s more like you are really enclosed. There’s no… You can see a little bit of sky, but then… I guess it’s always enclosed somewhat by buildings or by people. […] If I want to find a place more in a natural setting - I want to Okay, here in go to a park, and then, maybe then, I can… You know - it’s more… it’s Athens - just opened up a little bit and then I feel more okay… I’m in a natural setting. overall - I feel

Natural [K: I’m not always the biggest fan of like vines on stuff, but it is kind of materials nice on this…] I like it. I don’t know I feel like it kind of softens it a little (small scale): bit so it’s not… [K: Yeah, I think otherwise…] Yeah I think that actually – since you point that out – I think that helps cause there is a lot of that in Turkey as we’ve seen in different pictures, and so it’s not just… I don’t want to get into defining natural and that conversation, but it does give it a more natural feel – so it’s not completely constructed… human constructed.

The thing about natural material - about plants and just the outdoors is that they’re always changing - so even if the wind isn’t blowing - even if the sun is not out or it is a cloudy day so there’s no changing shadows - no matter what you know that as a human that it’s going to be changing at least throughout the seasons that it’s a living thing so… so in that sense even when there’s not physical movement you know that there’s change happening… so… that’s probably another thing that I like about this is that…it’s going to be different experiences at different times of day and if you were in a stone tunnel you would have no idea except for the very ends of the tunnel what in the world was going on around you… It’s softer - it’s not like a wall. I think that’s the thing - if that were like a little - like a one foot wall that didn’t go in and out off that edge - I don’t think… I think it would seem more open. I don’t know if it’s just ‘cause it’s a hard line that’s real low so like you can imagine that it goes higher but the fact that these grasses are kind of creeping in on the edge of it - that’s a kind of movement again in a way - the fact that that edge - that border of grass kind of is changing as it goes along the path… I think I looked at that and I was like ooo if that were stone it would be a totally different experience so once again even though you can’t see through those hedges - you probably wouldn’t even be able to climb through them - so it’s not like necessarily you could get out any easier than if it were stone, but it’s a cooler experience I think.

119

Flexible or moveable artificial materials:

Then again like here you have – I like that sense of moveable… you know – some of the elements in it being moveable. So the chairs are plastic… They’re not the most aesthetically pleasing, but it’s kind of nice if you want to have a little bit more space or you know…

Environmental conditions.

The elements: They have a really bad habit on this campus of putting picnic tables in places and then not putting it anywhere near a tree. [K laughing] Like they just drop it in the middle of a field. [K gesturing] Exactly – ‘You realize we’re in Georgia and it’s hot’ and it’s stupid.

I tend to like more enclosed places when it’s colder anyway ‘cause I pretend like it’s warmer… It’s like the breeze can’t get you quite as much…

Oh – well it could be protection from like weather… you know like we’re protected from the sun here. We’re protected from… I’m a little bit more protected from the rain than you are… [laughing] protected from the wind. So yeah it protects from the elements I guess you could say…

I think a shadow - like an area of shade - just by stepping into that you can feel more enclosed and part of that is probably coming from the fact that it’s definitely hot outside - it’s really sunny and so the shade offers cooler temperatures typically too, and I guess, in that sense, the feeling of enclosure is a positive one because you’re escaping the outside so you’re going into something - like you’re going into the shade - getting out of the sun...

I never really thought of it in terms of the elements. Smells: [K: What if it was really stinky? I’m trying to think of like enclosure as protection… so like things that would offend you…] It would be annoying, but I would still think of it as enclosed. Like that would be another thing, you know like… I don’t know… enclosure at that point it gets down to semantics or degree. Noise: …usually you think noise you think - well there’s a lot of stuff generating that noise - which implies density of some sort - you know density whether it be car traffic - whether it be people walking by and so enclosure just off of first hand or the first thing that comes in my mind is a retreat from that noise - it’s like a retreat from the opposite. […] I don’t think you can easily dismiss noise because enclosure is all about perception to me and perception you can’t just solely base on sight alone there’s other cues involved and noise definitely is one of them.

[K: …what if you were in this space and like on the other side of this greenery there was a bus route and there were busses going by a lot of the time and garbage trucks and noisy things would it still be an enclosed space?] I think so… it wouldn’t necessarily be like a totally tranquil space, but I think it would still be enclosed as long as that wall was thick enough that you… like hearing stuff doesn’t necessarily bother me, but like being able to see a car or bus…

120

Like now the noise – the siren - the fire trucks… this is an enclosed space, but I can still hear it. But now I think it’s enclosed – somewhat – partially.

Darkness: It might be the change in lightness too – to be honest – it’s dimmer.

…it’s darker, and I feel like that one’s more enclosed for that reason.

[K: What about this booth? […] Is this booth enclosed?] Partially enclosed - at night it’s more enclosed - that’s one thing - because I think the visual - like at night it would be more enclosed cause you can’t see - you know that would seem more solid [the windows] whereas now it seems more enclosed this way but if that wall were enclosed - I’d have my three walls.

Well, I’m thinking of like the courtyard spaces in China - in the ancient towns we went to and how the edges were always shaded - you know like even in the monastery old gardens where you have your occulus or whatever opening in the center and that was bright and sunny and then you’re like shaded borders… so I could see that.

…think about inside a building. I mean you could be in a really big room - right like a huge room - lights on versus lights off - when it’s like pitch black and I would guess that you probably would feel more enclosed. Maybe it’s just the sense that - I mean if you can’t see anything around you, it’s like you have no idea if there’s something there - so there could be you know. The not knowing…

[K: So… one thing that came up is this idea that a space being dark gives it an increased sense of enclosure regardless of like whatever else it’s doing - so if you like - if this had a shadow - would it be more enclosed?] I don’t think so… I think… I mean it would depend - it’s kind of the activity that’s going on there - ‘cause there’s nothing to sit there it seems too small to even put a spot to sit there and the proportions are just wrong… to like make it feel enclosed to me… So I don’t know that a shadow would make a difference ‘cause like here I’m not thinking of it just because it’s being dark I’m thinking of where you can see distance wise - whereas like a shadow you would still be able to see distance wise - so I don’t think that that would increase the sense of enclosure. I don’t think of enclosed spaces as being dark - like my backyard is filled with happy filtered light and it seems very enclosed to me and rooms that I like have a lot of light and windows in them… so to me I don’t think light and dark… I think that it can, but I don’t think it necessarily adds or creates or takes away from something.

Cultural and personal variables.

…there was a sense of even though you’re enclosed being an outsider ‘cause everyone there was really I guess skeptical of tourism […] when the inhabitants would see us and they were outside, they’d immediately go run back up into their house, but it was interesting ‘cause you’d see them peering through their window and they were really, really shy in this space as opposed to the other one […] It definitely had a completely different feeling […] The people definitely defined I think the space… Campfire circles became one of my favorite examples to discuss with participants. The initial introduction of this topic is listed first, and later responses to the issue follow.

121

Another thought that occurred to me was that even when I’m in an open area if I’m sitting in a circle with other people – say around a campfire – that feels enclosed to me – even though my back is exposed and the enclosure is formed by no more than the bodies of people that to me feels very similar to [pause]… I don’t know… I don’t know – that may take it in a direction that [K: Well…] but it’s not a space that’s enclosed, but the people are making the space I guess…

I think it has to do too with how far the light reaches and you feel like safe and sheltered within that space…

It does. I think it’s more of the people and the formation that is occurring more so than the actual light/dark itself. I think that amplifies it - but I mean if I were - the first thing I think about - you know the campfire example [that] pops in my head was first of all a circular formation and because you automatically feel - say there’s a circle of people around a campfire and you’re as an - I don’t want to say outsider but you’re standing outside that circle - still seeing the light of that campfire, but you’re outside the circle you all of the sudden feel greater vulnerability - I feel because you’re not a part of inside that circle so… and not being able to be aware of what’s behind you. I’d almost feel like if I were that person I’d feel more comfortable knowing if there was a delineation even if it be some logs in a circle around me or some campfire chairs or something - knowing that there was something behind me gives me that greater sense…

[K: …do you think that the people in this picture help create a sense of enclosure? Or do you think sitting in a circle with a bunch of other people creates a sense of enclosure?] Definitely - I think like even if you were to take the table out and these people were just standing on either side kind of adding to that - that edge that the trees already create. I think it would feel more enclosed kind of like… just the fact that if it was just one person standing there it would still be an enclosed space but not as enclosed. But as soon as you inhabit it with more people - not necessarily if they were all standing on a grid inside it - that probably wouldn’t do anything - make it feel more or less enclosed but yeah…

[K: What if it’s just a group of students sitting around in a circle out like on campus?] I would say if you were sitting in the circle or if you were sitting or standing inside that circle - I would say that yes that would seem like an enclosure.

It might be the culture surrounding the place and just a cultural awareness of security measures that are doubtless in place there as well as I mean obvious physical security measures that are taken there. Like they have those – what are they called? – jersey barriers – those like concrete like bunker – bomb bunker type things to keep vehicles from getting too

122

close to buildings. […] So I think that when you see those things there is an implication that you’re supposed to behave in a certain way...

Personal variables: [In a city] there’s not much personal space that you can have ‘cause you always bump into people or try to avoid running into people walking on the street. And then, if I want to stop… I want to rest or take a break, I don’t want to stand in the middle of the street and just, ‘I’m going to take this spot’ - sit down. I want to find a place where I can be away from the human traffic and just kind of have a space of my own… even though it’s a very small space. It doesn’t have to be like a private garden.

Safety.

Legibility: …if you are going into an enclosed space that’s also dark that doesn’t seem like a good place to go…

In combination: There are some areas around here that you know during the day I feel completely safe and at night they can be very scary. One of them that I think of is - actually my aunt refused to let me park my car there. She got creeped out, and I kept saying, ‘This is a perfectly safe area,’ and she was like, ‘I’m not letting you park the car here. I won’t get out of the car if you park here.’ It was Newton where the Days Inn is, and the Days Inn has a fence around it and the Marriot - the Courtyard Marriot - has a fence around it… But the Courtyard has a nice white fence and the Days Inn has like a wire fence, and the wire fence being bordered there by a steep hill on one side and a sort of rundown fraternity house on another side and all these different things […] makes that one segment of Newton feel really scary, when in reality you’re one block from Pulaski and that Days Inn is perfectly safe to stay at… that fraternity house there’s always hundreds of kids right there, and I’ve walked to my car by myself tons of times there and I’ve never had a problem […] and yet because of that sense of enclosure with the fence there and what that fence - that perception that my aunt had to that fence - to her it felt like an unsafe area and it really creeped her out.