Perceptual Evaluation of Traditional Turkish House Façade
Keywords:Traditional Turkish House, Facade, Perception, Street silhouette, Modified, Profession
This study aimed to make a comparative evaluation of the differences between the original façade (original) and the modified façade of the traditional Turkish Houses (collected from Afyonkarahisar city) based on perception.
In line with this purpose, digital images of eight sets of original and modified street silhouettes with gray color scales have been produced on the computer. Two different groups consisting of 80 people (architect and non-architect group) have evaluated the prepared images by the semantic differentiation scale consisting of the adjective pairs. The main hypothesis of the study is "The original façade would be more preferred than the modified façade". Also, gender, architect and non-architect group comparisons were made in the evaluations, too.
The results have shown that the participants liked the original traditional Turkish House façade more. The tidy/untidy and proportional/non-proportional adjective pairs have had the biggest difference in this evaluation. In another result, male participants have evaluated the traditional Turkish House façade views liked more for all dependent variables except for familiar / unfamiliar and qualified / unqualified adjective pairs compared to female participants. In addition, non-architects have liked more than architects the façade views of traditional Turkish Houses for adjective pairs that are beautiful / ugly, not impressive / unimpressive and interesting / uninteresting. On the other hand the architects have liked more than non-architects the façade view of traditional Turkish Houses for the proportional / non-proportional adjective pair.
This study has been conducted only for Turkish Houses collected from Afyonkarahisar city. In addition, only architects and non-architects group attended for evaluation of the surveys.
According to the most important finding obtained from the study, the fact that the original state is observed in the restoration of traditional Turkish Houses has caused people liked it more. Similarly, it has been observed that the organization of windows, solid-void relationship ratio, repetitions, horizontal and vertical structural elements (beams etc.) in the Turkish house façade characteristic will have a positive effect on perception.
With this study, for the first time in the literature, the evaluation of holistic (comprehensive) street silhouettes was made based on a single façade layout.
Akalın, A. Yıldırım, K. Wilson, C. Kılıcoglu, O. (2009). Architecture and Engineering Students’ Evaluations of House Façades: Preference, Complexity and Impressiveness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, (1) 124-132.
Akalin, A., Yıldırım, K., Wilson, C. and Saylan, A. (2010).Users’ Evaluations of House Façades: Preference, Complexity and Impressiveness. Open House International, 35(1) 57-65.
Arnheim, R. (1977). Solids and Hollows. In R. Arnheim, The Dynamics of Architectural Form, London: University of California Press.
Arslan, H.D., (2010). Assessment of The Perception Linked Parameters in Primary School Classroom Design and the Recommendations on Their Design”, Selçuk University, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, PhD Thesis, Konya.
Arslan, H. D., and Yıldırım, K. (2017). Perceptual Evaluation of the Mosque Facades of Diﬀerent Periods: Preference, Complexity, Impressiveness and Stimulative. MEGARON-Yıldız Technical University Faculty of Architecture E-Journal, 12(4) 511-523.
Arslan, H. D., Yıldırım, K., andGülşeker, E. (2018). Investigation of Architect and Non-Architect Participants’ Perceptual Evaluations on Different Period Mosque Facades. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, ISSN: 2147-9380, 6(2), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2018.58
Atalan, Ö.,(2016). Contuinity of Regional Identity: A Case Study of Facade Elements in Traditional Çesme Houses Act. ITU A/Z, 13(2) 121-131.
Ayalp, N., Yıldırım, K. and Çağatay, K. (2017). Effect on Users of the Seating Element Types in Cafés / Restaurants. Gazi University Journal of Science, 30(4) 15-28.
Ayalp, N., Yıldırım, K., Bozdayı, M. andÇağatay, K. (2016). Consumers’ Evaluations of Fitting Rooms in Retail Clothing Stores. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 44 (5) 524-539.
Aydıntan, E. (2001). An Experimental Study on Effect of Surface Coating Materials to Indoor Perception, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Karadeniz Technical University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Trabzon, Turkey.
Ayyıldız, A. (2000). Sensory-Cognitive-Emotional Process of Human-Environment Dialectic Environmental Perception-IT-meaning, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Istanbul Technical University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Istanbul, Turkey.
Baran, M. and Yıldırım, M. (2008). The Traditional Turkish House and the Use of Color, Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 7(26) 223-234.
Başkaya, A., Dinç, P., Aybar, U. and Karakaşlı, M. (2003). A Test on Formation of Spatial Image: The Main Entrance Hall of Education Block of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture. Gazi University, Journal of Faculty of Engineering and Architecture 18(2) 79-94.
Başkaya, A., Yıldırım, K. and Muslu, M. S. (2005). Functional and Perceptual Quality of Polyclinic Waiting Halls: Ankara Ibni Sina Hospital Polyclinic. Gazi University, Journal of Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, 20(1) 53-68.
Bauer, C. (1965). The Social Front of Modern Architecture in the 1930s. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 48-52.
Bektaş, C., (1996). Türk Evi. Yapı Kredi Yayınları,İstanbul.
Berlyne, D. E., (1974). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics. New York: Wiley.
Berlyne, D. E., (1977). The new experimental aesthetics and environmental psychology, in P. Suedfeld, J. A. Russell, L. M. Ward, F. Szigeti and G. Davis, (Eds). The Behavioral Basis of Design, Book 2, Proceedings, EDRA 7. Vancouver: McGraw Hill, 13-22. Berlyne D.E., (1975). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps Toward an Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 34(1) 86-87
Boumová I and Zdráhalová J., (2016) The Apartment with the Best Floor Plan Layout: Architects Versus Non-Architects. Critical Housing Analysis 3(1) 30-41.
Bozdag, N., (2018). Reality and Space: Hybrid Space Architecture (MSc Thesis).Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon
Bornstein, M. H., and Berlyne, D. E. (2006). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 34(1), 86. https://doi.org/10.2307/428656.
Brown, G., and Gifford, R. (2001). Architects Predict Lay Evaluations of Large Contemporary Buildings: Whose Conceptual Properties?. Journal of Environmental Psychology (21) 93-99.
Burkut, M. (1998). A Research on the Place of Turkish House Tradition in Housing Planning, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Istanbul Technical University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Istanbul, Turkey.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the İnternal Structure of Tests, Psychometrika, 16(3) 297-334.
Crozier, J.B., (1974). Verbal and Explorotary Responses to Sound Sequences Varying in Uncertainty Level, In Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps Toward an Objective Psycholgy of Aesthetic Appreceation (D.E. Berlyne) Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere.
David M. F. and Fort R., (2019). Historical City Centers and Traditional Building Stones as Heritage: Barrio de las Letras, Madrid (Spain), Geoheritage, (11) 71–85.
Devlin, K., andNasar, J.L. (1989). The Beauty and The Beast: Some Preliminary Comparisons of “High” Versus “Popular” Residential Architecture and Public Versus Architect Judgments of Same. Journal of Environmental Psychology 9(4) 333-344.
Devlin, K., (1990). An Examination of Architectural Inter-Pretation: Architects Versus Non-Architects. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, (7) 235-244.
Divleli, A. (2008). Facade Analysis in Traditional Turkish House: Istanbul Zeyrek District Haydar Neighborhood Example, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Selcuk University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Konya, Turkey.
Dube, L., and Morgan, M.S. (1996). Trend Effects and Gender Differences in Retrospective Judgments of Consumption Emotions, Journal of Consumer Research, (23) 156-162.
Dursun, N. (2012). Examples From Traditional Turkish Houses in and Around Akseki İlvat Villages, Journal of Selcuk University Institute of Social Sciences (27) 119-227.
Erdogan, E. Binici, S. Akalın, A ., and Yıldırım, K . (2013). URBAN CODES: Familiarity, Impressiveness, Complexity and Liking in Façades of Houses. Gazi University Journal of Science, 26 (2) , 319-330.
Eldem, S. H., (1954). Türk Evi Plan Tipleri (Turkish House Plan Types), Pulhan Matbaası, 238 pages, İstanbul.
Feilden B.M., (1982), Conservation of Historic Buildings. London, Butterworth Scientific.
Frampton, K., (1992). Modern Architecture. London, New York: Thames and Hudson.
Ghomeshi, M and Jusan, M.M., (2013). Investigating Different Aesthetic Preferences Between Architects And Non-Architects in Residential Façade Designs, Indoor and Built Environment, 22 (6) 952-964.
Ghomeshi , M., Ghomeshi, M. Nikpour, and M. Jusan, (2012). Identifying the Different Aesthetic Quality of Building Attributes from Architects Perspective. International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER) 2 (3) 917-919.
Gifford, R., (1997). Environmental Psychology, Principles and Practice. Allyne & Bacon.
Gifford, R., Hine D. W., Muler-Clemm, W., Reynolds, N.D. J. andShaw, K. T. (2000). Decoding Modern Architecture: A Lens Model Approach for Understanding the Aesthetic Differences of Architects and Laypersons. Environment and Behavior, (32) 168-187.
Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Clemm, W. M. andShaw, K. T., (2002). Why Architects and Laypersons Judge Buildings Differently: Cognitive Properties and Physical Bases. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 19(2) 131-148.
Göğebakan, Y., (2015). Factors That Determine the Formation of Traditional Turkish House Having Characteristics Value and General Features of These Houses. İnönü University Journal of Culture and Art 1(1) 41-55.
Göker, M., (2009). Historical Development Process of Sitting Components in Turks. Journal of World of Turk 1(1) 163-169.
Groat L.N. , (1988). Contextual Compatibility in Architecture: An issue of Personal Taste? Environmental Aesthetics Theory, Research, and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 228-253.
Groat, L.N., (1982). Meaning in Post-Modern Architecture: Anexamination Using the Multiple Sorting Task. Journal of Environmental Psychology, (2) 3-22.
Groat, L. N., (2013). Contextual compatibility in architecture: An issue of personal taste? Environmental aesthetics, 228–254. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511571213.023
Gümüş, B., (2019). Visual Analysis of Traditional Residential Façades: Example of Afyonkarahisar, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Necmettin Erbakan University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Konya, Turkey.
Hacıbaloğlu, M., (1989). Geleneksel Türk Evi ve Çağımıza Ulaşamamasının Nedenleri. Gazi Üniversitesi Teknik Eğitim Fakültesi Matbaası, Ankara.
Hayashi, T. (2004). Lasnamäe Track and Field Centre: Façade. MAJA, Estonian Architectural Review, 26 May.
Hersek C.M., (1989). Protection and Healing in Alaçatı Town. Ancient Monuments and Conservation Symposium on Trafficking in Turkey. 30 January-2 February, 1989, Ankara: Ankara University Faculty of Language, History and Geography, 395-404.
Hershberger, R. G. and Cass, R. (1974). Predicting User Re-Sponses to Buildings. In J. L. Nasar, (Ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research, and Applications NewYork: Cambridge University Press Editors: Neal M. Ashkanasy, Celeste P M Wilderom, Mark F. Peterson, 195-211.
Hershberger, R. G., (1969). A study of meaning and architecture. In J. L. Nasar, (Ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research, and Application. New York: Cambridge University Press, 75-194.
Herzog, T. R. and Shier, R. L. (2000). Complexity, Age and Building Preference. Environment and Behavior, (32) 557–575.
Hubbard, P., (1994). Professional Vs Lay Tastes in Design Controlöan Empirical Investigation. Planning Practice and Research, (9) 271-287.
Hui, C., W., (2007). Evaluation of the Façade of Buildings in the “Type ² Residential Area” of the 7th Land Consideration District in Taichung City, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), University of Science and Technology of China, China.
Huxtable, A. L., (2004). Building Façade, Retrieved 15 Feb, 2007, from http://ww.class.uidaho.eduedu/communityresearch/ facade_remodeling.htm
ICOMOS (2013). http://www.icomos.org.tr/Dosyalar/ICOMOSTR_0623153001387886624.pdf
Ilbeigi ,M. and Ghomeishi M., (2017). An Assessment of Aesthetics in Conceptual Properties and Its Relation to Complexity Among Architects and Non-Architects in Residential Façade Design in Iran. Journal of Buildings and Sustainability, 2(1) 50-58
Ilbeigi, M., Mahmudi, A., Posht, K.R. Ghomeishi, M. and Behrouzifard, E., (2019). Cognitive Differences in Residential Facades from the Aesthetic Perspectives of Architects and Non-Architects: A Case Study of Iran, Sustainable Cities and Society, 51, 101760, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101760,
Imamoglu, V., (1975). Spaciousness of interiors: its meaning, measurement and relationship to some architectural variables. PhD Thesis, University of Strathclyde.
Imamoglu, V., (1979a). Assessment of Living Rooms by House Holds and Architects, Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the International Association for the People and Their Physical Environment, Louvain le Neuve, Belgium, 65-85.
Imamoglu, O., (1979b). Liking and Preferences for Dwellings. In M. Pultar, (Ed.), Environment, Structure and Design. Ankara: Environmental Architecture Sciences Association, 31-345
Imamoglu, C., (2000). Complexity, Preference and Familiarity: Architecture and Nonarchitecture Turkish Students’ Assessments of Traditional and Modern House Façades. Journal of Environmental Psychology, (20) 5-16.
Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R. and Wendt, J.S., (1972). Rated Preference and Complexity for Natural and Urban Visual Material. Perception and Psychophysics, 12(4) 354-356.
Karaman, A., (1985). Defining the Regional Identity: Conceptual Parameter of Urban Morphology’, unpublished paper presented to the 4th International Seminar on Urban Form, Birmingham, UK.
Kim J., Dear R., Candido C. Zhang H. andArens E., (2013), Gender Differences in Office Occupant Perception of Indoor Environmental Quality. Building and Environment, (70) 245-256.
Klotz, H., (1988). The History of Postmodern Architecture. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Kuliga, S. F., Thrash, T., Dalton, R. C., and Hölscher, C., (2015). Virtual reality as an empirical research tool—Exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 54, 363-375.
Küçükerman, Ö., (1996). Turkish House in Search of Spatial Identitiy (Kendi Mekânının Arayışı İçinde Türk Evi), Apa Ofset Basımevi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş., İstanbul.
Kong, L. and Yeoh, B., (2004). The Meanings and Making of Place: Exploring History, Community, and Identity Retrieved 7 April, 2007, from http://profile. nus.edu.sg/ fass/ geokongl/intro.pdf
Krampen, M., Öztürk K., Özek V.and Saltık H., (1979). Eski ve Yeni Görünüşlerin Öznel İzlenimleri ve Nesnel Ölçümü (Subjective Evaluations and Objective Measurements of Old and New Facades). Mimarlik Bülteni, 3, Karadeniz Teknik Ûniversitesi.
Krier, R., (1992). Elements of Architecture. London: Academy Group Ltd.
Küller, R., Ballal, S., Laike, T., Mikellides, M.and Tonello, G., (2006). The Impact of Light and Colour on Psychological Mood: A Cross-Cultural Study of Indoor Work Environments. Ergonomics 49(14) 1496-1507.
LeCorbusier. (1965). Towards a New Architecture. London: The Architectural Press.
Llinares C. and Iñarra S., (2014). Human Factors in Computer Simulations of Urban Environment. Differences Between Architects and Non-architects’ Assessments. Displays, 35(3) 126-140.
Llinares C., A. Montañana and E. N. Astor (2011).Differences in Architects and Nonarchitects’ Perception of Urban Design: An Application of Kansei Engineering Techniques. Urban Studies Research https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/736307, Volume 2011, Article ID 736307
Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. MIT.
Malekinezhad, F., Chizari, H., Lamit, H.B. andBin, M. S. F. R. (2013). A Comparative 481 Study on Designers and Non-Designers Emotion of Urban Sculptures Using Affect Grid, Life Science 482 Journal, 10(3) 2056–2063.
Mcandrew, F. T., (1993). Environmental Psychology. Thomson Brooks/Cole.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J. A., (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA.
Montero-Parajo M.J., Jeong J.S., Hernandez-Blanco J. andGarcia-Moruno L,İ., (2017). Rural Landscape Architecture: Traditional Versus Modern Façade Designs in Western Spain, Open access peer-reviewed chapter in Landscape Architecture the Sense of Places, Model and Applications, Intechopen. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.71642
Nasar, J. L., (1983). Adult viewers’ preferences in residential scenes: a study of the relationship of environmental attributes to preference. Environment and Behavior, (15) 589-614.
Nasar, J. L., (1989). Symbolic Meaning of House Style. Environment and Behavior, (21) 235-257.
Ozkan A., (2017). Influence of Design Styles on User Preferences in Hotel Guestrooms. Online Journal of Art and Design, (2) 53-71
Özel, Y., (2019). Interiors Extending to the Street in Turkish House: Colonage. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences (IJSHS), 3(1), 143-160.
Özsoy, M., (2009). Culturel Heritage: A Study of The Third Big City of Alsancak- İzmir, Turkey. European Journal of Social Sciences, 10(2), 230-241.
Panayides, P., (2013). Coefficient Alpha: Interpret with Caution. Europe’s Journal of Psychology ,9(4) 687-696.
Purcell, T., (1995). Experiencing American and Australian High- and Popular-Style Houses. Environment and Behavior (27) 771-800.
Rasmussen, S.E., (1962). Experiencing Architecture. (The MIT Press)
Rapoport, A., (1977). Human Aspects of Urban Form. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
Robbins, S. P. and Langton, N., (1999). Organizational Behavior, Scarborough. Ontario, Prentice Hall.
Russell, J. A., Ward, L. M., and Pratt, G. (1981). Affective Quality Attributed to Environments: A Factor Analysis Study. Journal of Environment and Behavior, 13(3) 259-288.
Sochocka, A. and Anter K.F., (2017). Perceived Façade Colours in Different Daylight Situations: Survey in The Old Town of Warsaw Anna. Journal of the International Colour Association, (17) 92-119.
Stamps, A. E., (2003).Advances in Visual Diversity and Entropy, Environment and Planning B, Planning and Design, (30) 449-463.
Stamps, A. E., III. (1991). Public Preferences for High Rise Buildings: Stylistic and Demographic Effects, Perceptual and Motor Skills, (72), 839-844.
Şenyiğit Ö., (2010). An approach to the assessment of formal and semantic expression tool that front; Investigation of Façades in Mesrutiyet and Halaskargazi Streets in Istanbul, (Unpublished PhD Thesis), Yıldız Technical University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Istanbul Turkey.
Şenyiğit, Ö. and Altan İ., (2011). An Assessment Approach to Facades as a Tool of Semantic Expression: Study of Facades on Meşrutiyet Street in İstanbul, Megaron-Yıldız Technical University Faculty of Architecture E-Journal, 6(3) 139-150.
Ürer, H., (2013). Façade Systems of Traditional Turkish House in Eskigediz, Sanat Tarihi Dergisi, 22(2) 189-230.
Vartanian O,, Navarrete G., Chatterjee A., Fich LB, Leder H., Modrono C., (2013). Impact of Contour on Aesthetic Judgments and Approach-Avoidance Decisions in Architecture Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 (Supplement_2), 10446-10453.
Venturi, R., (1977). Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. New York: The Museum of Modern Art.
Wallet, G., Sauzéon, H.L. Florian and Bernard, N'K. (2013). Virtual/Real Transfer in a Large-Scale Environment: Impact of Active Navigation as a Function of the Viewpoint Displacement Effect and Recall Tasks. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 2013, Article ID 879563, 7 pages, [Online], accessed 22.04.2016 available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/879563.
Wilson, M. A. and Canter, D. V., (1990). The Development of Central Concepts During Professional Training. an Example of a Multivariate Model of the Concept of Architectural Style. Applied Psychology: An International Review, (39) 431-455.
Wilson, M. A., (1996). The Socialization of Architectural Preference, Journal of Environmental Psychology, (16) 33-44.
Wohlwill, J. F., (1968). Amount of Stimulus Exploration and Preference as Differential Functions of Stimulus Complexity, Perception and Psychophysics, (4) 307-312.
Wohlwill, J. F., (1975). Children’s Responses to Meaningful Pictures Varying in Diversity: Exploration Time Vs. Preference, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, (20) 341-351.
Wolbers, T.and Hegarty, M., (2010). What determines our navigational abilities? Trends in cognitive sciences, 14(3), 138-146
Yamaner, F., (2001). Evaluation of the Approches Using Colors with Different Function, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Selçuk University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Konya, Turkey.
Yazdanfar S. A., Heidari A.A and Aghajari N., (2015). Comparison of Architects’ and Non-Architects’ Perception of Place, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 170, 690-699.
Yıldırım, K., (2005). The Effect of Differences in Customer Characteristics on the Evaluation of a Store Image. Gazi University Journal of Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, 20(4) 473-481.
Yıldırım, K., Hidayetoğlu, M. L. and Şen, A. (2007a). The Effect of Differences in Architectural Forms of Cafe/Patisseries on Users’ Perceptual and Behavioral Performance, Gazi University Journal of Polytechnic, 10(3) 295-301.
Yıldırım, K., Başkaya (Akalın), A. and Hidayetoğlu, M. L. (2007b). Effects of Indoor Color on Mood and Cognitive Performance, Building and Environment, 42(9) 3233-3240.
Yıldırım, K., Hidayetoglu, M.L., Capanoglu, A., (2011a). Effects of Interior Colors on Mood and Preference: Comparisons of Two Living Rooms, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 112(2) 509-524.
Yıldırım, K., Capanoğlu (Özkan), A. and Cağatay, K., (2011b). The Effects of Physical Environmental Factors on Students' Perceptions in Computer Classrooms, Indoor and Built Environment, 20(5) 501 - 510.
Yıldırım, K., Ayalp, N., Aktas, G.G. and Hidayetoglu, M.L., (2014). Consumer Perceptions and Functional Evaluations of Cash Desk Types in the Clothing Retail Context, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 42(6) 542-552.
Yıldırım, K., Çagatay, K. and Hidayetoglu, M.L., (2015) .The Effect of Age, Gender and Education Level on Customer Evaluations of Retail Furniture Store Atmospheric Attributes, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 43(8) 712-726.
Yıldırım, K., Hidayetoğlu, M.L., Gökbulut, N. andMüezzinoğlu, M.K. (2019). Effects on students’ perceptual evaluations of the wall colors used in design studios by the virtual reality method, ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 7(1) 99-120.
Zülkadiroğlu D., (2013). Evaluation of Effect of Architectural Façade Representations on User Perception, (Unpublished MSc Thesis), Istanbul Culture University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science, Istanbul Turkey.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.