Architectural Sociology

Architectural sociology, the sociology of architecture, a little known discipline, studies how our physical environment influences how we live together and behave toward one another in social situations such as housing, work, school, health care, and entertainment. The article examines how sociological theories (e.g., symbolic interaction, structural functionalism, conflict theory, and postmodern theory) and sociological research methods can be applied to architecture from predesign through postoccupancy evaluation. Various sociological subfields, such as sociology of culture, community and urban sociology, environmental sociology, and sociology of space and place also have close connections to architectural sociology. Architectural sociology focuses on how architecture influences and is influenced by society and its organizations, as well as by human behavior.

Keywords Architecture; Culture; Environmental Sociology; Hawthorne Effect; Hyperreality; Material Culture; Nonmaterial Culture; Organization; Physical Environment; Predesign; Sociocultural; Sociology of Architecture; Symbols; Urban Sociology

Sociology & Related Fields > Architectural Sociology

Sociology of Architecture

Overview

What Is Sociology & What Does It Study?

Sociology had its beginnings in nineteenth century Europe at a time when the Industrial Revolution was causing major changes in the way people lived and worked. In the United States, in the early twentieth century, the Chicago School of Sociology was born, with early researchers interested in how industrialization was creating and structuring the burgeoning city of Chicago. Today, sociologists study almost any type of social behavior and the social structure of society. One branch of sociology closely related to urban sociology is the sociology of architecture.

The Four Major Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology

Sociological theory falls into four main perspectives:

• Structural Functionalism
• Social Conflict
• Symbolic Interactionism, and
• Postmodernism

Structural functionalism and social conflict study social topics at the macro level where research methods focus on large number of people such as census data. Symbolic interactionism studies society at the micro level, where researchers study social behavior on a smaller scale, sometimes as small as a case study. Finally, postmodernism falls between the macro and micro levels and into a somewhat unique category of its own, taking into consideration aspects such as globalism and new technologies that can affect how society functions.

Structural Functionalism

One of two primary macro level perspectives in sociology is the functionalist perspective, which focuses on those aspects of society that contribute to its smooth functioning. All the parts of society should contribute to its order and stability. Because consensus among members of a society is necessary for its ability to function well, people generally tend to agree on the values, beliefs, and rules of that society. Students of the sociology of architecture might study, for example, how the smaller structures of today's typical housing development, do not allow for the extended family to live together as in agrarian times when grandparents, parents, and even aunts and uncles lived together.

Social Conflict

A second macro level perspective in sociology is the social conflict perspective, which focuses on the struggle for control of the wealth, power, and prestige of a society. Karl Marx was perhaps the first conflict theorist when he identified the class struggle between the bourgeoisie (the owners of the means of production) and thus, the more powerful members of society, and the proletariat (everyone else who sold their labor for a paycheck and had a much weaker social position). In order to maintain the status quo and their privileged position, the bourgeoisie ruling class, or the elite would tend to define culture in terms that allow them to maintain their power. Conflict theorists contend that unequal groupings around such things as race, gender, religion, politics, age, and social class usually have these types of conflicting values and agendas, causing a ubiquitous struggle between them. The sociology of architecture from this perspective might look at the often-substandard housing of the poor in segregated areas of a city, or town.

Symbolic Interactionism

As its name implies, the symbolic interactionism perspective focuses on how people interact with each other and make subjective interpretations of meanings for themselves. Symbols, including language, can be interpreted differently in a variety of social situations, even though within a particular culture, subculture, or counterculture, the meanings have the same, or a similar meaning.

But symbolic interactionists are interested in studying how we shape and reshape our reality through an ongoing interaction among social objects, self, and others.

Culture is made up of material objects such as buildings, desks, computers, and books. It is also comprised of social identities such as being a physician, a mother, or a sales clerk. And culture is also comprised of nonmaterial things such as values, ideas, rules, and symbols, including language.

Researchers interested in the study of designing environments within organizations such as companies, hospitals, or schools, often use symbolic interactionism. This allows them to see how physical environments contain cues that communicate messages to people reminding them of their expected roles, who they are within the organization, and what is expected of them. For example, a receptionist, who is expected to greet visitors to the organization, would necessarily be placed in an open area just inside the main door. He or she would act as a barrier to the offices within the organization to which a visitor must receive permission to enter. The receptionist would also have several means of communication available at his or her station: a computer with internet access, telephones for communicating with the outside world, and perhaps a system of contacting other members of the organization through an intercom or similar device.

Some researchers argue that material items, such as a desk, can perform a significant role in the construction and development of self. The desk may represent many years of working for the same company, and may even have been handed down in a family whose members performed the same work. Consider the desk of the President of the United States, a desk that has been used for over two centuries by historic figures who came before. The desk represents that history, and the challenges, along with the respect, that the office demanded.

Others have discovered that workers who receive the interest of the management in the form of experimenting with differing work environments, will often increase their production and efficiency, not so much because of a design change, like better lighting, but because of the Hawthorne Effect. The Hawthorne Effect is named for the Hawthorne Experiments in the 1920s and 30s at Western Electric's Hawthorne plant, outside of Chicago. Management did want to try different lighting to see if it would affect worker production. But what they found was that because the workers were being observed by management, their production increased, whether the lighting was lowered, or increased. The Hawthorne Effect is still an important consideration when sociologists design research, because when people are being interviewed or observed, their behavior is likely to change from their behavior when not being observed, thus skewing research results.

But this was a serendipitous finding within the Hawthorne experiments, which concluded ultimately, that physical design of space strongly influences the behavior of its occupants. In the 1960s, with the advent of the civil rights movement, came the birth of social design, the relationship between the design of physical space and how it aligned with how people viewed themselves, based perhaps on Cooley's looking glass self concept, which suggests that we learn a self-concept by observing how others perceive us. Because our notions of self are intricately bound up in our everyday interaction with physical objects, sociologists began to be included in the physical space design process and the sociology of architecture had its beginnings (Bugni & Smith, 2002/03).

Postmodernism

Architectural sociology examines how architectural forms can both cause and have an effect on social phenomena. An example is the city of Las Vegas, considered to be the most postmodern city in the world, perhaps because it defies traditional notions about what we know of architecture, and how people want to be entertained. Las Vegas is considered postmodern because of its capacity to change and reinvent itself continually, in response to cultural and market changes.

Since 1990, the population of Las Vegas has risen sharply to 1.4 million people, with an additional 35 million tourists visiting there annually. Postmodern characteristics of Las Vegas include:

• Its ability to be a spectacle, where visitors experience everything from scenes of Paris to a pirate raid.
• The hyperreal atmosphere of Las Vegas, using technologies that enhance experiences so that for some, they may be more desirable than the original (Eco, 1990). People wanting to experience floating in a Venetian gondola, can go to Las Vegas and have the same experience without the difficulty of actually making a trip to Venice in Italy.
• Thematization, which offers more choices than one single identity. An example is the design of a new Las Vegas resort to be called The Reve, a dreamlike atmosphere where the imagination can run free.
• The concept of simulacra, a representation of a place that does not actually exist. For example, there might be a desert oasis with trees and plants that would not actually exist in a real desert. At the Mirage in Las Vegas, a volcano erupts every hour, where a real volcano is non-existent. These simulacra depend upon effective architectural design.
• The notion of commodification, where anything has a price and can be bought or sold. In Las Vegas, many things are free from food and drinks to scenery and the theatrical, but attractions take tourists by gambling stations where they can lose money, or win it.
• Fragmentation rather than a consistent theme (other than gambling) from casino to casino. Each casino-resort offers a different theme that lures tourists in, particularly into the center of the resort to the gaming tables and machines.

Using this postmodern perspective, the city of Las Vegas can be viewed as a good example of how architecture is key to promoting that city's primary industry of entertainment and gambling (Smith & Bugni, 2002).

Applications

The Connection between Sociology & Architecture

There is a relationship between people and their designed environments or social settings: where they live, work, and play. The converse is also true, that there is a relationship between an entire organization and the building where the organization's activities take place. Architectural sociology examines how architectural and design both influence, and are influenced in return, by social phenomena, particularly with a certain culture like the United States, or Spain, or Iran. A large proportion of our human experience and social interaction occurs in the buildings in which we live and work. Therefore, architectural sociologists use sociological perspective to enhance building design (Beaman, 2002).

We can define architectural sociology as the study of how designed physical environment influences and is influenced by society and human behavior. Major sociological perspectives play a part in explaining and interpreting architectural design (Smith & Bugni, 2002).

Sociologists can also study the profession of architecture: who becomes an architect, how do women fare in the profession, how does the profession control its education and credentials, and more.

Physical Space

Physical space affects people by providing safety from the elements, a place where people can gather to perform specific tasks. The space can mean different things to the people who occupy it, and how they learn to define it and themselves becomes impatient (Smith & Bugni, 2006).

For example, think of a person's home as such a physical space. It can provide safety from natural occurrences like storms and from human made elements such as violence. It is a place where members of a family gather to perform the task of everyday living: eating together, raising children, perhaps even working for a company as a telecommuter. There may be rooms set aside for pleasure, or for intellectual growth such as a family room, or a library, or music room. The home's physical address, its size and grandeur, or lack of it, all have symbolic meaning both for its inhabitants and for those outside of the house, who have also added to its social meaning. If it's a grand house in a beautiful part of town, certain attributes such as wealth and power may be bestowed on its inhabitants. If the home is shabby and in a poor section of town, the inhabitants can be viewed as lazy, uncaring, and undesirable. Certainly these social attitudes toward the inhabitants, whether positive or negative, become internalized and the people in the house can often feel the same about themselves, mirroring the way society views them.

These considerations are within the field of architectural sociology. Architectural sociology is different from the related field of environmental sociology, which studies the relationships between humans and their natural environments as opposed to their designed environments. But there is some overlap with the two disciplines, as we begin to be concerned about the ecological damage associated with some urban design (Smith & Bugni, 2006).

Architects and sociologists use similar research methods in their work. Sociologists collect research data through surveying, interviewing, and participant observation when studying some aspect of social behavior. Architects, or their sociological cohorts, use these same research methods to identify the current and future space and social needs of the future occupants of a building and to design physical environments that complement the lives of these occupants. Architectural sociologists use several research designs and methods of gathering and analyzing data that are helpful to architects and their clients about preferences for and actual use of designed physical space (Bugni & Smith, 2002).

The physical design of space strongly influences the behavior of its occupants because material aspects of culture, such as physical space and all the material objects that comprise it, have symbolic significance. In other words, through culture, we shape and give meaning to our physical environment and in turn, it shapes and gives meaning to us, so that architecture, as part of culture, is more than just designing, or putting up a building. It also involves building social relationships, or social reality (Bugni & Smith, 2002/03).

Consider an example of how notions of self are interrelated with physical objects: the overnight proliferation of the cell phone. It wasn't long ago that people didn't even have answering machines on their home telephones. If someone called and they weren't home, the other person was obliged to call again until the party he or she was seeking answered their phone. Today, people are connected wherever they may be: at work, shopping, at the beach, even while sailing a boat, or spelunking in an underground cave, if there is a signal. What has made it necessary for people to need to keep in touch so often? Could it be that families and friends are often separated by distance? Or that daily lives are so activity-filled that there is no longer the time to make house visits to one another? These changes in how society works, which comprise family life, work, and socializing, are making the invention of the cell phone the phenomenon that it is. If a person does not have a cell phone, he or she can feel isolated, or cut off from the mainstream of the community.

The Social Design Movement of the 1960s

The social design movement occurred during a tumultuous time in American history, when people began questioning an assortment of cultural values and beliefs in the United States. Architecture to that point had developed into a kind of formalized discipline, viewing buildings more as sculpture than as physical spaces inhabited by people.

In response to the atmosphere of the era, a growing number of architects shifted their focus to the needs of building occupants, and began looking to a rather young discipline (sociology), for reliable information about social behavior and well-being. From this liaison came the concept of social design.

Social design means that architects involve people in the planning and management of the spaces they occupy, or plan to occupy, in an effort to create a balance between the social and physical environment, while also taking into consideration the natural environment and its preservation.

The differences between social and formalistic design practice include small scale design as opposed to large scale; local, rather than national or international in scope; human-oriented design, not institution-oriented; and a democratic, low-cost, bottom-up design approach, rather than high cost, exclusive, and authoritarian design modes of the formalistic approach (Du & Tanner, 1983).

Architecture, therefore, is made up of aesthetic, engineering, and social aspects. The creation is a space where the building itself and the activities that take place within it, are intertwined. When architecture designs buildings to fulfill social needs, it is complying with notions of social design (Stevens, 2008).

Sociology & Community Architecture

The Architecture of Fear

Historically, buildings have had the primary task of sheltering people from dangers, both natural and human-made. Walled cities and forts were designed for protection from invaders. Each period of history has brought with it, another set of dangers to be dealt with, up to the present day (Ellin & Blakely, 1997). But now, atomic bombs can pierce any human-made wall and there is no longer any safety. Other dangers lurk around every corner: terrorists, disease, violence, pollution, child-snatchers, all prey on us every waking moment so that we are entering what some have called the great age of confinement.

Contemporary architecture, some would argue, is built on American society's obsession with fear and people's willingness to subscribe to notions of security, however fictitious they are (Ellin & Blakely, 1997). Gated communities are springing up in every corner of the country, while in suburban developments each house sports a security device warning sign somewhere near the front door. But given the cheaper methods of home construction often used for middle-class housing, security systems on doors and windows cannot keep a thief from using a box cutter to make an entry hole in flimsily constructed walls. While public spaces such as parks, shopping malls, casinos, and Internet gathering places such as Facebook are popular, they are replacing face-to-face primary relationships with cyberspace and tertiary relationships made semipublic with registrations, gating, security, neighborhood watch groups, and rules of conduct that must be adhered to, in order to make people feel safe.

Segregation/Integration Architecture

The first American school of sociology, the Chicago school, observed that city dwellers struggle for social position and prime location within the city. The space different groups they are able to occupy, depends on group characteristics, with those with similar characteristics occupying similar spaces, known as ecological segregation. This segregation may be voluntary, or forced, depending on the class control that exists in society, over coveted urban space, which changes as a city urbanizes.

Why this segregation exists is a topic for debate. Some would argue that while a classless society and urban unity are desirable, there can never be a true mixing of different classes, no matter how much social design goes into the planning. They point to the economic structure of society as being impenetrable. This social polarization is often blamed for segregation. An immigrant's country of origin, the color of skin, place of employment or the lack of employment, all serve to separate people.

The experiment to give divergent groups a place to mix occurred in the nineteenth century in America, when urban parks were developed. Here was a democratic place, designers believed, where anyone could enjoy healthful recreation, reducing class barriers and increasing social cohesion. But the economic value of urban parks became evident when real estate developers realized that the property surround the parks increased in desirability and thus, in price. The concept of proximate value, where property adjoining some public spaces grew in valuation, was advanced further in the 1990s when some 1,000 golf courses were built next to, or in conjunction with, real estate developments (Crompton, 2007).

Thus, the existence of urban parks and other public recreational areas indicates that there may have been some integration among classes in capitalist society. Another example points to some housing developments that have put upper and lower classes at least in close proximity to one another, such as in New Mumbai, India. But others point to the low income neighborhoods in Brazil surrounding the gated communities of the elite, which is not truly integration. However, even close proximity of highly valued property may help the lower classes by helping to pay for the urban spaces, allowing them to continue to be enjoyed by everyone (Omenya, O., 2002).

Thus, there does not seem to be any indication that architects can design public spaces that will bring people together and bridge the structural gaps that exist between them.

Building for the Poor?

It is probably safe to say that there is no actual design element that takes poverty into consideration. While programs such as Habitat for Humanity utilize average building materials and even green construction technology in new construction, most of the poor occupy the leftover dwellings of social groups who have long left the area for safer, more affluent havens. Much design in today's urban areas seems to focus more on keeping the poor away from the wealthy.

A shrinking labor market is expanding poor neighborhoods in American cities such as Los Angeles, where in the parks, the homeless take up residence, and on neighborhood streets, an underground economy hums, selling narcotics and prostitution. Los Angeles is the fastest growing American city on the West Coast, boasting immigrant populations that are spreading throughout the city. No longer forced to remain in contained areas because of liberalized housing laws, ethnic groups are dispersing throughout the city. There is no longer a majority of any one group and each group has its own cultural values and rules governing spatial use and personal contact. The result is a fluid mix, social friction and perceived or actual encroachment on one another. Neighborhood watch groups and other neighborhood groups attempt to create boundaries, and fear abounds. Only those who can afford to, escape to the elite, gated communities where deviation is not allowed and monitored strictly by security guards and neighborhood covenants. Entry to these walled areas is permitted based on one's actual or perceived affluence. In other words, physical barriers are being designed and constructed to keep people away from one another, based on their accumulation of material wealth (Ellin & Blakely, 1997).

Architecture as Crime Control

Can changes to the architecture of our streets and buildings reduce criminal activity? Certainly, architecture can manipulate people and utilize social control in a variety of ways.

For example, fast food restaurants want you to eat and leave quickly so there is a fast turnover. Therefore, seats are hard plastic, tables are small, and noise levels can be astronomical, driving most reasonable people out in a hurry.

Grocery stores with narrow aisles keep customers from talking to one another while shopping, so they won't be distracted from purchasing more items.

Hotels are often designed without lounging areas so clients who linger are kept to a minimum.

Similar strategies are thus used in designs for crime prevention. Design such as windows onto the street, sightlines down corridors, better lighting, and putting parking lots in the front of buildings rather than in the rear can give residents the opportunity for natural surveillance of the street, or neighborhood.

Gates, barriers, even small ones, monuments and markers of housing developments and other distinctions give people a sense of privacy and ownership of their neighborhoods and a desire to protect them from intruders. Even the addition of a simple archway between buildings can deter trespassers. Some buildings are placed in an L formation with an added fence that forms a triangle and provides an open space where children can play, observed by adults.

But one of the best deterrents of crime is that neighbors get to know one another and recognize each other. Architects have reduced the number of living quarters in each individual unit for the purpose of avoiding the anonymity that can breed crime, or at least allow it to occur unnoted. Lounge areas or benches on the exterior of buildings can bring people together, or divide them, as social control dictates.

There are many other design tricks and techniques that can be incorporated into building design to prevent crime. For example, fire escapes can be raised up to keep them out of easy reach. Trash receptacles are kept far from buildings so they aren't used as ladders to reach lower level windows. Even ducts that give off hot air, or prickly hedges can be placed near ground floor windows to keep people from thinking about getting in.

Designers stress the importance of keeping the design less obvious to increase benefits. A subtle architecture reinforces law-abiding behavior, rather than the blatant type of design that makes inhabitants feel like they are being held hostage. Therefore, some architects argue that gated communities, while perhaps effective, are not good use of architectural and social design (Lockton, 2008).

Architecture, Organizational Culture, & Organizational Development

The way an organization, such as a company, places its workers can often require certain designs. For example, a traditional hierarchical structure, typical for most companies, would place top executives in private areas on the higher floors of a building, middle management below them as a sort of buffer, and the workers at the bottom, symbolizing their place within the organization. Work tasks are typically arranged in specialized areas, or even in separate buildings.

But new approaches in organizational design and communication, and attitudes about the workplace, are causing changes in architectural design. For these new companies, there is an emphasis on open communication, and team projects, requiring the removal of barriers typical of traditional layouts. Organizations are often demanding more time from their employees and are encouraging employees to remain close to their work. Often this is accomplished by using sophisticated interactive chat applications with enticing names such as Twitter and Campfirenow. But organizations are also demanding more physical presence. Thus, there's more of a demand for rooms where employees can meet for a luncheon presentation, game rooms where colleagues can play ping pong or exercise, and day care centers for employee's children to remain closer to parents.

Sociological perspectives that complement this new organizational design include the sociology of organizations focusing on the culture of the organization, networking and team building theory, and social psychological theories that focus on worker participation, empowerment and self realization. Thus, the design of the typical office building has changed for good, and its inhabitants are the better for that change. Certainly, the old style office building continues to exist, but since the advent of the twenty-first century, a new attitude toward a more educated employee is reflected in new design which focuses on human needs: daylight, fresh air, and room to move around. They emphasize stress reduction and a relaxed work atmosphere, while also demanding high performance and dedication of their inhabitants (Sullivan, 2005).

In this new age of officing, architectural sociologists use their background and research to learn how the physical environment reflects managerial styles and philosophies, as well as to analyze the impact that the physical environment has on the inhabitants. Their findings influence workplace design, furnishings, work stations, locations of conference and break rooms, and who receives valued space (Smith & Bugni, 2002).

Houses of Worship

Many houses of worship are either being built anew or have undergone face lifts. Whatever the situation, the architects must be aware of the social needs of the congregation that hires them. A church, or place of worship, just by definition, requires a source of inspiration, usually within the religion's own tenets of faith. But first and foremost, the building must be spiritually uplifting.

But architects have other social considerations when designing houses of worship. Some parts of the United States, such as New England, have a strong and distinct architectural tradition already in place and a church built in their midst that does not adhere to this tradition could be unwelcome.

In addition, some faith communities are diversifying, as are their members who can come from different cultural backgrounds and ethnicities. The understanding and incorporation of this symbolic union is the task of the designers. And other denominations are creating mega-houses of worship, focusing on a theatrical environment rather than traditional Christian symbols.

Many congregations, regardless of their philosophy or spiritual tenets, view themselves as stewards of the earth and are more concerned than ever with principles of sustainability and green architecture (Crosbie, 2005).

The Architecture Profession

Sociologists study not only the work of architects, often offering their expertise to assist in a variety of design problems to be solved, but they also study the profession itself. From what social class do most architects come? How is the education and training of architects designed? How does the architecture profession monitor and regulate itself? What representation do minorities have in the profession? We look here at one aspect of such a study, the role of women in the profession of architecture.

Some would agree that in an ideal culture, all occupations should be gender-neutral. However, that is still not the case in the real culture and in the field of architecture, women have reported sexual harassment and discrimination.

While the number of female architecture school graduates climbed steadily in the 1970s and early 1980s, and an influx of female students has occurred since then; some argue that women experience a glass ceiling in the profession. In other words, top architectural positions were more often not held by women.

While more women are studying architecture, however, they are not as likely to practice their profession for long after graduation. For example, a Royal Institute of British Architects study conducted in 2002 found that only 13 percent of the British architects are women, even though up to 37 percent have studied architecture (Manley, 2004).

Of the women remaining in the profession beyond college, many are married to other architects and act as collaborators on projects. But many turn to academia, maintaining their licenses, but not actively practicing, indicating that perhaps the profession is a difficult one for women to break into successfully (Stevens, 2008).

Conclusion

Architectural sociology involves the application of social theory and methods to architectural design. Yet architectural renderings rarely if every show any humans. Students of architecture must learn to consider the human response to, and interaction with, their designs.

Therefore, using sociological methods such as observing people in their natural setting can help architects learn about social interactions, or barriers to them, caused by the designs they conjure. Not only should architects research carefully in the predesign stage, but they should also seek human evaluation in the construction and post-construction stages (Beaman, 2002).

There are, even with the marriage of sociology and architecture, a number of so-called great buildings that the people who have to live or work in them despise. Building projects are often delayed, and over-budget, as in the case of the new Scottish parliament building, which went ten times over its budget and the Peckham Library in London, which hampers patrons who are disabled or elderly, by having the entrance on the fourth floor. For other buildings, the design flaws make them difficult and costly to maintain. The number of examples of design flaws is too high to mention them all here. Let us suffice it to say that more precise measures must be utilized in predesign and design to obtain structures that are sturdy, economical and serviceable. This will be the job for sociologists and architects in the future as building costs continue to rise (Stevens, 2008).

Architecture and sociology will continue to inform each other. Architectural sociology will remain viable because it addresses questions such as what the buildings we construct say about us as a society. The future of the field is linked to educating design professionals to (a) see the relationship between social setting and the individual and organization, (b) encourage sociologists to contribute outside the field, and (c) network with those interested in architectural sociology. Sociology has a huge contribution to make to a new way of thinking in architecture and that sociology will also further expand upon some of its theories as a result of this work. As with all new paradigms, architecture will not change easily. Nevertheless, architectural sociology has a promising future (Beaman, 2002).

Terms & Concepts

Architecture: Strategic invention, decision, and rationales about the design of an overall structure.

Culture: The values, attitudes, beliefs, customs, symbols and language and material items important to a group of people.

Environmental Sociology: The sociological study of societal-environmental interactions.

Hawthorne Effect: A temporary change in behavior in response to a change in the social environment.

Hyperreality: The inability to distinguish reality from fantasy.

Material Culture: Items such as computers, cell phones, books, and much more that are important to a particular social group.

Nonmaterial Culture: Intangible elements of importance to a social group such as ideas, values, beliefs and rules.

Organization: A group of people who work together, usually on a common task.

Physical Environment: The elements that surround an organism, including humans.

Postmodernism: The belief that direction, evolution and progression have ended in social history with the rise of relativity rather than absolutes.

Predesign: The beginning phase of a project's design process.

Sociocultural: A combination of both social and cultural factors.

Sociology of Architecture: Examines how architectural forms both influence and react to sociocultural phenomena.

Symbols: Objects, pictures, language, or other representations of ideas, or concepts.

Urban Sociology: The sociological study of social life and human interaction in metropolitan areas.

Bibliography

Aomenya, O. A. (2002). Theoretical conceptualisations of urban segregation and their relevance to housing in post-apartheid South Africa. Unpublished paper. Retrieved October 1, 2008 from: http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:ybVvqXC-EW8J:www.bristol.ac.uk/sps/c cnrpapersword/gated/omenya.doc+Segregation/Integration+Architecture& ;hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Beaman, J. (2002). Architectural Sociology [Electronic version]. Footnotes, Newsletter of the American Sociological Association, 30 , p. Retrieved September 26, 2008 from: http://www.asanet.org/footnotes/dec02/fn17.html

Bugni, V. & Smith, R. (2002). Combining architecture and sociological research methods. Connections, July 2002. Retrieved September 30, 2008 from: http://strata.unlv.edu/smith%5fbugni/ methods.pdf

Bugni, V. & Smith, R. (2002/03). The symbolic approach to physical environments. Connections. Retrieved September 30, 2008 from: http://strata.unlv.edu/smith%5fbugni/symbolic.pdf

Chen, F. (2011). Traditional architectural forms in market oriented Chinese cities: place for localities or symbol of culture?. Habitat International, 35, 410-418. Retrieved October 22, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=57368318

Crompton, J. (2007). The role of the proximate: Principle in the emergence of urban parks in the United Kingdom and in the United States. Leisure Studies, 26 , 213-234. Retrieved October 1, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24175613&site=ehost-live

Crosbie, M. (2005). Renewing spaces. Christian Century, 122 , 20-21. Retrieved October 1, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18832577&site=ehost-live

Du, F. & Tanner, C. (1983). Social design: Creating buildings with people in mind. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Eco, U. (1990). Travels in Hyper Reality. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt, Brace & Company.

Ellin, N. & Blakely, E., Eds. (1997). Architecture of Fear. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Kornberger, M., Kreiner, K., & Clegg, S. (2011). The value of style in architectural practice. Culture & Organization, 17, 139-153. Retrieved October 22, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=59131081

Lockton, D. (2008). Review of Katyal, N., Design with Intent: Architectures of Control. Retrieved September 30, 2008 from: http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/10/18/ review-architecture-as-crime-control-by-neal-katyal/

Manley, S., & de Graft-Johnson, A. (2004). Why women still leave architecture. Women & Environments International Magazine, (62/63), 19-20. Retrieved October 22, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=13056231

Sarg?n, G., & Sava?, A. (2012). Dialectical urbanism: tactical instruments in urban design education. Cities, 29, 358-368. Retrieved October 22, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=82429020

Smith, R. & Bugni, V. ( 2006). Symbolic Interaction Theory and Architecture. Symbolic Interaction, 29 . Retrieved September 30, 2008 from: http://strata.unlv.edu/smith%5fbugni/smithbugni2006.pdf

Smith, R & Bugni ,V. (2006). Defining Architectural Sociology. Retrieved September 30, 2008 from: http://strata.unlv.edu/smith%5fbugni/smithbugni.html

Smith, R. & Bugni, V. (2002). The role of architecture and sociology in organizational development. Connections, June, 2002. Retrieved September 26 from AIA Las Vegas Forum Newsletter, June 2002. http://strata.unlv.edu/smith%5fbugni/orgdevo.pdf

Smith, R. & Bugni, V. (2002). Architectural sociology and post-modern architectural forms. Connections, August, 2002. Retrieved September 30, 2008 from: http://strata.unlv.edu/smith%5fbugni/pomo.pdf

Stevens, G. (2008). Women in architecture. Retrieved September 29, 2008 from Archsoc.com: http://www.archsoc.com/kcas/ArchWomen.html

Sullivan, C. (2005). A new age of officing. Architecture, 94 . Retrieved October 1, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22790972&site=ehost-live

Stevens, G. (2008). Things you won't read in the glossies. Retrieved September 26, 2008 from Archsoc.com: http://www.archsoc.com/kcas/Erections.html#glossies

Suggested Reading

Heylighen, A., & Strickfaden, M. (2012). {Im}materiality: designing for more sense/s. Space & Culture, 15, 180-185. Retrieved October 22, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=82378504

Jones, P. (2008). The Sociology of Architecture. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Jones, P. (2011). The Sociology of Architecture. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Newman, D. (2008). Sociology: Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Newman, D. & O'Brien, J. (2008). Sociology: Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life. CA: Sage Publications.

Vassoler-Froelich, I., Cantu, J., & McAdams, M. A. (2012). The Geography, Politics, and Architecture of Cities: Studies in the Creation and Complexification of Culture. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press.