The Threefold Structure of Interior Spatial Quality in Healing Architecture: Physiological, Phenomenological, and Social-Cultural Aspects

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistant Professor, Department of Interior Architecture, School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

In recent decades, increasing attention has been paid to the role of architecture in promoting physical, psychological, and socio-cultural dimensions of healing, alongside the growing complexity of healthcare systems and a fundamental shift in contemporary understandings of health and care. Despite this awareness, many healthcare environments continue to be dominated by technical, functional, and efficiency-driven criteria, while perceptual, experiential, and socio-cultural qualities of interior space remain fragmented or insufficiently theorized. This condition reveals a theoretical gap concerning the quality of interior spaces in healing architecture and the spatial mechanisms through which healing is experienced. The aim of this research is to develop a multidimensional explanatory framework for analyzing interior spatial quality in healing architecture through the integration of physiological, phenomenological, and socio-cultural dimensions. The study adopts a qualitative and interpretive research methodology. In the first phase, key conceptual themes were identified through a critical review of theoretical literature and refined through the coding and analysis of semi-structured interviews with experts in architecture, healthcare design, and environmental psychology. In the second phase, the analytical capacity of the proposed framework was examined through a comparative analysis of four significant case studies representing landmark healing environments developed over the past century. The physiological dimension focuses on environmental variables such as natural light, ventilation, acoustic comfort, spatial organization, and materiality, which directly influence bodily processes and health-related outcomes. Rather than treating these factors as purely technical parameters, the study interprets them as spatial conditions that shape embodied experience. The phenomenological dimension addresses healing as an embodied and multisensory process, emphasizing perception, movement, tactility, sound, smell, and atmosphere as integral components of interior space. Drawing on phenomenological theories articulated by thinkers such as Merleau-Ponty, Pallasmaa, and Norberg-Schulz, this dimension conceptualizes healing as a lived and experiential process rather than a solely functional outcome. The socio-cultural dimension examines healing architecture as a socially embedded phenomenon shaped by cultural meanings, social practices, collective values, and place identity, highlighting the role of architecture in fostering dignity, trust, belonging, and social interaction within healthcare environments. The findings indicate that healing architecture achieves its highest effectiveness when these three dimensions are activated simultaneously and interactively within the design process. Rather than operating as discrete or hierarchical layers, physiological, phenomenological, and socio-cultural factors overlap and reinforce one another in shaping the overall healing experience. Spatial qualities such as light, nature, and materiality function not only as determinants of physiological comfort but also as carriers of cultural meaning and mediators of sensory perception and social behavior. The primary contribution of this research lies not in proposing a new dimension of healing architecture, but in articulating the dynamic, non-linear, and integrative relationships among existing dimensions. The proposed tripartite explanatory framework conceptualizes healing as a multisensory, embodied, and socio-culturally embedded experience within interior spaces and offers both an analytical tool and a design-oriented guideline for evaluating and enhancing healthcare interiors across diverse cultural contexts, particularly where healthcare architecture has been shaped predominantly by technical and imported models.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Battisto, D., & Wilhelm, J. J. (2019). Architecture and health: Guiding principles for practice. Routledge.
Casey, E. S. (1996). How to get from space to place in a fairly short stretch of time: Phenomenological prolegomena. In S. Feld & K. H. Basso (Eds.), Senses of place (pp. 13–52). School of American Research Press.
Codinhoto, R., Tzortzopoulos, P., Kagioglou, M., Aouad, G., & Cooper, R. (2009). The impacts of the built environment on health outcomes. Facilities, 27(3–4), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632770910933152
Curtis, S. (2010). Space, place and mental health. Ashgate Publishing.
Foucault, M. (1973). The birth of the clinic: An archaeology of medical perception. Vintage.
Frampton, K. (1980). Modern architecture: A critical history. Thames & Hudson.
Frampton, K. (1983). Towards a critical regionalism: Six points for an architecture of resistance.
In H. Foster (Ed.), The anti-aesthetic: Essays on postmodern culture (pp. 16–30). Bay Press.
Gesler, W. M. (1992). Therapeutic landscapes: Medical issues in light of the new cultural geography. Social Science & Medicine, 34(7), 735–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(92)90360-3
Gharipour, M., Masoud, E., Esmaeilzadeh Vafaei, J., & Jahani Sadatmahalle, F. (2024). The impact of social development on the architecture of early medical infrastructure in Gilan, Iran, in the 20th century. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-03-2024-0092
Grosz, E. (2001). Architecture from the outside: Essays on virtual and real space. MIT Press.
Heathcote, E., & Jencks, C. (2010). The architecture of hope: Maggie's cancer caring centres.
Frances Lincoln. Heikinheimo, M. (2016). Architecture and technology: Alvar Aalto’s Paimio Sanatorium [Doctoral dissertation, Aalto University]. Aalto University Publication Series Doctoral Dissertations, 1/2016. https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/21063
Jelić, A., Tieri, G., De Matteis, F., Babiloni, F., & Vecchiato, G. (2016). The enactive approach to architectural experience: A neurophysiological perspective on embodiment, motivation, and affordances. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 481. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00481
Jencks, C. (2010). The language of post-modern architecture (5th ed.). Rizzoli.
Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Kellert, S. R., Heerwagen, J., & Mador, M. (2011). Biophilic design: the theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. John Wiley & Sons.
Lawson, B. (2010). Healing architecture. Arts & Health, 2(2), 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/17533010903488517
Murphy, M. P., Jr., Mansfield, J., & MASS Design Group. (2021). The architecture of health: Hospital design and the construction of dignity. Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design.
Museum.Neves, J. D. (2024). Sensory Architecture: The art of designing for all senses. mapa lab.
Mendell, M. J., & Heath, G. A. (2005). Do indoor pollutants and thermal conditions in schools influence student performance? A critical review of the literature. Indoor Air, 15(1), 27-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0668.2004.00320.x Merleau-Ponty, M. (2010). Phenomenology of Perception (D. Landes, Trans.; 1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203720714
Wagenaar, C. (2006). The architecture of hospitals.NAi Publishers.
Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Genius loci: Towards a phenomenology of architecture. Rizzoli.
Pallasmaa, J. (2005). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. Wiley.
Pallasmaa, J. (2012). The embodied image: Imagination and imagery in architecture. Wiley.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
Ryan, C. O., & Browning, W. D. (2020). Biophilic design. In Sustainable built environments (pp. 43–85). Springer US. Scruton, Roger (2021) The aesthetics of architecture. Princeton University Press.
Seamon, D. (2013). Place attachment and phenomenology: The synergistic dynamism of place.
In L. C. Manzo & P. Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment: Advances in theory, methods and applications (pp. 11–22). Routledge.
Sternberg, E. M. (2009). Healing spaces: The science of place and well-being. Harvard University Press.
Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224(4647), 420–421. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6143402
Ulrich, R. S. (1991). Effects of healthcare interior design on wellness: Theory and recent scientific research. Journal of Health Care Design, 3, 97–109. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10123973
Ulrich, R. S., Zimring, C., Zhu, X., DuBose, J., Seo, H. B., Choi, Y. S., Quan, X., & Joseph, A. (2008). A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 1(3), 61–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/193758670800100306
Verderber, S., & Fine, D. J. (2000). Healthcare architecture in an era of radical transformation. Yale University Press. Verderber, S., & Refuerzo, B. J. (2019). Innovations in hospice architecture (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Verderber, Stephen (2010). Innovations in hospital architecture. Routledge.
Wigley, M. (1997). The architecture of deconstruction: Derrida’s haunt. MIT Press.
Wilson, Edward O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard University Press.
پارسی، حمیدرضا و پورهادی‌گوابری، مهدیه. (۱۴۰۰). تبیین و تدوین مؤلفه‌های مؤثر در طراحی فرم معماری محیط‌های درمانی. معماری و شهرسازی آرمان‌شهر، 14(35)، 41-56. https://doi.org/10.22034/aaud.2020.209960.2050
جانی‌پور، بهروز؛ حقیقی‌ خوشخو، آیسان و طاهری، محمدرضا. (۱۴۰۰). کاربست معیارهای منظر درمانگرا و باغ‌های شفابخش در طراحی فضای سبز بیمارستان‌ها (نمونه موردی: مرکز طبی کودکان تهران). علوم باغبانی ایران، 52(2)، 487-500. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijhs.2021.307830.1828
حمزه‌لو، سارا و سنبلی، الهام. (۱۴۰۰). معیارهای طراحی داخلی مراکز درمانی با تأکید بر طراحی مبتنی بر شواهد. معماری، مرمت و شهرسازی، 1، 40-58. https://www.ensani.ir/fa/article/464136
صبوری، صابر؛ شاهمرادی، فرانک و نیکزاد، سارا. (۱۳۹۶). بررسی کیفیت معماری فضاهای داخلی بیمارستان‌ها از دیدگاه ادراکی بیماران و کارکنان (مطالعه موردی: بیمارستان شمس تبریز). نشریه معماری و شهرسازی ایران، 14(پیاپی)، 49-64. https://ensani.ir/file/download/article/1585971659-10263-14-4.pdf
پاگیری قلعه‌نویی، منصور؛ مسعود، محمد و یارمحمدیان، محمدحسین. (۱۳۹۹). طراحی معماری بیمارستان با رویکرد بیمارمحور: شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر تجربه زیسته بیمار از حس مکان در فضای درمانی. مجله تحقیقات نظام سلامت حکیم، 23(4)، 435-448. http://hakim.tums.ac.ir/article-1-2095-fa.html
صیامیان، فرناز و رستمی، راحله. (۱۴۰۰). بررسی تأثیر طراحی داخلی بیمارستان‌ها بر بهبود سلامت روان بیماران. نشریه معماری سبز، 27، 15-26. https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/1873763
گلستانی، سارا و زاهدان، آرش. (۱۳۹۶). منظر محوطه بیمارستان: تداوم درمان. مجله منظر، 38، 48-59. https://www.manzar-sj.com/article_55192.html
Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning
Volume 31, Issue 1
June 2026
Pages 75-86

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics