TRADITIONAL ARCHITECTURE AND PSYCHOPHYSICAL WELLBEING
AN INTEGRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36674/mythos.v22i1.988Keywords:
mental health, neuroscience, psychology, wellbeing, built environmentAbstract
The study of psychobiology has revealed promising potential: understanding how architectural design can sustainably address human psychological needs. Recent studies suggest that the human brain is naturally drawn to structures with traditional characteristics, raising intriguing questions about which elements of the built environment truly impact well-being. This article seeks to explore these aspects through an integrative literature review, aiming to identify the key architectural and urban elements that positively influence physical and mental health, based on evidence from fields such as neuroscience and psychology, while relating these findings to traditional architecture. After analyzing 12 selected publications, the results point to a significant connection: structural characteristics often associated with traditional architecture are directly linked to improvements in quality of life, encompassing both physical and mental well-being. This finding not only underscores the importance of fostering dialogue between science and design but also invites broader reflection on how we can shape environments that genuinely promote health and happiness.
References
Andalib, E., Faghani, M., Heidari, M., & Tabari Khomeiran, R. (2022). Design of vestibules as transitional spaces in infection control: Necessity of working space changes to cope with communicable infections. Work (Reading, Mass.), 72(4), 1227–1238. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-210216
Botton, A. D. (2008). The Architecture of Happiness (Reprint edition). Vintage.
Brielmann, A. A., Buras, N. H., Salingaros, N. A., & Taylor, R. P. (2022). What Happens in Your Brain When You Walk Down the Street? Implications of Architectural Proportions, Biophilia, and Fractal Geometry for Urban Science. Urban Science, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci6010003
Buras, N. H. (2020). CAN BEAUTY KILL GERMS?: THE IMPACT OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING AND ARCHITECTURE ON PUBLIC HEALTH. New Design Ideas, 4(2), 119–137.
Coburn, A., Vartanian, O., & Chatterjee, A. (2017). Buildings, Beauty, and the Brain: A Neuroscience of Architectural Experience. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29(9), 1521–1531. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01146
Darwin, C. (2017). The Origin of Species. General Press.
El-Zeiny, R. M. A. (2012). Biomimicry as a Problem Solving Methodology in Interior Architecture. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 502–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.054
Gainotti, G. (2012). Unconscious processing of emotions and the right hemisphere. Neuropsychologia, 50(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.12.005
Gjerde, M., & Vale, B. (2022). An examination of people’s preferences for buildings and streetscapes in New Zealand. Australian Planner, 58(1-2), 36-48.
Hollander, J. B., & Sussman, A. (2020). Urban Experience and Design: Contemporary Perspectives on Improving the Public Realm. Routledge & CRC Press.
Huskinson, L. (2018). Architecture and the Mimetic Self: A Psychoanalytic Study of How Buildings Make and Break Our Lives. Routledge & CRC Press.
Karakas, T., & Yildiz, D. (2020). Exploring the influence of the built environment on human experience through a neuroscience approach: A systematic review. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 9(1), 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.10.005
Kellert, S. R. (2015). The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island Press.
Lee, M.-H., Cheon, D.-Y., & Han, S.-H. (2020). A Technical Assessment of Comfort Performance of Hanok Using Comparative Field Surveys between Experts and Users. Sustainability, 12(24), 10315. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410315
Marohn, C. L. (2019). Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity. Wiley.
Michalos, A. C. (2014). Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer.
Mouratidis, K. (2018). Rethinking how built environments influence subjective well-being: A new conceptual framework. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 11(1), 24–40.
Mouratidis, K., & Hassan, R. (2020). Contemporary versus traditional styles in architecture and public space: A virtual reality study with 360-degree videos. Cities, 97, 102499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102499
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Ramzy, N. (2015a). Sustainable Spaces with Psychological Values: Historical Architecture as Reference Book for Biomimetic Models with Biophilic Qualities. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR.
Ramzy, N. S. (2015b). Biophilic qualities of historical architecture: In quest of the timeless terminologies of “life” in architectural expression. Sustainable Cities and Society, 15, 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.11.006
Rizi, R. A. (2022). Occupants’ migration in residential buildings towards comfort and energy efficiency (case of traditional residential architecture in Iran). Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 37(1), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-021-09829-w
Salingaros, N. A. (2008). Anti-Architecture and Deconstruction (3rd ed. edição). Isi Distributed Titles.
Salingaros, N. (2024). ARCHITECTURAL KNOWLEDGE: LACKING A KNOWLEDGE SYSTEM, THE PROFESSION REJECTS HEALING ENVIRONMENTS THAT PROMOTE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING. New Design Ideas, 8(2), 261–299. https://doi.org/10.62476/ndi82261
Samalavi?ius, A. (2018). Beyond sustainability: Reconsidering the healing qualities of the built environment. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 213(1), 012001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/213/1/012001
Scruton, R. (2015). Roger Scruton: “Why Beauty Matters?” (Por que a beleza importa? - Legendado) [Gravação de vídeo]. https://vimeo.com/128428182
Seresinhe, C. I., Preis, T., MacKerron, G., & Moat, H. S. (2019). Happiness is Greater in More Scenic Locations. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 4498. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40854-6
Souza, M. T. de, Silva, M. D. da, & Carvalho, R. de. (2010). Revisão integrativa: O que é e como fazer. einstein (São Paulo), 8, 102–106. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1679-45082010RW1134
Sussman, A., & Hollander, J. B. (2021). Cognitive Architecture: Designing for How We Respond to the Built Environment. Routledge & CRC Press.
Wilson, E. O. (2007). Biophilia and the Conservation Ethic. Em Evolutionary Perspectives on Environmental Problems. Routledge.
Zeki, S. (2019). Beauty in Architecture: Not a Luxury - Only a Necessity. Architectural Design, 89(5), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2473
Zhong, W., Schröder, T., & Bekkering, J. (2022). Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, well-being, and sustainability: A critical review. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 11(1), 114–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2021.07.006
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Raphael Patrício de Andrade Falcão, Ilanna de Brito Lyra Silva Meira Costa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Since January of 2024, the authors retain the copyright relating to their article and grant the journal Mythos, from FEPESMIG, the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0), as stated in the article’s PDF document. This license provides that the article published can be shared (allows you to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapted (allows you to remix, transform, and create from the material for any purpose, even commercial) by anyone.
