Conceptualizing the Remote Site Experience through Immersive Technology: Unraveling the Santa Marta Favela from Students’ Perspectives

REFERENCES

1. ↵
   1. Antrop, M.

   (2000). Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 77(1–2), 17–28.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
2. ↵
   1. Balakrishnan, B., &
   2. Kalisperis, L. N.

   (2009). Design visualization: A media effects approach. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 7(3), 415–427. https://doi.org/10.1260/147807709789621194

   OpenUrlCrossRef
3. ↵
   1. Balakrishnan, B.,
   2. Oprean, D.,
   3. Martin, B., &
   4. Smith, M.

   (2012). Virtual reality: Factors determining spatial presence, comprehension and memory. In Y.C. Lin & S. J. Kang (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality (pp. 451–459). National Taiwan University Press.
4. ↵
   1. Balakrishnan, B., &
   2. Sundar, S. S.

   (2011). Where am I? How can I get there? Impact of navigability and narrative transportation on spatial presence. Human–Computer Interaction, 26(3), 161–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2011.601689

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Baudoin, G. S.

   (2016). Interpreting site: Studies in perception, representation, and design. Routledge.
6. ↵
   1. Beauregard, R. A

   . (2005). From place to site: Negotiating narrative complexity. In Burns C. & Kahn A.(Eds.), Site matters: Design concepts, histories, and strategies (pp. 39–58). Routledge.
7. ↵
   1. Bishop, I. D.,
   2. Ye, W.–S., &
   3. Karadaglis, C.

   (2001). Experiential approaches to perception response in virtual worlds. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1–4), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169–2046(01)00130–X

   OpenUrl
8. ↵
   1. Bullinger, H. J.,
   2. Bauer, W.,
   3. Wenzel, G., &
   4. Blach, R.

   (2010). Towards user centred design (UCD) in architecture based on immersive virtual environments. Computers in Industry, 61(4), 372–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2009.12.003

   OpenUrl
9. ↵
   1. Castronovo, F.,
   2. Nikolic, D.,
   3. Liu, Y., &
   4. Messner, J.

   (2013). An evaluation of immersive virtual reality systems for design reviews. In Dawood N. & Kassem M.(Eds.), 13th International Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality (CONVR) (pp. 22–29). Teesside University.
10. ↵
    1. Clarke, H. A. G

    . (2005). Land–scopic regimes: Exploring perspectival representation beyond the “pictorial” project. Landscape Journal, 24(1), 50–68. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.24.1.50

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
11. ↵
    1. Damann, N.,
    2. Voets, T., &
    3. Nilius, B.

    (2008). TRPs in our senses. Current Biology, 18(18), R880–R889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.07.063

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. ↵
    1. Damasio, A.

    (2003). Feelings of emotion and the self. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1001(1), 253–261. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1279.014

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. ↵
    1. Drettakis, G.,
    2. Roussou, M.,
    3. Reche, A., &
    4. Tsingos, N.

    (2007). Design and evaluation of a real–world virtual environment for architecture and urban planning. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 16(3), 318–332. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.16.3.318

    OpenUrlCrossRef
14. ↵
    1. Echevarria Sanchez, G. M.,
    2. van Renterghem, T.,
    3. Sun, K.,
    4. de Coensel, B., &
    5. Botteldooren, D.

    (2017). Using virtual reality for assessing the role of noise in the audio–visual design of an urban public space. Landscape and Urban Planning, 167, 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.05.018

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Fereday, J., &
    2. Muir–Cochrane, E.

    (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107

    OpenUrlCrossRef
16. ↵
    1. Franck, K. A., &
    2. Lepori, R. B.

    (2007). Architecture from the inside out: From the body, the senses, the site, and the community (2nd ed.). Wiley–Academy.
17. ↵
    1. Freitas, M. R. D., &
    2. Ruschel, R. C.

    (2013). What is happening to virtual and augmented reality applied to architecture? In R. Stouffs, P. Janssen, S. Roudavski, & B. Tunçer (Eds.), Open systems: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on computer–aided architectural design research in Asia (CAADRIA 2013) (pp. 407–416). CAADRIA and CASA.
18. ↵
    1. George, B. H.

    (2016). Distributed site analysis utilizing drones and 360–degree video. Journal of Digital Landscape Architecture, 1, 92–99. https://doi.org/10.14627/537612011

    OpenUrl
19. ↵
    1. George, B. H.

    (2018). Using virtual tours to facilitate sustainable site visits of historic sites. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 7(4), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2018.v7n4p411

    OpenUrl
20. ↵
    1. George, B. H.,
    2. Sleipness, O. R., &
    3. Quebbeman, A.

    (2017). Using virtual reality as a design input: Impacts on collaboration in a university design studio setting. Journal of Digital Landscape Architecture, 2, 252–259. https://doi.org/10.14627/537629026

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    1. Ghadirian, P., &
    2. Bishop, I. D.

    (2008). Integration of augmented reality and GIS: A new approach to realistic landscape visualisation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86(3–4), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.03.004

    OpenUrlCrossRef
22. ↵
    1. Gilbert, S. B.

    (2016). Perceived realism of virtual environments depends on authenticity. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 24(4), 322–324.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Girot, C.

    (1999). Four trace concepts in landscape architecture. In Corner J. & Balfour A.(Eds.), Recovering landscape: Essays in contemporary landscape architecture (pp. 58–67). Princeton Architectural Press.
24. ↵
    1. Hill, D.,
    2. George, B., &
    3. Johnson, T.

    (2019). How virtual reality impacts the landscape architecture design process during the phases of analysis and concept development at the master planning scale. Journal of Digital Landscape Architecture, 4, 266–274. https://doi.org/10.14627/537663029

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. ↵
    1. Jakle, J. A.

    (1987). The visual elements of landscape. University of Massachusetts Press.
26. ↵
    1. Jiven, G., &
    2. Larkham, P. J.

    (2003). Sense of place, authenticity and character: A commentary. Journal of Urban Design, 8(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357480032000064773

    OpenUrlCrossRef
27. ↵
    1. Kilteni, K.,
    2. Groten, R., &
    3. Slater, M.

    (2012). The sense of embodiment in virtual reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 21(4), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00124

    OpenUrlCrossRef
28. ↵
    1. Klippel, A.,
    2. Zhao, J.,
    3. Jackson, K. L.,
    4. La Femina, P.,
    5. Stubbs, C.,
    6. Wetzel, R.,
    7. Blair, J.,
    8. Wallgrün, J. O., &
    9. Oprean, D.

    (2019). Transforming earth science education through immersive experiences: Delivering on a long–held promise. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(7), 1745–1771. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119854025

    OpenUrl
29. ↵
    1. Koseoglu, E., &
    2. Onder, D. E.

    (2011). Subjective and objective dimensions of spatial legibility. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1191–1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.231

    OpenUrl
30. ↵
    1. Lange, E.

    (2001). The limits of realism: Perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1–4), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00134-7

    OpenUrlCrossRef
31. ↵
    1. Lange, E., &
    2. Schmid, W. A.

    (2000). Ecological planning with virtual landscapes: Three examples from Switzerland. Landscape Journal, 19(1–2), 156–165. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.19.1-2.156

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
32. ↵
    1. Leach, N.

    (2002). Designing for a digital world. Academy Editions.
33. ↵
    1. Lombardo, A. E.

    (2018). Virtual reality and the landscape architecture design process (Master‘s thesis), Norwegian University of Life Sciences.
34. ↵
    1. Lyle, J. T.

    (1985). The alternating current of design process. Landscape Journal, 4(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.4.1.7

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
35. ↵
    1. Makstutis, G.

    (2010). Architecture: An introduction. Portfolio. Laurence King.
36. ↵
    1. Milburn, L. A. S., &
    2. Brown, R. D.

    (2003). The relationship between research and design in landscape architecture. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64(1–2), 47–66.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
37. ↵
    1. Milgram, P., &
    2. Kishino, F.

    (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems, 77(12), 1321–1329.

    OpenUrl
38. ↵
    1. Mitchell, W. J.

    (1975). The theoretical foundation of computer-aided architectural design. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2(2), 127–150.

    OpenUrl
39. ↵
    1. Oprean, D.,
    2. Verniz, D.,
    3. Zhao, J.,
    4. Wallgrün, J. O.,
    5. Duarte, J. P., &
    6. Klippel, A.

    (2018). Remote studio site experiences: Investigating the potential to develop the immersive site visit. In Fukuda T., Huang W., Janssen P., Crolla K., &Alhadidi S. (Eds.), Learning, adapting and prototyping—Proceedings of the 23rd CAADRIA Conference (pp. 421–430). Tsinghua University.
40. ↵
    1. Orland, B.,
    2. Budthimedhee, K., &
    3. Uusitalo, J.

    (2001). Considering virtual worlds as representations of landscape realities and as tools for landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1–4), 139–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00132-3

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
41. ↵
    1. Parke, F. I.

    (2005). Lower cost spatially immersive visualization for human environments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 73 (2–3), 234–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.11.009

    OpenUrl
42. ↵
    1. Portman, M. E.,
    2. Natapov, A., &
    3. Fisher–Gewirtzman, D.

    (2015). To go where no man has gone before: Virtual reality in architecture, landscape architecture and environmental planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 54, 376–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2015.05.001

    OpenUrl
43. ↵
    1. Pressman, A.

    (2012). Designing architecture: The elements of process. Routledge.
44. ↵
    1. Relph, E.

    (1976). Place and placelessness: Research in planning and design (vol. 1). Pion.
45. ↵
    1. Schutte, N. S., &
    2. Stilinović, E. J.

    (2017) Facilitating empathy through virtual reality. Motivation & Emotion, 41, 708–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031–017–9641–7

    OpenUrl
46. ↵
    1. Shin, D.

    (2018). Empathy and embodied experience in virtual environment: To what extent can virtual reality stimulate empathy and embodied experience? Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.012

    OpenUrl
47. ↵
    1. Slater, M.,
    2. Usoh, M., &
    3. Steed, A.

    (1995). Taking steps: the influence of a walking technique on presence in virtual reality. ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction (TOCHI), 2(3), 201–219.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
48. ↵
    1. Suh, A., &
    2. Prophet, J.

    (2018). The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019

    OpenUrl
49. ↵
    1. Williams, D. R.

    (2014). Making sense of “place”: Reflections on pluralism and positionality in place research. Landscape and Urban Planning, 131, 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.08.002

    OpenUrlCrossRef
50. ↵
    1. Wu, H., &
    2. Leung, S. O.

    (2017). Can Likert scales be treated as interval scales? A simulation study. Journal of Social Service Research, 43(4), 527–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2017.1329775

    OpenUrl
51. ↵
    1. Yin, R. K.

    (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage.