Update 20120507 [on literature review]

1. Seems like William James’ somatic theories, which suggested that bodily reaction comes first and affects the emotion human expresses, was dominating in emotion study area before cognitive theories were developed in the 1880s. The James-Lange theory had until 1953 been all abandoned by most scholars. But later there was a neo-Jamesian theory appeared which was based on James’ theories.

2. I read Bruce Hull’s articles a second time after i found some info about the relationship between emotion and mood. Got two more issues:
a. There’s a clear distinction between mood and emotion (non-object and object, long-last and short time, incapable to be expressed and capable to be expressed), but i can’t find a formal citation for this important part.
b. In Bruce’s two articles, Explaining the Emotion People Experience in Suburban Parks and Mood as a Product of Leisure: Causes and Consequences, seems like he thought mood was equal to emotion, and use the PAD coordinate to describe both mood and emotion. While in Wikipedia, it was said that the PAD emotional state model … uses three numerical directions to represent all emotions.[Citations here] ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAD_emotional_state_model )

Basically i got a clearer logical backbone for my research:
Water features in urban parks: Entertain the city
Water feature in urban parks –> emotion (acquired from water feature in vision) –> leisure (as a purpose of visiting urban parks) –> mood (as a productive of leisure) [–> urban social activities like emotional labor]
The subject will be narrowed down to people age above 18 (Will be further discussed)
I’ve found some articles support the relationship between mood and emotional labor (shown in last part in square brackets), it will be part of the conclusion and will only be an evidence of the critical position of this research.

Literature Review Draft [Keep updated]

“A mood is a relatively long lasting emotional state. Moods differ from emotions in that they are less specific, less intense, and less likely to be triggered by a particular stimulus or event.

“A mood is a distinguishing, emotional quality or character, a value of feeling at a certain time, an existing emotional tone or attitude.

— Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_(psychology)

*     *     *     *     *

“Emotion is a complex psychophysiological experience of an individual’s state of mind as interacting with biochemical (internal) and environmental (external) influences. In humans, emotion fundamentally involves “physiological arousal, expressive behaviors, and conscious experience.” Emotion is associated with moodtemperamentpersonality,disposition, and motivation. Motivations direct and energize behavior, while emotions provide the affective component to motivation, positive or negative.

“No definitive emotion classification system exists, though numerous taxonomies have been proposed. Some categorizations include:[citation needed]

— Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion

*     *     *     *     *

Leisure, or free time, is time spent away from businesswork, and domestic chores. It is also the periods of time before or after necessary activities such as eatingsleeping and, where it is compulsory, education.

— Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leisure

(In my thesis, the term “leisure” specifically refers to time spend on site)

*     *     *     *     *

Mood vs Emotion

Mood and emotion are words that are used interchangeably. Both emotion and mood are related to each other that makes the distinction a bit hard.

One of the main differences between mood and emotion can be seen in the expression. Mood is something a person may not express whereas emotions may be expressed. Another difference is that moods may last longer than the emotions.

Emotions are aroused in people by some specific objects or situations. On the other hand, moods are not created in someone because of any specific object or any particular situation. For example, if a person gets angry, he expresses that emotion towards someone. If a person is in a sad mood, he cannot express it to others. The concept that emotion is object- based has been proven even during Aristotle’s times. The object- directed distinction has always been a criterion to differentiate between moods and emotions.

Mood may for a long period whereas emotions only last for the time being. An anger or happiness pertains to the time it is felt. On the other hand, sadness or any other mood is something that can be felt for many days.

When compared to moods, emotions are more extreme.

Emotion is a word that has been derived from the French emouvoir. This word is based on the Latin word emovere, which means ‘out’ and movere which means ‘move’. Mood is a word that is derived from the Old English word of Mod, which represented military courage. This word also referred to personal courage at some particular time.


1. Mood is something a person may not express whereas emotions may be expressed.

2. Mood may last for a long period whereas emotions may last only for the time being.

3. Emotions are aroused in people by some specific objects or situations. On the other hand, moods are not created in someone because of any specific object or any particular situation.

4. If a person gets angry, he expresses that emotion towards someone. If a person is in a sad mood, he cannot express it to others.

5. When compared to moods, emotions are more extreme.

6. Emotion is a word that has been derived from the French emouvoir.

7. Mood is a word that is derived from the Old English word of Mod, which represented military courage.

— DifferentBetween.net, http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-mood-and-emotion/

*     *     *     *     *

“leisure is a positive experience accompanied by satisfying and pleasurable moods, emotions or feelings (Mannell, 1980:77).

“The term ‘mood’ is used to denote a specific set of subjective feelings which occur as a consequence of everyday leisure experiences (i.e., excitement, relaxation, awe, happiness).

“… impact of moods on such socially relevant things as the immune system, cognitive skills, and helping behavior.

“Hammitt (1980) and More and Payne (1978) found that moods varied as a result of participation in leisure activities.

“Stone (1987) … found that leisure were significantly associated with positive and desirable moods.

“Mannell, Zusanek, and Larson (1988) reported that leisure activities tend to evoke ‘positive’ mood states.

“… Gunter (1987) identified eight properties of leisure: five of which seem related to moods (pleasure, enjoyment, fantasy, adventure, spontaneity).

“… behavioral, motoric, and physiological states which occur concurrently with subjective feelings of mood and to use these as indicators to denote the onset of mood. [Mood can not be expressed in the same way emotion does]

(about PAD emotional state model)

“It is a measure of how wide awake the organism is, of how ready it is to react. The lower pole of the continuum is represented by sleep or coma, while the upper pole would be reached in state of frantic excitement (Berlyne, 1960:48). Dominance refers to the feeling of control and/or ability to manipulate a situation. … Pleasure is characterized by feelings of satisfaction, comfort, enjoyment, and beauty.

“Light, sound, smell, vibration, taste, temperature all influence pleasure, arousal and dominance.

(In Recreation Activity)

“… whatever the environment is, it is likely to have a significant impact on mood state.

(From the rest parts of this article)

/* Mood has impacts on attention, cognition, behavior and physiology as well as on memories, planning and health.

*     *     *     *     *

“In general, people prefer parks that are both pleasant and arousing.

“Emotions are suggested to be pancultural, innate, and independent of sense modality (Izard, 1997; Osgood, 1969).

“Mehrabian and Russell (1974) present arousal, pleasure, and a third dimension, dominance, as a basis for environmental psychology and review evidence supporting these constructs as legitimate dimensions of  human emotion.

“Three analogous dimensions — activity (arousal), evaluation (pleasure), and potency (dominance) — are supported by the substantial body of semantic differential evidence collected by Osgood and associates (e.g., Osgood rt al, 1957; Osgood, 1969).

“‘Emergent properties’ of molar environments create situations where the sum of the molecular parts may not explain the experience of the whole place.

“specific characteristics of the park will explain some of the variance in residents’ emotional responses to parks.

“one of the reasons people visit parks is to experience an emotion not commonly experienced in a ‘normal’ suburban or urban environment.

— R. Bruce Hull IV, Antony Harvey, Explaining the emotion people experience in suburban parks, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 21 No. 3, May 1989 pp. 323-345

Update 20120501 [Upgrade version]

  1. Literature review:
  • The process of leisure: cognition or emotion? (Find adequate evidence and talk about briefly, leave the debate be, no further discussion)
  • Why emotion should be considered in landscape design?

à Four factors affect emotion

à Emotion could be affected by environment.

  1. Research:
  • General concept:

à Predict how a design changes people’s emotion through changing the environment on site (through vision, temperature, moisture, sound, etc.)

àEvaluate potential leisure level on site

  • Specific topic:

àHow water feature affect people’s leisure

  • Function of water feature
  • Approaches (through which water feature) affect leisure
  • Affecting factors: weather, seasons, other people, etc.
  • Audience (Divide into category, i.e., age)
  • Case Study
  • Conclusion


Summer 2012                    Literature review

Emotion and leisure

Precedents on leisure evaluation

Water feature in urban landscape (Types and functions)

Pick up (or make) stimuli (for survey), investigation, and survey

Pick up site(s) for case study

Start case study procedure

Fall 2012                              Analyze data

Some more survey maybe

Winter 2012                       Finalize data analysis

Draw a draft conclusion

Full check on all steps

Spring 2013                         Start thesis writing

Summer 2013                    End case study

Finalize thesis

R. Bruce Hull IV, Antony Harvey, Explaining the emotion people experience in suburban parks, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 21 No. 3, May 1989 pp. 323-345

R. Bruce Hull IV, Mood as a product of leisure: causes and consequences, Journal of Leisure Research, 1990, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 99-111

Michelle R. Greene, Aude Oliva, The briefest of glances: the time course of natural scene understanding, Psycological Science, 2009, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 464-472                                                               [NOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND]

Update 20120418 [Need to be revised]

Topic (Temporary title)

Application of semiotic approaches in urban landscape architecture design process

Advisory committee

Dr. Byoung-Suk Kweon, Associate Professor, Committee Chair

Dr. David Myers, Associate Professor, Committee Member

Someone in PSYC Department

Problem statement

Treat the urban landscape design as a problem shooting process on the point of view of people in environment.

Critical Position

Try to add a new way to urban landscape design method which open the designers’ mind throughout the design process.


As our language develops, it becomes more and more accurate on describing our world. Since the way we describe things is an anti-process of invention and improvement, our languages becomes an obstacle between us and free imagination. For example, the application of benches in public space is based on our needs of recreational infrastructures. Benches in public space provide us with the opportunity of applying sitting posture, thus effectively reduce the burden of our legs which carries the whole weight of our body when we stand. In order to keep our language simple enough for daily use, we added in the word “bench” to our vocabulary to describe a piece of furniture, which typically offers seating for several people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bench, Wikipedia). This type of vocabulary contains a wealth of information which at least part of it is often ignored in the daily use. When come up with these words, people’s first impression is often a specific instance rather than the common characteristics of all elements in this set. From a linguistic point of view, the essence of this phenomenon is, a collective noun is used as a proper noun by at least one party of the speakers and the listeners in the communication. In response to this phenomenon, I’m trying to develop a different way which emphasis more on the feeling of people in urban environments to improve our design method.

To achieve this goal, the first priority is to change the language of design. Instead of thinking what kind of specific infrastructures is needed on a site, we go a little deeper and thinking what kind of feeling is needed on a site. In this way we get more options on the same design. For example, instead of thinking “people will need a parasol here”, we think “what will provide the cool feeling under sunshine”. Thus we have several options: shade, breeze, water feature, air-conditioner, etc. Then we have more options under each of these labels like parasol, canopy, building, sculpture and even other person or animals could provide shade. Since not all of these options are reasonable, we need to optimize our choice range by adding other factors when we reach the substantial landscaping elements: air-conditioner cannot meet our sustainable requirement when placing in an exterior space, building a fountain will probably crash our budget, buildings might block the horizon or a charming waterfront view, etc. Sometimes the result might be nothing but a parasol, but the process provides a strong reason to put a parasol on this particular site. (At this point I’m hesitating on the necessity of developing a set of simple but intuitive symbols to describe people’s feelings in environment.)


Urban landscape design, people’s feeling in environment, language of urban landscape design

Content frame


Literature Review


  1. Semiotic description of human emotions;
  2. People’s emotions in environment;
  3. Landscape design in perspective of the user group.
  4. Language of landscape (Anne Whiston Spirn’s theory and Lawrence Halprin’s theory)*/

/*Need to be further developed*/

Alessa, Lilian (Naia), Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey, and Gregory Brown. 2008. Social–ecological hotspots mapping: A spatial approach for identifying coupled social–ecological space. Landscape & Urban Planning 85 (1) (03/21): 27-39.

Arentze, Theo A., Aloys W. J. Borgers, and Linda Ma. 2010. An agent-based heuristic method for generating land-use plans in urban planning. Environment and Planning B, Planning & Design 37 (3) (May 2010): 463-82.

Bailey, Neil, John T. Lee, and Stewart Thompson. 2006. Maximising the natural capital benefits of habitat creation: Spatially targeting native woodland using GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning 75 (3–4) (3/15): 227-43.

Bell, Simon, Alicia Montarzino, and Penny Travlou. 2007. Mapping research priorities for green and public urban space in the UK. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 6 (2) (05/25): 103-15.

Bruce, Dvorak. 2009. Green roofs in sustainable landscape design by steven L. cantor. Landscape and Urban Planning 92 (3–4) (9/30): 347-8.

Carter, Timothy, and C. Rhett Jackson. 2007. Vegetated roofs for stormwater management at multiple spatial scales. Landscape and Urban Planning 80 (1–2) (3/28): 84-94.

Coroza, Oliver, David Evans, and Ian Bishop. 1997. Enhancing runoff modeling with GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning 38 (1–2) (10): 13-23.

Czemiel Berndtsson, Justyna. 2010. Green roof performance towards management of runoff water quantity and quality: A review. Ecological Engineering 36 (4) (04): 351-60.

Dean, Denis J., and Alicia C. Lizarraga-Blackard. 2007. Modeling the magnitude and spatial distribution of aesthetic impacts. Environment and Planning B, Planning & Design 34 (1) (Jan 2007): 121-38.

Francis, Mark. 2001. A case study method for landscape architects. Vol. 20.

Hansen-Møller, Jette. 2009. Natursyns model: A conceptual framework and method for analysing and comparing views of nature. Landscape & Urban Planning 89 (3) (02/15): 65-74.

Jeran, Zvonka, Radojko Jacimovic, U. Sansone, and Maria Belli. 2003. The use of k[sub]0-INAA for determination of surface contamination of some aquatic plants by trace elements. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry Lausanne : Elsevier ; Budapest : Akadémiai K Vol.257.

Kaplan, Rachel, and Stephen Kaplan. 2011. Anthropogenic/anthropogenerous: Creating environments that help people create better environments. Landscape & Urban Planning 100 (4) (04/30): 350-2.

Kaźmierczak, Aleksandra, and Gina Cavan. 2011. Surface water flooding risk to urban communities: Analysis of vulnerability, hazard and exposure. Landscape and Urban Planning 103 (2) (11/30): 185-97.

Keeley, Melissa. 2007. Using individual parcel assessments to improve stormwater management. Journal of the American Planning Association 73 (2) (Apr 2007): 149-60.

Lehrman, Barry. 2010. Green roof systems: A guide to the planning, design, and construction of landscapes over structure. Landscape Journal 29 (1) (03): 92-3.

Li, Feng, Rusong Wang, Juergen Paulussen, and Xusheng Liu. 2005. Comprehensive concept planning of urban greening based on ecological principles: A case study in beijing, china. Landscape and Urban Planning 72 (4) (5/15): 325-36.

Lidskog, Rolf, and Linda Soneryd. 2000. Transport infrastructure investment and environmental impact assessment in sweden: Public involvement or exclusion? Environment and Planning A 32 (8) (Aug 2000): 1465-79.

Maas, Jolanda, Peter Spreeuwenberg, Marijke van Winsum-Westra, Robert A. Verheij, Sjerp de Vries, and Peter P. Groenewegen. 2009. Is green space in the living environment associated with people’s feelings of social safety? Environment & Planning A 41 (7) (07): 1763-77.

Mahmoud, Ayman Hassaan Ahmed, and Marwa El-Sayed. 2011. Development of sustainable urban green areas in egyptian new cities: The case of el-sadat city. Landscape & Urban Planning 101 (2) (05/30): 157-70.

Mayaill, Kevin, and G. B. Hall. 2005. Landscape grammar 1: Spatial grammar theory and landscape planning. Environment & Planning B: Planning & Design 32 (6) (11): 895-920.

Mentens, Jeroen, Dirk Raes, and Martin Hermy. 2006. Green roofs as a tool for solving the rainwater runoff problem in the urbanized 21st century? Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (3) (8/30): 217-26.

Minshaw, Mark. 2009. Closing the parks gap. Landscape Architecture 99 (7) (07): 24-6.

Nelms, Cheryl, Alan D. Russell, and Barbara J. Lence. 2005. Assessing the performance of sustainable technologies for building projects. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 32 (1) (02): 114-28.

Nichol, Janet, Sing Wong, Christopher Fung, and Kenneth K. M. Leung. 2006. Assessment of urban environmental quality in a subtropical city using multispectral satellite images. Environment and Planning B, Planning & Design 33 (1) (Jan 2006): 39-58.

Núñez Andrés, Mª Amparo, and Felipe Buill Pozuelo. 2009. Evolution of the architectural and heritage representation. Landscape and Urban Planning 91 (2) (6/15): 105-12.

Oberndorfer, Erica, Jeremy Lundholm, Brad Bass, Reid R. Coffman, Hitesh Doshi, Nigel Dunnett, Stuart Gaffin, Manfred Köhler, Karen K. Y. Liu, and Bradley Rowe. 2007. Green roofs as urban ecosystems: Ecological structures, functions, and services. (cover story). Bioscience 57 (10) (11): 823-33.

PERRY, STEPHEN, ROB REEVES, and JEANNIE SIM. 2007. Landscape design and the language of nature. Landscape Review 12 (2) (09): 3-18.

Piombini, Arnaud. 2010. Deviations in pedestrian itineraries in urban areas: A method to assess the role of environmental factors. Environment and Planning B, Planning & Design 37 (4) (Jul 2010): 723-39.

Popovich, ErickaZint,Michaela T. 2012. A review of “Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits”. Journal of Environmental Education 43 (1) (01): 66-8.

Pullar, David V., and Margo E. Tidey. 2001. Coupling 3D visualisation to qualitative assessment of built environment designs. Landscape and Urban Planning 55 (1) (6/15): 29-40.

Roehr, Daniel, and Yuewei Kong. 2010. “Retro-greening” suburban calgary. Landscape Journal 29 (2) (09): 124-43.

Scarr, SandraMcCartney, Kathleen. 1983. Child Development 54 (2) (04): 424.

Sigrid, Hehl-Lange. 2001. Structural elements of the visual landscape and their ecological functions. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1–4) (5/25): 107-15.

Striefel, Jan L. 2006. Shades of green: Green roof or rooftop garden, this landscape brings a high-mountain meadow to downtown salt lake city. Landscape Architecture 96 (10) (Oct 2006): 168-77.

Tian, Yuhong, C. Y. Jim, Yan Tao, and Tao Shi. 2011. Landscape ecological assessment of green space fragmentation in hong kong. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 10 (2) (05): 79-86.

Tyrväinen, Liisa, Kirsi Mäkinen, and Jasper Schipperijn. 2007. Tools for mapping social values of urban woodlands and other green areas. Landscape & Urban Planning 79 (1) (01/15): 5-19.

Uy, Pham Duc, and Nobukazu Nakagoshi. 2008. Application of land suitability analysis and landscape ecology to urban greenspace planning in hanoi, vietnam. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 7 (1) (02/15): 25-40.

Uzzell, David. 2008. People-environment relationships in a digital world. Journal of Architectural & Planning Research 25 (2) (Summer2008): 94-105.

Van Assche, Kristof, Martijn Duineveld, Harro De Jong, and Aart Van Zoest. 2012. What place is this time? semiotics and the analysis of historical reference in landscape architecture. Journal of Urban Design 17 (2) (05): 233-54.

Van Herzele, Ann, and Cees van Woerkum. 2011. On the argumentative work of map-based visualisation. Landscape & Urban Planning 100 (4) (04/30): 396-9.

VILLENEUVE, AURÉLIE, AGNES BOUCHEZ, and BERNARD MONTUELLE. 2011. In situ interactions between the effects of season, current velocity and pollution on a river biofilm. Freshwater Biology 56 (11) (11): 2245-59.

Wachtel, Joshua. 2007. GREEN ROOFS: Prove their value in return on investment. In Business 29 (3) (May): 14-7.

Walford, Nigel, Edgar Samarasundera, Judith Phillips, Ann Hockey, and Nigel Foreman. 2011. Older people’s navigation of urban areas as pedestrians: Measuring quality of the built environment using oral narratives and virtual routes. Landscape & Urban Planning 100 (1) (03/30): 163-8.

Weiss, Allen S. 2010. Heimits of etaphor: Ideology and representation in the zen garden. Social Analysis 54 (2) (08/30): 116-29.

White, Stacey Swearingen, and Cliff Ellis. 2007. Sustainability, the environment, and new urbanism: An assessment and agenda for research. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 24 (2) (Jul 2007): 125-42.

Site Analysis

Opportunities and constrains

Design element


Design approach

Conclusion and envision

/*Design Example

Community Park: Pick a site in DC and design with this theory.*/