SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Peyzaj Araştırmaları ve Uygulamaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1

AN ANALYTICAL EVALUATION OF INTERIOR FURNITURE ELEMENTS IN SHOPPING MALLS IN RELATION TO THE SPATIAL PERCEPTION AND USER EXPERIENCE OF FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN: THE CASE OF PANORA AND KENTPARK SHOPPING MALLS

ALIŞVERİŞ MERKEZLERİNDE İÇ MEKÂN DONATI ELEMANLARININ ÇOCUKLU AİLELERİN MEKÂNSAL ALGI VE KULLANICI DENEYİMİ İLE İLİŞKİSİ BAĞLAMINDA ANALİTİK DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ: PANORA VE KENTPARK ALIŞVERİŞ MERKEZLERİ ÖRNEĞİ

Başak Yurtseven0000-0001-6074-0906
Pages
52–75
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings reveal that balanced lighting enhances spatial legibility and perceived safety, while the ergonomic design and placement of seating units directly affect duration of stay and user satisfaction.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the relationship between interior urban furniture elements and the shopping mall preferences of families with children.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As interior public spaces, shopping malls incorporate lighting, seating units, and floor coverings as key design components influencing spatial perception, wayfinding, safety, and user comfort.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings reveal that balanced lighting enhances spatial legibility and perceived safety, while the ergonomic design and placement of seating units directly affect duration of stay and user satisfaction.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kamusal mekanlar · Alışveriş merkezleri · Kent donatıları

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between interior urban furniture elements and the shopping mall preferences of families with children. As interior public spaces, shopping malls incorporate lighting, seating units, and floor coverings as key design components influencing spatial perception, wayfinding, safety, and user comfort. Panora Shopping Mall and Kentpark Shopping Mall, both located in Ankara, were selected as case studies due to their distinct spatial typologies and circulation systems. The research adopts an exploratory mixed-method approach, combining a literature review with structured face-to-face interviews conducted with 20 families who actively use these malls. The data was analyzed through descriptive evaluation to identify patterns related to user interaction and spatial perception. Findings reveal that balanced lighting enhances spatial legibility and perceived safety, while the ergonomic design and placement of seating units directly affect duration of stay and user satisfaction. Floor coverings were found to support child safety; however, their contribution to spatial orientation remained limited. Overall, interior urban furniture elements play not only functional but also perceptual and experiential roles, significantly influencing spatial preferences and user experience, particularly for families with children.

Özet

Bu çalışma, iç mekân kent donatı elemanları ile çocuklu ailelerin alışveriş merkezi tercihleri arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektedir. Kamusal iç mekânlar olarak alışveriş merkezlerinde kullanılan aydınlatma, oturma birimleri ve yer döşemeleri; mekânsal algı, yön bulma, güvenlik ve kullanıcı konforunu etkileyen temel tasarım bileşenleri olarak ele alınmıştır. Panora Alışveriş Merkezi ve Kentpark Alışveriş Merkezi, farklı mekânsal tipolojileri ve dolaşım sistemleri nedeniyle örnek alanlar olarak seçilmiştir. Araştırma, literatür taraması ile bu alışveriş merkezlerini aktif olarak kullanan 20 çocuklu aileyle gerçekleştirilen yapılandırılmış yüz yüze görüşmeleri birleştiren keşifsel bir karma yöntem yaklaşımına dayanmaktadır. Veriler, kullanıcı etkileşimi ve mekânsal algıya ilişkin örüntüleri belirlemek amacıyla betimleyici olarak analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, dengeli aydınlatmanın mekânsal okunabilirliği ve güvenlik algısını artırdığını; oturma birimlerinin ergonomik özellikleri ile konumlandırılmasının mekânda geçirilen süre ve kullanıcı memnuniyeti üzerinde doğrudan etkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Yer döşemeleri çocuk güvenliğini desteklemekle birlikte yön bulmaya katkılarının sınırlı olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, iç mekân kent donatı elemanlarının yalnızca işlevsel değil, aynı zamanda algısal ve deneyimsel roller üstlendiği; özellikle çocuklu ailelerin mekânsal tercihleri ve kullanıcı deneyimi üzerinde belirleyici olduğu ortaya konmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yurtseven, B. (2026). AN ANALYTICAL EVALUATION OF INTERIOR FURNITURE ELEMENTS IN SHOPPING MALLS IN RELATION TO THE SPATIAL PERCEPTION AND USER EXPERIENCE OF FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN: THE CASE OF PANORA AND KENTPARK SHOPPING MALLS. Peyzaj Araştırmaları ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 52–75. https://doi.org/10.56629/paud.1858401

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (57)

  1. Aksu, Ö. (2012). Kent Mobilyaları Tasarımında Özgün Yaklaşımlar. İnönü Üniversitesi Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 2(6), 373-386.
  2. Arthur, P., & Passini, R. (1992). Wayfinding: people, signs, and architecture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  3. Berezko, O. (2021). Systems Analysis of Social Spaces of Shopping Malls from. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1203(3), 032073. doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1203/3/032073
  4. Bitner, M. (1992). Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1252042
  5. Carmona, M. (2019). Public Places Urban Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. Routledge.
  6. Chawla, L. (2001). Growing up in an urbanizing world. Routledge.
  7. Crawford, M. (1992). The world in a shopping mall. In M. Sorkin, Variations on a theme park: The new American city and the end of public space (pp. 3-30). Hill and Wang.
  8. Crawford, M. (2002). Blurring the Boundaries: Public Space and Private Life. In J. Chase, M. Crawford, & J. Kaliski (Eds.), Everyday urbanism (pp. 8-22). Monacelli Press.
  9. Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2017). Desingning and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Ca: Sage.
  10. Çavka, H. (2023). An Analysis of Visitors’ Perceptions of Shopping Malls. Engineering Proceedings, 53(1), 50. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCBD2023-16358
  11. Dep, S., & Mitra, K. (2020). Spatial Logic of Shopping Malls: Application of Space Syntax in Understanding Economics of Architecture. Creative Space, 7(2), 109-117. doi:https://doi.org/10.15415/cs.2020.72009
  12. Erdoğan, E., Yıldız, Z., & Erdoğan, H. (2023). User Perceptions of Shopping Centres with Different Spatial Configurations. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 11(1), 207-228. doi:10.15320/ICONARP.2023.239
  13. Erkip, F. (2005). The rise of the shopping mall in Turkey: The use and appeal of a mall in Ankara. Cities, 22(2), 89-108. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2004.10.003
  14. Fjørtoft, I. (2004). Landscape as Playscape: The Effects of Natural Environments on Children's Play and Motor. Children, Youth and Environments, 14(2), 21-44. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.14.2.0021
  15. Flick, U. (2022). An Introduction to Qualitative Research (Seventh Edition ed.). SAGE Publications.
  16. Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. Basic Books.
  17. Gehl, J. (2011). Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. Island Press.
  18. Gilboa, S., Vilnai-Yavetz, I., & Chebat, J. (2015). Capturing the multiple facets of mall experience: Developing and validating a scale. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(1), 48-59. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1531
  19. Goss, J. (1993). The “Magic of the Mall”: An Analysis of Form, Function, and Meaning in the Contemporary Retail Built Environment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 83(1), 18-47. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/2569414
  20. Gökçe, Ş. (2007). Sosyal Etkileşimi Geliştirecek Peyzaj Tasarımı Üzerine Bir Araştırma: Çukurambar Mahallesi Örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
  21. Habermas, J. (1994). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press.
  22. Heschong, L. (1979). Thermal delight in architecture. MIT Press.
  23. Iftikhar, H., Shah, P., & Luximon, Y. (2020). Human wayfinding behaviour and metrics in complex environments: a systematic literature review. Architectural Science Review, 64(5), 452-463. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2020.1777386
  24. Karadağ, A. (2003). Kamusal Alan Modelleri: Çoğulcu Perspektiften Bir Değerlendirme. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 58(03), 171-195. doi:https://doi.org/10.1501/SBFder_0000001653
  25. Levinson, S. (2003). Space in language and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
  26. Low, S. (2000). On the plaza: The politics of public space and culture. University of Texas Press.
  27. Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  28. Madanipour, A. (1996). Design of urban space: An inquiry into a socio-spatial process. Wiley.
  29. Madanipour, A. (2003). Public and private spaces of the city. Routledge.
  30. Marcus, C., & Sarkissian, W. (1986). Housing As If People Mattered: Site Design Guidelines for the Planning of Medium-Density Family Housing. University of California Press.
  31. Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  32. Mehta, V. (2014). The street: A quintessential social public space. Routledge.
  33. Mehta, V., & Bosson, J. (2018). Revisiting Lively Streets: Social Interactions in Public Space. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 41(2), 160-172. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X18781453
  34. Nasar, J. (1994). Urban Design Aesthetics: The Evaluative Qualities of Building Exteriors: The Evaluative Qualities of Building Exteriors. Environment and Behavior, 26(3), 377-401. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659402600305
  35. Önal, S. (2019). Kent Parklarda Kullanılan Donatıların Standartlara Uygunluğunun Belirlenmesi: Ankara Örneği. Antropoloji, 38, 54-64. doi:10.33613/antropolojidergisi.633411
  36. Öncü, A., & Weyland, P. (1997). Space, culture, and power: New identities in globalizing cities. Zed Books.
  37. Pallasmaa, J. (2005). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. Wiley.
  38. Passini, R. (1984). Wayfinding in architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
  39. Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. Pion.
  40. Ritzer, G. (2005). Enchanting a disenchanted world: Revolutionizing the means of consumption. Sage Publications.
  41. Rosenbaum, M., Otalora, M., & Ramirez, G. (2017). How to create a realistic customer journey map. Business Horizons, 60(1), 143-150. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.09.010
  42. Sennett, R. (1992). The fall of public man. W.W. Norton & Company.
  43. Stillerman, J., & Salcedo, R. (2012). Transposing the Urban to the Mall: Routes, Relationships, and Resistance in Two Santiago, Chile, Shopping Centers. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 41(3), 309-336. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241611434551
  44. Tekel, A. (2009). Alışveriş Merkezlerinin Kamusal Mekan Nitelikleri Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme: Ankara Panora Alışveriş Merkezi Örneği. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları, 10(10), 141-154.
  45. Ulrich, R. (1991). Effects of interior design on wellness: theory and recent scientific research. Journal of Health Care Interior Design, 3, 97-109.
  46. UN-Habitat. (2020). Global Public Space Toolkit: From Global Principles to Local Policies an Practice. Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme. Retrieved from https://www.local2030.org/library/82/Global-Public-Space-Toolkit--From-Global-Principles-to-Local-Policies-and-Practice.pdf
  47. Uzun, İ. (2006). Kamusal Açık Mekan: Kavram ve Tarihe Genel Bakış. Ege Mimarlık Dergisi, 4(59), 14-17.
  48. Van Melik, R., & Althuizen, N. (2020). Inclusive Play Policies: Disabled Children And Their Access To Dutch Playgrounds. Journal of Economic and Human Geography, 113(2), 117-130. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12457
  49. Woolley, H., & Lowe, A. (2013). Exploring the relationship between design approach and play value of outdoor play spaces. Landscape Research, 38(1), 53-74. doi: 10.1080/01426397.2011.640432
  50. Yücel, G. (2006). Kamusal Açık Mekanlarda Donatı Elemanlarının Kullanımı. Ege Mimarlık Dergisi, 4(59), 26-29.
  51. Zali, P., McElroy, L., Giardini, M., Chaiyawat, K., & Watson, M. (2025). A Scoping Review of the Impact of Environmental Design on Wayfinding for People With Sensory Impairment. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 0(0). doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/19375867251391361
  52. Zejnilovic, E., Husukic, E., & Licina, M. (2023). Perception and evaluation of interior space: Experimental study on. IDA: International Design and Art Journal, 5(1), 13-30.
  53. Zhang, Z., Fei, T., & Wang, K. (2024). Analyzing the Impact of Interior Public Space on User Satisfaction in Shopping Malls Using Virtual Reality Simulation Experiments. Buildings, 14(10), 3264. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14103264
  54. Zukin, S. (1995). The cultures of cities. Blackwell.
  55. Zukin, S. (1998). Urban lifestyles: Diversity and standardisation in spaces of consumption. Urban Studies, 35(5-6), 825-839. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098984574
  56. Levinson, S. (2003). Space in language and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
  57. Zali, P., McElroy, L., Giardini, M., Chaiyawat, K., & Watson, M. (2025). A Scoping Review of the Impact of Environmental Design on Wayfinding for People With Sensory Impairment. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 0(0). doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/19375867251391361