Journals / Düzce Üniversitesi Süs ve Tıbbi Bitkiler Botanik Bahçesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1

Investigation of the Psychological Effects of Water Forms: A Case Study of Düzce

Suyun Formlarının Psikolojik Etkisinin Düzce Örneğinde Araştırılması

Zeki Demir(Düzce University)
Pages
20–29
Publication Date
2026-06-29
DOI
—
🏛️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)

It is recommended that designers prioritize still water surfaces in areas intended for mental relaxation and create platforms that support the perception of safety in moving water designs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the effects of different physical forms of water (still, moving, and aerated/mechanical) on human psychology and sensory perception through three distinct sites in Düzce.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Conducted with a total of 51 landscape architecture students, the research demonstrates that water is not merely a visual landscape element but also a strategic component providing mental restoration.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is recommended that designers prioritize still water surfaces in areas intended for mental relaxation and create platforms that support the perception of safety in moving water designs.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Peyzaj psikolojisi · Suyun formları · Zihinsel onarım

Abstract

This study examines the effects of different physical forms of water (still, moving, and aerated/mechanical) on human psychology and sensory perception through three distinct sites in Düzce. Conducted with a total of 51 landscape architecture students, the research demonstrates that water is not merely a visual landscape element but also a strategic component providing mental restoration. The highest impact on focus and stress reduction was observed in the still water form. It was determined that expansive and calm water surfaces possess a soft fascination effect that alleviates mental fatigue. Moving water stood out as the most visually impressive and invigorating/energetic form; however, its high kinetic energy and inherent complexity resulted in a lower perception of safety. While aerated/mechanical water was found successful in providing a sense of coolness in urban areas, it was evaluated as the most artificial and noisy form compared to natural counterparts. The study emphasizes the need to maximize the salutogenic (health-promoting) effects of water in design. It is recommended that designers prioritize still water surfaces in areas intended for mental relaxation and create platforms that support the perception of safety in moving water designs. Additionally, the study suggests that mechanical water sounds should be optimized to better replicate the natural white noise effect.

Özet

Bu çalışma, suyun farklı fiziksel formlarının (durgun, hareketli ve havalı/mekanik) insan psikolojisi ve duyusal algısı üzerindeki etkilerini Düzce ilindeki üç farklı alan üzerinden incelemektedir. Toplam 51 peyzaj mimarlığı öğrencisiyle yürütülen çalışma, suyun sadece görsel bir peyzaj ögesi değil, aynı zamanda zihinsel onarım sağlayan stratejik bir bileşen olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Katılımcılar üzerinde en yüksek odaklanma ve stres azaltma etkisi durgun su formunda görülmüştür. Geniş ve dingin su yüzeylerinin, zihinsel yorgunluğu gideren yumuşak büyüleme etkisine sahip olduğu saptanmıştır. Görsel olarak en etkileyici ve zindelik/enerji verici form olarak ise hareketli su öne çıkmıştır. Ancak hareketli suyun yüksek kinetik enerjisi ve yarattığı karmaşa, güven algısının düşük kalmasına neden olmuştur. Kentsel alanlarda serinlik hissi sağlamada ise havalı ile karıştırılmış su başarılı bulunsa da, doğal formlara kıyasla en yapay ve en gürültülü form olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışma, suyun psikolojik onarım sağlayan etkisinden maksimum düzeyde faydalanılması gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır. Tasarımcılara; zihinsel rahatlama hedeflenen alanlarda durgun su yüzeylerine ağırlık vermeleri, hareketli su tasarımlarında ise güvenlik algısını destekleyecek platformlar oluşturmaları önerilmektedir. Ayrıca mekanik su seslerinin, doğal beyaz gürültü etkisini yakalayacak şekilde optimize edilmesi gerektiği belirtilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Demir, Z. (2026). Investigation of the Psychological Effects of Water Forms: A Case Study of Düzce. Düzce Üniversitesi Süs ve Tıbbi Bitkiler Botanik Bahçesi Dergisi, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 20–29. https://ajindex.com/articles/1644921

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Burmil, S., Daniel, T. C., & Hetherington, J. D. (1999). Human values and perceptions of water in arid landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(2-3), 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00007-9
  2. Demir, Z., & Demir, D. (2026). Suyun peyzaj tasarımındaki estetik etkileri. In M. Dal & H. C. Zülfikar (Eds.), Peyzaj mimarlığında güncel akademik çalışmalar (ss. 46-66). Bidge Yayınları. https://doi.org/10.70269/10.70269/7646742394
  3. Düzenli, T., Mumcu, S., Yılmaz, S., & Özbilen, A. (2014). Water reflections on the social dimension of place: Different waterscapes and related activity patterns. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 15(2), 148–157.
  4. Grellier, J., White, M. P., Albin, M., Bell, S., Elliott, L. R., Gascón, M., Gualdi, S., Mancini, L., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Sarigiannis, D. A., van den Bosch, M., Wolf, T., & Fleming, L. E. (2017). BlueHealth: A study programme protocol for mapping and quantifying the potential benefits to human health and well-being from Europe’s blue spaces. BMJ Open, 7(6), Article e016188. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016188
  5. Kamble, M. A., & Mandal, S. K. (2026). Water soundscapes: a systematic review on trends, current challenges, and research gaps. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2026.2653930
  6. Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2
  7. Nasar, J., & Lin, Y. H. (2003). Evaluative responses to five kinds of water features. Landscape Research, 28(4), 441–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142639032000150167
  8. Völker, S., & Kistemann, T. (2011). The impact of blue space on human health and well-being - Salutogenetic health effects of inland surface waters: A review. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 214(6), 449–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2011.05.001
  9. Wherrett, J. R. (2000). Creating scenic preference models for landscape aesthetics. In I. D. Bishop & E. Lange (Eds.), Visualization in landscape and environmental planning (pp. 167–178). Taylor & Francis.
  10. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard University Press.
  11. Yang, S., Huang, Y., Radhakrishnan, M., & Rene, E. R. (2021). Sustainable urban water management in China: A case study from Guangzhou and Kunming. Applied Sciences, 11(21), Article 10030. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112110030