In interior design, stylistic fads come and go. More often than not, these trends reflect changing tastes and fleeting—dare we say silly—cultural phenomena, but rarely anything else. With our homes, offices, and ever-fluctuating political spaces forming the backdrop of our lives, shouldn’t these environments be captured with more informed intent? Shouldn’t the right acoustic or lighting design supersede the perceived “need” for artificial flex? And why can’t these basic thoughts be delivered with visual appeal still in mind?
New report from of John Hopkins University International Arts + Mind Lab (IAM Lab) re-evaluates the serious functional value of aesthetics not only in supporting mental and physical health but also in better facilitating individual creativity and interpersonal interaction; a condition in short supply these days.
Released earlier this year, the Intentional Space Roadmap it’s an in-depth, versatile scientific yet accessible written study that ultimately calls for the establishment of a more comprehensive field of interior design, conceived by Neuroarchitecture, incorporating the necessary expertise of psychology. It reveals how light, sound, texture, form and physical shape (Biophilia) indirectly affect the way we feel, think, heal and connect with others.
“We are in, or move through, spaces every moment of our lives, and we now know that our environment has powerful effects on our physical and mental health,” said Susan Magsamen, Executive Director of the IAM Laboratory. “The importance and momentum of this work has never been more critical. From individual well-being to community impact, across every sector of society, the implications are profound. Intentional spaces represent a cost-effective, life-changing opportunity to improve health, resilience, innovation and quality of life at scale. This is not a dream or wishful thinking. Accelerate this movement.”
The report is not just a defense of this new proposal – rooted in long-sophisticated strategies – but also an actionable framework. The sections self-reflectively outline the research involved. the disciplinary barriers that still exist preventing the adoption of this more flexible and truly holistic mindset. and recommendations to overcome these limitations. Overall, it requires a more interdisciplinary and collaborative approach.
Some of the challenges identified include the lack of universal terminology, access to applied evidence and regulatory incentives. Inadequate training and financial constraints—the speed at which we expect projects to be executed to meet the bottom line of increasingly rushed economic realities—are other more obvious obstacles. The onus is on both design professionals and academic researchers, both of whom tend to keep their intuitive and intellectual expertise locked away in their respective fields.
Some of the strategic “tools” described focus on breaking down these boundaries, making neuroaesthetics research and values more integral to designing one’s education. When it comes to the actual practice of interior design, an evidence-based strategy could take more into account the use of a particular space. its role is to help individuals focus. Create memories. regulate emotions; Ideate with little constraint or distraction. and have more pleasant – calming – sensory experiences.
Perhaps the most important aspect for our still capitalist society is to make clear links between the economic value – efficiency and cost – of this methodology. the idea that spaces that are more holistically designed in this context will help its inhabitants/users live and perform better.
To further evolve and perhaps be more environmentally responsible, architecture and design must harness the virtues of the scientific method.
To learn more about the IAM Lab, visit artsandmindlab.
Photo courtesy of John Hopkins University.
