Search

The space around our body, the so-called peripersonal space, is where interactions with nearby objects may occur. “Defensive space” and “Reaching space”, respectively, refer to two opposite poles of interaction between our body and the external environment: Protecting the body and performing a goal-directed action. Here, we hypothesized that mechanisms underlying these two action spaces are differentially modulated by the valence of visual stimuli, as stimuli with negative valence are more likely to activate protective actions whereas stimuli with positive valence may activate approaching actions. To test whether such distinction in cognitive/evaluative processing exists between Reaching and Defensive spaces, we measured behavioral responses as well as neural activations over sensorimotor cortex using EEG while participants performed several tasks designed to tap into mechanisms underlying either Defensive (e.g., respond to touch) or Reaching space (e.g., estimate whether object is within reaching distance). During each task, pictures of objects with either positive or negative valence were presented at different distances from the participants’ body. We found that Defensive space was smaller for positively compared with negatively valenced visual stimuli. Furthermore, sensorimotor cortex activation (reflected in modulation of beta power) during tactile processing was enhanced when coupled with negatively rather than positively valenced visual stimuli regarding Defensive space. On the contrary, both the EEG and behavioral measures capturing the mechanisms underlying Reaching space did not reveal any modulation by valence. Thus, although valence encoding had differential effects on Reaching and Defensive spaces, the distance of the visual stimulus modulated behavioral measures as well as activity over sensorimotor cortex (reflected in modulations of mu power) in a similar way for both types of spaces. Our results are compatible with the idea that Reaching and Defe

Fieldwork in public spaces throughout Wellington and Hamilton has revealed synergistic interactions between those who may often be regarded as ‘socially undesirable’ and other urban dwellers. These ‘undesirables’ might be commonly identified as homeless, beggars, street workers, the publicly intoxicated, young punks, or skateboarders and are largely seen to be an ‘urban problem’. While a first move of this research has been to recast these groups under a more compassionate light by referring to them wholly as ‘vulnerables’ the focus of this research is looking at these interactions. With vary degrees of intensity and interactivity exploring these interactions hopes to open a practice for designers to design more compassionate and open urban spaces in the context of population increase and urbanization. The aims of this research have been to demystify these synergistic interactions and break it down to a set of spatial conditions which can be experimented with to uncover some tools and a method which designers can use to help facilitate better interactions. Also looking to others who have tackled similar projects, to study not just the design result but how they approached the process in a non-hypothetical project, how they went about consultation, and what potentially unexpected factors were important for these groups and interactions. Firstly, studying discovered examples where some synergistic interactions occur and breaking them down to a set of reoccurring spatial factors. Then testing these spatial factors through a design process to understand how they work, what their limitations are, and the processes for implementing them to best facilitate these synergistic interactions. The result of this thesis research is, partly, a set of spatial conditions collected from real examples and tested through a design investigation. However, the method for experimenting with these devices and implementing them is an equally important product of the research.