Designing for the human experience has been at the forefront of architect’s intentions and motivations behind their work. While traditional processes prove beneficial, the industry is peering over boundaries to find opportunities for collaboration with other design and non-design fields. New approaches have emerged with collaborations between architects and service designers, or even psychologists, to create more human-centric spaces. A new intersection captures the attention of practitioners, especially with a recent installation at Salone de Mobile neuroarchitecture. ArchDaily breaks down the scope and potential for this new field with Federica Sanchez, architect and neuroscience researcher at Italian firm Lombardini22, responsible for revamping the Salone.
Neuroarchitecture brings a positive influence on traditional practice- often concerned with aesthetics, functionality, and code compliance- with a focus on well-being in design considerations. Essentially, the hybrid pursuit recognizes that human brains are intricately connected to the environments they inhabit. “Our body and brain continuously communicate interactions between external stimuli and sensory organs are converted into electrical signals, and the body sends sensory information to the brain,” explains Sanchez. The emerging discipline bridges neuroscience and spatial design to challenge perceptions of a building’s influence on human emotions, thoughts, and actions.
“Traditionally, spaces were designed based on artistic concepts, only afterward observing the effects on human perception and behavior. Neuroarchitecture flips this approach by first understanding how the brain processes the built environment, using that knowledge to consciously craft evidence-based designs supported by empirical data,” Sanchez highlights. While architectural training may instill a particular theoretical lens, neuroarchitecture accounts for how diverse individuals subjectively experience spaces, avoiding biases. Leveraging neuroscience enriches design intuition rather than diminishing it. With this newfound understanding, prioritizing human-centered design becomes an ethical imperative architects cannot ignore.
Related Article
How Environmental Neuroscience is Shaping Architecture and Urban Planning
At the 2024 Salone del Mobile, Lombardini22 designed the exhibition layout in collaboration with neuroscientists. With an understanding of grid-based floor plans’ influence on visitor fatigue and disorientation, the team proposed an evidence-based layout facilitating natural movement by applying research on human navigation, spatial memory formation, and the cognitive mapping of environments. The design aimed to harmonize spatial and temporal experiences to shape the visitors’ journeys. Iterative virtual reality experiments informed the design process, while on-site data collection after implementation demonstrated the neuroscience-driven layout enhanced visitor orientation, and recall, and reduced cognitive strain.
Earlier in 2019, Lombardini22 initiated a research project in collaboration with a team of neuroscientists to investigate the effects of architectural space on underlying human emotional states and social cognition. The study found that open and expansive spaces promote relaxation and positive feelings, while cramped or confined environments can trigger physiological stress and negativity. This points to the deep implications for designing spaces that foster empathy, attentiveness, and positive social interactions, building a case for neuroarchitecture.
Longoni points at the vast applications of neuroscience in architecture- from hospitals designed to accelerate patient recovery to office spaces that enhance cognitive performance. Neuroarchitecture is particularly promising in spaces inhabited by vulnerable populations, such as prisons, where design choices can significantly impact rehabilitation outcomes and recidivism rates. For example, the renovation of an Italian prison had architects collaborate with psychologists to dissect the phenomenological experience of inmates and staff. By isolating spatial features that elicit specific emotional and behavioral responses, the design team could focus their strategies on creating an environment that supports rehabilitation and personal growth. “Integrating neuroscience represents more than just a tool- it is a paradigm shift positioning human experiences and well-being at the core of the design process”, Sanchez shares.
The successful integration of neuroscience into architectural practice relies on effective collaboration between architects and scientists. However, this interdisciplinary exchange is not without its challenges. The different methodologies, timelines, and communication styles of these two fields can create obstacles to seamless knowledge translation. Sanchez finds that “something that still represents a limit in the translation of scientific findings into design practice is a generalization: the possibility of recreating the experimental conditions in other contexts and guaranteeing that the effects will be the same as those obtained in previous studies”.
On one hand, the scientific process is rigorous and methodical, relying on extensive experimentation, data collection, and peer review to validate findings. Architectural design, on the other hand, often follows a more intuitive and creative trajectory, shaped by conceptual visions and aesthetic sensibilities. Barriers to knowledge exchange have also been identified as significant challenges. The traditional academic culture, where research findings are shared openly, has been known to contrast the private sector’s competitive nature, in which proprietary knowledge is often closely guarded. The collaboration between neuroscientists and architects demands a collaborative environment beneficial to both disciplines.
Additionally, the mismatch between the time required for structured scientific studies and experiments and the typical rhythm of design processes familiar to architects and clients is a concern. However, the initial time investments in testing design options could potentially lead to cost savings for property owners once projects are realized. Reconciling these distinct approaches requires open-mindedness, patience, and a willingness to embrace new perspectives from both sides.
Neuroarchitecture presents strong opportunities to radicalize architectural design by grounding it in empirical data and a deeper understanding of human cognition and behavior. The interdisciplinary approach allows architects to proactively design spaces based on how architectural components affect people, leading to more conscious, evidence-based design. Informed design decisions prioritize human well-being to positively impact perception, emotional states, and behavior.
The growing connection between neuroscience and architecture reflects a broader societal trend– the move towards decisions informed by evidence. This dialogue strengthens architecture’s position as a rigorous and innovative field that prioritizes human well-being. To fully unlock its potential, architects need to facilitate knowledge sharing and collaboration across disciplines. By incorporating insights from neuroscience, psychology, anthropology, sociology, and behavioral science, architecture revolutionizes its approach, setting human experience as the primary design objective and creating built environments that support the intricacies of human life.
Michael Johnson is a tech enthusiast with a passion for all things digital. His articles cover the latest technological innovations, from artificial intelligence to consumer gadgets, providing readers with a glimpse into the future of technology.
