Document Type : Research Paper


1 Assistant professor,Department of urbanism, Tehran North Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant professor, Department of urbanism, Najaf-Abad Unit, Islamic Azad University, Najaf Abad, Iran

3 Assistant professor, Department of geography and urban planning, Department of urbanism, Najaf-Abad Unit, Islamic Azad University, Najaf Abad, Iran.


Extended Abstract
The concept of place has long been considered an issue of importance for sociology, anthropology, and human geography. Geography begins with human beings and will not exist without human activities and their effects on the Earth’s surface. Humanistic geographers believe that place is a part of the geographic space occupied by someone or something in which perceived values ​​are manifested. Studying the concept of place begins with the distinction between space and place. Sociology and human geography experts believe that space is made up of the material and human-made environment as well as the natural environment, and with the meaning added by individuals, groups or culturalprocesses, it changes into place. Since human geography examines the relations among human communities andbetween these communities and their environment, it can identify social patterns dominant in them. Definitely human communities cannot function properly in providing their memberswith a social identification without planning and providing rich and well-defined facilities tailored to their needs, up-to-date values ​​and requirements. Therefore, considering the enormous and comprehensive transformations of the Information Age and the necessity of aligning with this global movement on one hand, and the importance of the meaning as one of the most important qualitative variables of urban spaces, exploring and recognizing the effects of cyberspace on the perception, sense of attachment and belonging to a place are of special importance. Therefore,studying factors influencing the meaning of place is necessary to improve the quality of urban space. In fact, meaning of place is aninternal emotion individual feels toward a place formed by the interaction of different factors. Many studies have been performed on the meaning of place some of which consider meaning as an inherent characteristic of the place, and others believe that meaning is induced by the individual in different circumstances. In fact, meaning is created by presence in the place and our perception of it. The continuity of space-based experiences formed by motor system, and the recognition and perception of space creates a sense of satisfaction for people in contact with the place. Therefore, the quality of urban spaces can be improved by creation ofmeaningful spaces based on appropriate space-based rules, measures and disciplines. To reach this aim, we need to investigate and realize factors influencing perceptions of place by its residents. Thus, we must inevitably understand changes in and influences ofthe values, attitudes and demands of society. Nowadays, we are witnessing rapid changes in cities which seems to reduce the effectiveness of old ideas and assumptions about urban development, planning, and management, and subsequently, question accepted concepts about the nature of space, place, time, distance and processes of urban life. The advent of the Information Age achievements has redefined space and provided us with a new experience of space. Cyberspace is considered as the main axis of development in the world, and its achievementshave different effects on various dimensions of human life. Thus,Cyberspace is replacing the real world in a way. Undoubtedly, these changes in different dimensions of human lifeare influencing the perception of space. The present study seeks to evaluate the effect of Cyberspace usage time in different users on the physical, personal, social and functional components of the meaning of space and their defining indices in urban spaces. In this study, we believe that users of this environmenthave a different understanding of their space, place, and face different dimensionsof space based on their usage time, and thus, perceive the meaning of urban space differently.
 Materials & Methods
In order to answer the main question of the study, “How does the use of cyberspace affect the perception of meaning in traditional and modern urban spaces?”, Thus, the effect of cyberspace usage on defining components of perception including physical, individual, social and functional components was investigated. A traditional urban space (Imam Square) and a modern urban space (City Center) was selected as the study area in Isfahan and the statistical samplespresent in these places were studied. Correlationalresearch method was used. The statistical tests of Kolmogorov-Smirnov regression and Pearson correlation were used to determine the relationshipbetween independent and dependent variables, and its intensity and direction.
Results indicate that using cyberspace increasesthe users’ understanding of the meaning of place while being present in urban spaces.In this regard, the incremental effect on the four factors, the degree of correlation and the impact of cyberspace usage on the components of meaning has been extracted and analyzed in two traditional and modern urban spaces.


1.ابراهیم‌آبادی، حسین(1392)، تأملی بر نسبت میان فناوری‌های اطلاعاتی با تغییرات در فرهنگ و مناسبات اجتماعی، تهران: فصلنامه تحقیقات فرهنگی ایران.
2.پاکزاد، بزرگ؛ جهانشاه، حمیده.(1391)، الفبای روانشناسی محیط برای طراحان، تهران: انتشارات آرمان‌شهر.
3.پرتویی، پروین(1393)، پدیدارشناسی مکان، تهران: مؤسسه تألیف ،ترجمه و نشر آثار هنری.
4.پوگلیسی، لوییجی پرستینزا (1379)، فرامعماری: فضاها در عصر الکترونیک،ترجمه‌کاوه شفیعی و فرناز فرجی، تهران: نشر توسعه.
5.جانستون، رونالد (1379) مسئله جا و مکان جغرافیایی "تفحّصی در جغرافیای انسانی"، ترجمة جلال تبریزی، تهران: انتشارات دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‌المللی وزارت امور خارجه.
6.خاکی، غلامرضا (1378). روش تحقیق با رویکردی به پایان‌نامه نویسی. تهران.مرکز تحقیقات علمی کشور.
7.شکویی، حسین (1375) اندیشه‌ های نو در فلسفه جغرافیا،جلد اول، تهران انتشارات گیتاشناسی.
8.شکویی، حسین (1382) اندیشه‌های نو در فلسفه جغرافیا،جلد دوم، تهران انتشارات گیتاشناسی.
9.ضیایی، مظاهر(1387)، دانش، نوآوری و توسعه دانایی محور، تهران: نشر پژوهشکده جهاد کشاورزی.
10.عاملی، سعیدرضا(1391)، منطق شهرهای مجازی و مفهوم کار مجازی: ضرورت طرح شهر مجازی، مجله رسانه، بهار 1392.
11.فتحیان، محمد (1383)، جامعه اطلاعاتی و راهبردهای تحقق آن در ایران، تهران، اولین کنفرانس بین المللی مدیریت فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات.
12.  فریادی، شهرزاد(1387)، تدوین زبان طراحی شهری در فرآیند جهانی شدن، پایان‌نامه دکتری شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران.
13.کاستلز، مانوئل (1380)، عصر اطلاعات، اقتصاد، جامعه و فرهنگ: ظهور جامعه شبکه‌ای، ترجمه احدعلیقلیان و افشین خاکباز، تهران: انتشارات طرح نو.
14.کاستلز، اینس؛ مانوئل، مارتین (1385) ،گفت‌و‌گوهای مانوئل کاستلز، ترجمه حسن چاوشیان و لیلا جوافشانی‌، تهران:نشر نی.
15.کلالی، مدیری؛ پریسا، آتوسا (1391)، تبیین نقش مؤلفه معنا در فرآیند شکل‌گیری حس مکان، هنرهای زیبا، دوره17.
16.گیفورد، رابرت (1378)، ادراک و شناخت محیطی، ترجمه نسرین دهباشی، نشریه معماری و فرهنگ، شماره 2و3.
17.منتظرالقائم، مهدی(1381)، دمکراسی دیجیتالی و حکومت الکترونیکی: سیاست و حکومت در عصر تکنولوژی‌های اطلاعاتی و ارتباطی، نامه علوم‌اجتماعی 1381، شماره 19.
18. Amdur.L & Epstein-Pliouchtch.M. (2009), Architects’ Places, Users’ Places: Place Meanings at the New Central Bus Station, Tel Aviv, Journal of Urban Design, Vol. 14. No. 161–147 ,2.
19. Arefi, M. (1999), Non-Place and Placelessness as Narratives of Loss- Rethinking the Notion of Place
20. Bartuska,Tom, J.(2007),Understanding Environment:Built & Natural,in WendyR.
21. Carmona,M.&Tiesdell,S.(2007),UrbanDesignReader,Oxford;Burlington,MAElsevier/Archit
22. Carmona, M., Magalhães C., Hammond, L. )2008). Public Spaces: The Management Dimension, USA & Canada, Routledge.-Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S)2011). Urban Design Reader, )K. Zekavat & F. Farshad, Trans.). Tehran: Azarakhsh Publication
23. Castells, M. (2001). The Rise of Network Society, the Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture.
24. Cheng,A.S,& Daniels,S E.(2003). Examining the interaction between geographic scale and ways of  knowing in ecosystem management. Forest Science, (49): 841-854.
25. Creswell,J.W & Planto Clarrk,V.L.(2011).Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
26. Gifford,R,(2016),Research Methods for Environmental Psychology,Cornell University, USA.
27. Gifford,R.(2002), Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice,Canada, Optimal Books.
28. Graham, S & Marvin, S. (2002). Telecommunications and the City: Electronic paces, Urban Places. Routledge .
29. Gustafson ,P.(2001), Meanings of place-Everyday experience and the oreticalconce ptualizations. Journal of Environental Psychology.
30. Latham, A .(2011), Topologies and the multiplicities of space-time Dialogues in Human Geography, vol. 1: pp. 312-315. , FirstPublished
31. Meesters,J(2009), Private and public green spaces: Meaningful but different settings.
32. Mitchell,W.J(1995)City of bits: Space, Place and the Infobahn,Cambridge, The MIT press. Journal of Urban Design, Vol. 4,No. 2.
33. Scannell, L.& Gifford, R. (2010), Defining Place Attachment- A Tripartite Organizing Framework, Journal of Environment and Psychology, Vol.
34. Seamon,D.(2012). Physicaland Virtual Environments: Meaning of Place and Space, Human Geography, London
35. Seamon,D.&Gill,l.(2014).QualitativeApproachestoEnvironmentBehaviorResearch:Understanding  Environmental and Place Experiences, Meanings , and Action.
36. van derKlis,M&Karsten,L.(2009) , Commuting partners, dual residences and the meaning of home. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 29, Issue 2, Pages 245-235.