Impact of Mental Components on the Analysis of Space Syntax Using a Weighted Graph (Case Study: Iranian Artists’ House-Tehran)

Document Type : Research Article


1 Department of Architecture, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, University of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Iran


Problem statement: As a logical research system, the architectural space syntax method has been profoundly developed in recent decades. However, despite all its advantages, it has received serious criticism such as negligence of the individual and mental characteristics of the built environment, existential integrity of the human in the space, and analysis of the behavioral patterns based on the space configuration. The present study attempts to understand how such characteristics of space can be investigated simultaneously with the space configuration. This article assumes that using a weighted graph instead of a simple graph allows for determining the unique value of each space, leading to more precise and reliable results.
Research objective: The article seeks to take into account the impact of mental components of space, apart from space configuration, on the movement and, consequently, the behavior of a human in an architectural building. The simultaneous analysis of the weights of mental components and space syntax can correct some defects of the current approach in space syntax analyses.
Research method: The analyses performed in the study were both qualitative and quantitative. The integration and agent-based analyses, as two parameters related to the research subject, were performed to study the spatial organization of the Iranian Artists’ House through two approaches. The weights of the mental components were first determined using a simple graph and the depthmap software. In the second method, they were calculated using the AHP method and considered in the space syntax calculations. Eventually, the reliability of the outcomes was compared using the gate count method.
Conclusion: The comparison of the two methods revealed that the results obtained from the weighted graph were more precisely in line with the movement flows in the space of the Iranian Artists’ House.


Abbaszadegan, M. (2002). Ravesh-e chideman-e faza dar farayand-e tarrahi-ye shahri ba negahi be shahr-e Yazd [The Space Layout Method in the Urban Design Process with a Look at the City of Yazd]. Journal of Urban Management, 3(9), 64-75.
Afroogh, E. (1998). Space and society, space and social Inequality. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University Publications.
Al-Sayed, K., Turner, A., Hillier, B., Iida, S. & Penn, A. (2018). Space syntax methodology. A teaching guide for the MRes/MSc Space Syntax course (Version 5). London: Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL.
Arnheim, R. (2009). The Dynamics of Architectural Form (M. Ghayoumi Bidhendi, Trans.). Tehran: The Organization for Researching and Composing University textbooks in the Humanities, Farhangestan Honar Publications.
Dalton, R. & Hoelscher, C. (2007). Understanding Space: the nascent synthesis of cognition and the syntax of spatial morphologies. In: Space Syntax and Spatial Cognition - Proceedings of the Workshop, 24 September - 28 September 2006, Bremen.
Dideban, M., Pourdeihimi, Sh. & Rismanchian, O. (2013).The Relationships between Cognitive Characteristics and Spatial Configuration of the Built Environment, an Experience in Dezful. Architectural Studies of Iran, 2(4), 37-64.
Dorani Arab, A. , Galenoie, M., Zamani, B. & Moazzezi Mehr Tehran, A. (2016). A Revision on the Common Bases of the Theories of Interaction Rites and Space Syntax. Research in Art and Humanities, 1(1), 1-8.
Forty, A. (2000). Words and buildings: a vocabulary of modern architecture. New York: Thames & Hudson.
Ghahramani, M., Piravi Vanak, M., Mazherian, H. & Sayyad, A. (2014). Audience Embodiment in the Haptical Film Space. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Honar-ha-ye Mosighi va Namayeshi, 19(2), 53-62.
Grajewski, T. (1992). Space Syntax Observation Manual (2001 unpublished revised edition: L. Vaughan). London: UCL Bartlett and Space Syntax Ltd.
Hajian, M. & Alitajer, S. (2017). Evaluating graph theory approaches, convex space and intersection, to architectural spatial analysis, case study: Jahanbani, Neshastepour and Azadmanesh haouses, Kashan. Naqshejahan,   7(2), 33-46.
Hamedani Golshan, H., Behzadfar, M. & Motallebi, Gh. (2015). Rethinking the Theory of “Space Syntax,” An Approach in Architecture and Urban Design, Case Study: Borujerdiha Historical House. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba, 20(2), 59-74.
Hamedani Golshan, H., Behzadfar, M. & Motallebi, Gh. (2020). Declaration of the Relationship between Spatial Configuration and Social Interactions Using the Space Syntax Interaction and Ecological Psychology. Soffeh, 30(1), 59-76 .
Heidegger, M. (1971). On the Way to Language (P.D. Hertz Trans.). San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Hillier, B. (2007). Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture. London, England: Space Syntax. (Original work published 1996).
Hillier, B., Hanson, J. & Peponis, J. (1984). What do we mean by building Function? (In J. Powell, I. Cooper, & S. Lera (Eds.), Designing for building utilization. New York: Spon.
Hillier, B., Penn, A., Hanson, J., Grajewski, T. & Xu, J. (1993). Natural movement: Or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 20(1), 29-66.
Jafary Bahman, M. & Khanian, M. (2013). Comparative Study of the Existing Condition of Kababian Neighborhood with the 2005 Comprehensive Development Plan of City of Hamadan Using SpaceSyntax Software. Armanshahr, 5(9), 285-295.
Jiang, B. (1998). A space syntax approach to spatial cognition in urban environments. Paper presented at NSF-funded research workshop on Cognitive Models of Dynamic Phenomena and Their Representations. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh.
Kim, Y. O. & Penn, A. (2004). Linking the spatial syntax of cognitive maps to the spatial syntax of the environment. Environment and Behavior, 36(4), 483-504.
Klarqvist, B. (2015). A space syntax glossary. NA, 6(2).
Kurt Grütter, J. (2014). Aesthetics in Architecture. 2nd Edition. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University.
Lamprecht, M. (2022). Space syntax as a socio-economic approach: a review of potentials in the polish context. Miscellanea Geographica, 26(1), 5-14.
Lay, M. C. D., Reis, A., Dreux, V., Becker, D. & Ambrosini, V. (2005). Spatial Configuration, Spatial Behavior and Spatial Cognition: Syntactic and Perceptual Analysis of the Market Station Area in Porto Alegre. In Proceedings from EDRA 35, Vancouver, Canada.
Ma, D., Omer, I., Osaragi, T., Sandberg, M. & Jiang, B. (2019). Why topology matters in predicting human activities. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 46(7), 1297–1313.
Marshall, S. (2005). Streets and Patterns .London/New York: Spon Press.
Martin, L. & March, L. (1972). Urban Space and Structures, Cambridge Urban and Architectural Studies, No. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mavridou, M. (2003). An investigation of the relation of space to society: a discussion on A. Giddens, H. Lefebvre and space syntax (Unpublished Masters Thesis in Architecture). Faculty of Architecture, UCL (University College London). 
Memarian, Gh. (2002). Architectural Space Syntax. Soffeh, 12(35), 75-83.
Mohareb, N. I. (2009). Street morphology and its effect on pedestrian movement in historical Cairo. Cognitive Processing, 10(2), 253-256.
Partovi, P. (2008). Phenomenology of Place. Tehran: Art Academy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Penn, A. & Turner, A. (2003). Space layout affects search efficiency for agents with vision. In Proceedings 4th International Space Syntax Symposium, London.
Piravi Vanak, M. (2010). Phenomenology from Merleau-Ponty’s Perspective. Abadan: Porsesh Publications, 101.
Pourali, M. (2011). Phenomenology in Architecture. Soffeh, 21(1) , 19-30.
Rapoport, A. (1969). House Form and Culture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rashidzadeh, E., Tahmasbi, A. & Habibi, F. (2019). The Architectural Space Dominated by Capital: Analysis of the Formation of Architectural Space from the Perspective of Lefebvre’s Space Production Theory. Architectural Thought, 3(6), 204-220.
Ratti, C. (2004). Space syntax: some inconsistencies. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31(4), 487-499.
Rismanchian, O. & Bell, S. (2010). The Applied Identification of the Space Layout Method in Understanding the Spatial Configuration of Cities. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba, 2(43), 49-56.
Sabry Hegazi Y., Tahoon, D., Anwar Abdel-Fattah N. & Fathi El-Alfi, M. (2022). Socio-spatial vulnerability assessment of heritage buildings through using space syntax. Heliyon, 8(3).
Steadman, J. P. (1983). Architectural morphology: An introduction to the geometry of building plans. London: Pion.
Thungsakul, N. (2002). A Syntactic Analysis of Spatial Configuration towards the Understanding of Continuity and Change in Vernacular Living Space: A Case Study in the Upper Northeast of Thailand. Bell & Howell, Ann Arbor, MI.
Zaleckis, K., Chmielewski, S., Kamičaitytė, J., Grazuleviciute-Vileniske I. & Lipińska H. (2022). Walkability Compass—A Space Syntax Solution for Comparative Studies. Sustainability, 14(4), 2033.