Extension and Dominant Visual Reading Direction in the Perception of Architectural Phenomena in Right-writer Societies Based on the Approach of Cognitive Sciences

Document Type : Research Article


1 Ph.D. Candidate in Architecture, Department of Architecture, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Urban Development, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.


Problem statement: mental-visual perception and processing mainly take place in a certain direction of the vision field. Viewing and processing a visual field has start and end points, extension, and dominant direction. Most designers are not aware of the way the perceptual system of the mind works. This lack of knowledge causes the selection of forms and positions of visual elements not to be in accordance with the processing patterns of the mind. Analyzing and knowing how the mechanism of visual perception works makes it a more effective design of every element. This type of approach leads to more scientific reasons for descriptive and sometimes ambiguous aesthetic analyses.
Research objective: The purpose of this research is to find the desired extension and scope in the field of vision and also the direction of reading visual works of art and architecture in the cultural and linguistic context of the right-hand writing community in the cognitive sciences template.
Research method: This research is based on the theoretical research literature and content analysis of the findings in parallel with experimental tests in an analytical structure. Therefore, this research is considered descriptive-analytical research with a scientific interpretation of descriptive topics and findings.
Conclusion: Language habits and the direction of reading texts in different cultures, although they cannot be completely unaffected, but the range, orientation and desired visual direction are dependent on the mechanism of mental perception, and writing direction is not considered the main factor. Reading and processing along the horizontal line take place from left to right due to the spatial orientation of the mind in the left area of the visual field. This issue is independent of language teachings in orthographic cultures. The orientation of the mind in reading visual works is related to brain structure and perception mechanism, which is caused by the inherent asymmetry of the brain. This mental bias to left will lead to horizon preference. Different areas in a landscape are not perceived and valued equally. Therefore, the importance of each form in space depends on the position of the observer’s visual field.


Alexander, Ch. (2011). The timeless way of building (M. Qayyoomi Bidhendi, Trans.). Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University.
Arnheim, R. (1965). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye. California: Univ of California Press.
Arrington, C. M., Carr, T. H., Mayer, A. R. & Rao, S. M. (2000). Neural mechanisms of visual attention: object-based selection of a region in space. Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 106–117.
Barrett, A. M., Crosson, J. B., Crucian, G. P. & Heilman, K. M. (2000). Horizontal line bisections in upper and lower body space. International Neuropsychological Society, 6(4), 455–459.
Baskabadi, M., Afhami, R. & Farboud, F. (2013) Neuroesthetics and its challenges. Visual and Applied Arts, (12), 29-45..
Bejan, A. (2009). The golden ratio predicted: Vision, cognition and locomotion as a single design in nature. Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 4(2), 97–104.
Brodie, E. E. & Pettigrew, L. E. (1996). Is left always right? Directional deviations in visual line bisection as a function of hand and initial scanning direction. Neuropsychologia, 34(5), 467–470.
Chokron, S. & Agostini, M. (1995). Reading habits and line bisection: a developmental approach. Cognitive Brain Research, 3(1), 51–58.
Chokron, S. & Agostini, M. (2000). Reading habits influence aesthetic preference. Cognitive Brain Research, 10(1), 45–49.
Chokron, S. (2002). On the Origin of Free-Viewing Perceptual Asymmetries. Cortex, 38(2), 109–112.
Churches, O., Loetscher, T., Thomas, N. A. & Nicholls, M. E. R. (2017). Perceptual Biases in the Horizontal and Vertical Dimensions are Driven by Separate Cognitive Mechanisms. Experimental Psychology, 70(3), 444–460.
Dickinson, C. A. & Intraub, H. (2009). Spatial asymmetries in viewing and remembering scenes: Consequences of an attentional bias? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(6), 1251–1262.
Dondis, D. A. (2019). A Primer of visual literacy (M. Sepehr, Trans.). Tehran: Soroush.
Duecker, F. Graaf, T. A. de & Sack, A. T. (2014). Thinking caps for everyone? The role of neuro-enhancement by non-invasive brain stimulation in neuroscience and beyond. Frontiers in systems neuroscience, (8), 71.
Fink, G. R. , Marshall, J. C. , Weiss, P. H. & Zilles, K. (2001). The Neural Basis of Vertical and Horizontal Line Bisection Judgments: An fMRI Study of Normal Volunteers. NeuroImage, 14(1), S59-S67.
Fink, G. R., Marshall, J. C., Shah, N., Weiss, P., Halligan, P., Grosse-Ruyken, M. et al. (2000). Line bisection judgments implicate right parietal cortex and cerebellum as assessed by fMRI. Neurology, (54), 1324–1331.
Foulsham, T., Gray, A., Nasiopoulos, E. & Kingstone, A. (2013). Leftward biases in picture scanning and line bisection: A gaze-contingent window study. Vision Research, (78), 14–25.
Friedenberg J.; Silverman G. (2020). Cognitive science, an introduction to the study of mind (M. Oftade Hal et al., Trans.). Tehran: Defense Industries Educational and Research Institute.
Gilchrist, I. D., & Harvey, M. (2006). Evidence for a systematic component within scan paths in visual search. Visual Cognition, 14(4-8), 704–715.
Haan, B. de, Morgan, P. S., & Rorden, C. (2008). Covert orienting of attention and overt eye movements activate identical brain regions. Brain Research, (1204), 102–111.
Koleini Mamaghani N., Seyedarabi M., & Nasser Al Islami H. (2014). Surveying the Ratio of Conformity in Surface Orientation and Human Vision Trailing to Recognize Image Base on Gestalt Psychology. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Honar-Ha-Ye-Tajassomi, 18(4), 75-84.
Lang, J. (2017). Creating architectural theory: The role of behavioral sciences in environmental design (A. Eynifar, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press.
Lipshits, M. & McIntyre, J. (1999). Gravity affects the preferred vertical and horizontal in visual perception of orientation. Neuroreport, 10(5), 1085-1089.
Liversedge, S. P. & Findlay, J. M. (2000). Saccadic eye movements and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 6–14.
Loftus, A. M., & Nicholls, M. (2012). Testing the activation–orientation account of spatial attentional asymmetries using transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuropsychologia, 50(11), 2573–2576.
Loughnane, G. M., Shanley, J. P., Lalor, E. C. & O’Connell, R. G. (2015). Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence of opposing lateral visuospatial asymmetries in the upper and lower visual fields. Cortex, (63), 220–231.
Mahmoodinezhad, H. (2019). Neurology in architecture. Tehran: Tahan
Mao, L., Zhou, B., Zhou, W. & Han, S. (2007). Neural correlates of covert orienting of visual spatial attention along vertical and horizontal dimensions. Brain Research, (1136), 142–153.
Meyer L., (2020). Visual aesthetics (A. A. Sherve, Trans.). Tehran: Shabahang.
Nicholls, M. E. R., Mattingley, J. B., Berberovic, N., Smith, A. & Bradshaw, J. L. (2004). An investigation of the relationship between free-viewing perceptual asymmetries for vertical and horizontal stimuli. Cognitive Brain Research, 19(3), 289–301.
Post, R., Caufield, K. & Welch, R. (2001). Contributions of object- and space-based mechanisms to line bisection errors. Neuropsychologia, 39(8), 856–864.
Rahnev, D., Maniscalco, B., Graves, T., Huang, E., Lange, F. P. de & Lau, H. (2011). Attention induces conservative subjective biases in visual perception. Nature Neuroscience, 14(12), 1513–1515.
Rinaldi, L., Di Luca, S., Henik, A. & Girelli, L. (2014). Reading direction shifts visuospatial attention: An Interactive Account of attentional biases. Acta psychologica, (151), 98–105.
Shahcheraghi A., Bandarabad, A. (2016). Mohat dar mohit [Environed in environment, application of environmental psychology in architecture and urban design]. Tehran: Tehran Academic Jahat Organization.
Sharifi, V. (2001). Edrak-e Bedun-e Agahi dar Ravans-Shenasi [Perception without awareness: perspectives from cognitive psychology]. Advances in Cognitive Sciences, 3(4), 57-59.
Thomas, N. A. & Elias, L. J. (2011). Upper and lower visual field differences in perceptual asymmetries. Brain research, (1387), 108–115.
Thomas, N. A., Castine, B. R., Loetscher, T. & Nicholls, M. E. (2015). Upper visual field distractors preferentially bias attention to the left. Cortex, (64), 179–193.
van Vugt, P., Fransen, I., Creten, W. & Paquier, P. (2000). Line bisection performances of 650 normal children. Neuropsychologia, 38(6), 886–895.
Wexler, M., Mamassian, P. & Schütz, A. C. (2022). Structure of visual biases revealed by individual differences. Vision Research, (195), 108014.