The Restorative Impact of Perceived Open Space
A Hidden Wellness Dividendfor

Deep Plan BuildingsbyDavid A. Navarrete • Bill Witherspoon • Skye Witherspoon© 2017 Sky Factory

The Restorative Impact of Perceived Open Space
A Hidden Wellness Dividend for Deep Plan Buildings
In the last few years, an abundance of research has confirmed the extent to whichbuilding design impacts human health and productivity. However, our fascination withnew architecture has obscured the more daunting challenge represented by older
buildings—those not designed to maximize human performance—which make up the
majority of metropolitan centers.
This paper is concerned with the impact that isolated built interiors have on humanwellness and performance. The effects of partially or completely enclosed interiors on
health and cognitive function have been addressed in multidisciplinary studies
spanning three decades, particularly in the healthcare industry. However, one finding is
striking. Due to its comprehensive restorative qualities, the most sought-after feature in
the design of any building is an open view to nature.
The introduction of the WELL Building Standard® in 2014 represents an encouraging
leap forward as it enables occupants and building owners to quantify and mitigate thedeleterious effects of building design. Despite our progress, the wellness impact of open
space on the human physiology has not been fully explored, nor has its cognitive
importance in relation to biophilic retrofit solutions, been quantified.
This paper attempts to summarize a few of the most relevant studies that shed light on
why a visual/spatial connection to a natural exterior—real or simulated—represent awellness and productivity-enhancing feature for populations that spend much of theirday, indoors. In addition, this paper introduces a new framework through whicharchitects and interior designers, as well as healthcare professionals, building owners,and HR managers can understand the impact of perceived open space in the workspace
on staff, patients, and other captive populations.
We also introduce the reader to an overview of how the visual process and its neuralcorrelates give rise to our sense of space and the value thereof. This paper introduces a
new technology that proposes the restorative value of perceived open space in its two
essential orientations: perceived zenith and perceived horizon line. In contrast to how weperceive these spatial reference frames outdoors, in enclosed interiors where suchreference frames are often not visible, we can stage architectural cues to alter our
perception of interior space. Multisensory illusions can incorporate these fundamental2

spatial reference frames, thereby restoring a range of wellness benefits normallyassociated with interiors applying biophilic design principles.
In order to also grasp the economic implications of building design, among otherthings, it is important to first understand how daylight, natural environments, andspatial design impact our physiology. This assessment is pertinent. Consider, forexample, the United Nations estimates that two-thirds of the global population will live
in metropolitan areas by 2050 (up from 50% in 2015). This migration will result in thelargest percentage of humankind—at any time in history—who will work, study, or seek
treatment in buildings with little or no connection to a natural environment.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, Americans, along with most people indeveloped economies, spend over 90% of the day working indoors. This represents aradical departure from life in a natural outdoor environment that shaped ourphysiology. Given the pace of urbanization in the last century, the human physiology
has undergone—in the span of a handful of generations—a dramatic shift.
As a species, we’ve gone from spending our entire diurnal cycle in open space, theenvironment that shaped our physiology for thousands of generations, to the present
where we spend most of the day indoors, exposed to static artificial light and views ofurban landscapes or without outdoor views at all.
Even without direct sunlight—average daylight yields between 10,000 to 25,000 lux (ameasurement of light level intensity also called “illumination”) whereas the bestinterior office lighting offers about the same illumination generated at sunset, whichequals less than 5% of prime daylight or about 500 lux.
Simply put, every day, we spend our waking hours in the equivalent of twilight. And
then we go home—at dusk—essentially having lived a quasi-nocturnal existence.
On an evolutionary scale, this is an entirely new experience for our mind and body, onethat carries profound implications. In order to maintain peak physiological andpsychological performance, our circadian rhythm, which regulates mental alertness andother aspects of our well-being, relies on cool, blue light, found in abundance outdoors.
Furthermore, daylight intensity and wavelength are not the only factors that impact ourphysiology. An equally important element is the environmental context in which daylightappears; that is, light’s interdependent relationship to outdoor open space. Therefore,
it’s reasonable to assume that our circadian rhythm might also be attuned to light as it
relates to and is a function of spatial awareness.
3

By direct observation we experience the greatest shift in magnitude, in both daylightintensity and color temperature—outside, in open air, or at the very least, in the presenceof a visual connection to open skies. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that our circadianrhythm might also be attuned to light as the light relates to and is a function of our
spatial awareness.

Circadian Cells & Spatial MappingStandard vision in the human eye—object recognition, color vision, motion detection—is processed by specialized neurons called cones, responsible for daylight (photopic)
vision when light levels are high, and rods, responsible for night (scotopic) vision whenlight levels are low. Until 2002, these were all the photoreceptors the human eye wasthought to have: short, middle, and long wavelength cones, plus rods.1
However, science has uncovered another unique sensory apparatus responsible forregulating biological rhythms. This fifth type of photoreceptor, located in the innerretina, has demonstrated peak sensitivity to blue light wavelengths, indicated by aslightly different absorption spectrum from the other four photoreceptors (cones androds).2 Due to their particular sensitivity to this wavelength of light, this fifth type ofphotoreceptor—called intrinsically photosensitive Retinal Ganglion Cells (ipRGC)—has
been denominated as our physiology’s “blue sky detectors.”
It is worth noting that in evolutionary terms, when these circadian photoreceptors,
which are the neural processing units of the retina that specialize in detecting Earth’s
rich blue sky, signal the master circadian clock in the hypothalamus,3 they have done so
under the unique conditions afforded by the open space of natural environments.
This master circadian pacemaker regulates how all cells adjust their physiology
according to the time of the day. Yet, it remains to be seen whether the brain’s masterclock will operate in identical fashion in the absence of a visual connection to a naturalexterior space. At this time, no one can say for certain.
______________________________________________________________________________
1

Figueiro, Mariana. “Light isn’t for vision anymore.” The International Society for Optical Engineering 10.1117(2006): pg. 1, Nov. 7, 2006 <http://spie.org/newsroom/technical-articles-archive/03-0400/0304-light-isnt-just-forvision-anymore>.
2

Ellis, E.V., Gonzalez, E.W., & Donald L. McEachron. “Chronobioengineering Indoor Lighting to Enhance Facilities
for Aging and Alzheimer’s Disorder.” Intelligent Buildings International (July 2013). Retrieved Nov. 20, 2015, from<http://www.bauarchitecture.com/research.chronobioengineering.shtml>.
3

Figueiro, Mariana. Ibid.

4

And while research on circadian photoreceptors in mammals is in its infancy and manyof the findings are derived from other species, there are indications of significant similarities, both in the structural and functional traits of these cells, which may
foreshadow how our own Melanopsin-expressing circadian photoreceptors operate.
(Melanopsin is a photosensitive pigment involved in entraining our circadian rhythm tothe sun cycle.)
For example, while early studies on the existence of a third class (there are three classes
and five types) of mammalian photoreceptors, indicated that they “utilized a different
photopigment, were much less sensitive to light, responded to light far more slowly,
and had far lower spatial resolution, characteristics that fit with their primary functionof signaling ambient light levels (irradiance) to the brain,”4 new data by Mouland et al.,has found evidence in mice that “even though the SCN receives all retinal input from
cells lacking center/surround antagonism [that is, spatial receptive fields], suchframework can still be somehow created within the SCN. The same could also be
happening within the human SCN, but we don’t know for sure.”5
As noted earlier, when our circadian photoreceptors, which are the neural processing
units of the retina that specialize in detecting Earth’s rich blue sky, signal the mastercircadian clock in the hypothalamus, they do so apparently without the aid of standard
receptive fields found in the other two classes of photoreceptors, cones and rods, responsible forday and night vision, which allow these cells to distinguish between surfaces, using
contrast to detect edges, and thereby create spatial maps of our surroundings.
Cones and rods have receptive fields that have certain properties called center/surroundantagonism, which means that the cells respond to visual stimuli depending on where it
originates. That means these cells are each responsive to light from a limited portion of
space, which the brain’s visual processing function puts together, thereby giving rise tospatial cognition.
To date, the photosensitive retinal ganglion cells responsible for circadian function havenot been found to have a distribution of cells that respond in this fashion. That is why
they have been thought to have much lower spatial resolution or simply lack the____________________________________________________________________________
4

Graham, D. M. and Kwoon Y. Wong. “Melanopsin-expressing, Intrinsically Photosensitive Retinal Ganglion Cells(ipRGCs).” Webvision (August 2015). Retrieved Dec. 14, 2015, from the Introduction in:
http://webvision.med.utah.edu/book/part-ii-anatomy-and-physiology-of-the-retina/melanopsin-expressingintrinsically-photosensitive-retinal-ganglion-cells/>.
5

K.Y. Wong (personal communication, January 10, 2016).

5

center/surround antagonism framework. However, a new paper by Mouland et al.,reveals otherwise.
The authors note that while the accepted function of retinohypothalamic tract (RHT)—
the neural input pathway involved in the circadian rhythms of mammals that begins
with our circadian photoreceptors (ipRGCs)—is to bring information about backgroundlight intensity (irradiance) to the master circadian clock (SCN), there has been little
investigation of the significance of the spatial distribution of light across the visual scene on
SCN activity.
And while this study from the University of Manchester shows that circadianentrainment remains constant in the presence of diffuse or patterned light, it also
underscores that “there is no empirical evidence that diffuse light sources engage the
SCN most effectively. Our data suggest that displays capable of presenting visual
images (televisions, computers, etc.) to which people have an intrinsic attraction, are atleast as effective at engaging the SCN.”6 The paper concludes “that the SCN is, in fact,
very responsive to spatial patterns. Indeed, an unbiased assessment would identify
spatial distribution as being at least as large an influence on SCN firing as irradiance.” 7
Despite the new evidence, Mouland and company do not show what the function of thespatial distribution of light might be. What does the master circadian clock do with spatial
data, if it does not appear to affect circadian phase resetting? (Not to the limited set oflight patterns tested thus far.) 7A However, in view of other indicators, it seems
reasonable to assume that such information may play a valuable role. Perhaps future
research will bear this out. After all, the sun beams daylight within the environmental
context of a blue canopy that is, by its very nature, spatial.
Such an integrated view of our brain’s neural connections and synaptic inputs would
also appear to fit well with Dr. Groh’s observations, which note that higher cognitive
faculties like attention, memory, and planning share the same neural infrastructure that
our sensory and motor faculties use to navigate a shifting external environment.
And while the relatively young field of circadian photoreceptors may be years away____________________________________________________________________________
6

Mouland et al., Responses to Spatial Contrast in the Mouse Suprachiasmatic Nuclei, Current Biology (2017),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.039 p.6

7

Mouland et al. Ibid.

7A

Robert J. Lucas, Lead Contact, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester (personalcommunication, August 23, 2017).

6

from mapping out all their functional roles, their interconnectedness with the rest of thevisual system demonstrates the relevance of a holistic approach to visual phenomena.
Studies have found that viewing the same object under different circumstances
influences the strength of the visual signal. In other words, the neuroscience of visual
processing has established that environmental context shapes cognitive perception.
Hence, changing the environmental context of circadian light by creating a circadianeffect in enclosed interiors, might very well trigger alertness in the physiology.
However, it is equally plausible that the artificial context in which this light intensity isperceived could also trigger other less desirable cognitive or physiological reactions in
enclosed spaces. Particularly if the source of the circadian light cannot be attributed to a
familiar biophilic source that provides a recognizable spatial reference frame, such as a
blue sky naturally does outside.
While the impact of man-made circadian lighting systems on captive populations iscurrently under study, our intent is to point out that light triggers a spatial dimension in
the environment that cues perception in ways just as fundamental and meaningful as
the circadian impact of light itself.
Leading researcher Mariana Figueiro, program director at Rensselaer’s Lighting
Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, has noted that:“The visual system relies on accurate spatial correspondence between the environment
and perception. The circadian system, however, simply responds to changes in overall
retinal light exposure—although it seems more responsive to light from above the line ofsight, which reinforces the notion that the circadian system is a ‘blue sky’ detector.”8
Taking a different approach, the above noted observation may also indicate thathumankind’s hardwired ‘blue sky’ detection system is not limited to the retina, but
might also involve the brain maps created by our visual system to establish spatial
correspondence between the environment and perception. A blue sky does not transmit
circadian light to our brain on an abstract basis; it does so as humanity’s most meaningful—visceral—experience of open space.
Perhaps, in addition to mimicking the circadian oscillations of daylight in enclosed
interiors, another equally important component is the spatial context in which light is____________________________________________________________________________
8

Figueiro, Mariana. Ibid.

7

transmitted; if not the sky itself, then an illusion of a natural environment or overhead skythat is sufficiently credible to match our biophilic (genetic) memory of the same stimuli,
under similar conditions, may be of significant importance.

Light, Space, and Memory
Research in neuroscience has also uncovered the fascinating connection between ourability to map space and memory, a fundamental building block involved in giving rise
to environmental context. According to Jennifer Groh, Professor at the Department of
Psychology and Neuroscience, and the Department of Neurobiology, at the Center for
Cognitive Neuroscience at Duke University, it turns out that “not only is memory an
integral part of building a sense of space, but space in turn serves as a kind of filingsystem for storing and accessing memories. And the brain’s memory-space connection
relies on shared neural infrastructure.”9This insight provides one of the clues that may answer the mystery behind why certain
optical illusions—what we term biophilic illusions of nature in this paper— which
provide a spatial reference frame, have such a unique impact on our psycho-physiology
in comparison to standard (representational) nature art photography.
When we provide a visual stimulus that mimics a spatial relationship we are familiar
with, the brain’s sensory and motor regions react as if the original memory itself wasbeing re-experienced. This is consistent with a unique facet of illusions; they are capableof conjuring an experience when key cognitive cues emulate a bone fide past experience.
While our circadian rhythm signals various internal biological clocks, given the strong
connection between shared neural infrastructure between memory and spatial
cognition, it seems reasonable to assume that our most universal sense of space, the sky,would also be an elemental circadian synchronizer as it relates to the effects of daylighton our physiology.
After all, our own experience confirms that we intuitively gravitate to nature and open
space because our senses come alive, enticed in ways that no man-made environment
can mimic without overstimulation or sensory overload.
In nature we transcend the confines of individual awareness and merge into a deeper
grandeur. Open space literally deepens thought.
____________________________________________________________________________
9

Jennifer M. Groh. (2014). Making Space, How the Brain Knows Where Things Are. Cambridge, Massachusetts, The
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Ch. 9, p. 189.

8

I.

Urban Architecture: The High Cost of Enclosed Interiors

The proliferation of skyscrapers and the deep plan building—where the horizontal
distance from the external wall is many times greater than the floor to ceiling height—
impairs our circadian cycle. The circadian cycle is responsible for suppressing
melatonin during the day. Low light levels, typical of deep plan buildings, expose thephysiology to a fraction of the light needed to suppress daytime melatonin production
and thereby maintain mental acuity, emotional balance, and optimal cognitive
functioning.
Deep plan floor plates, endemic to large buildings, invariably generate huge enclosed
sections that do not—by virtue of their design—receive daylight.
And while the highly sought day-lit workspaces lie on the periphery of such structures,(and ironically, further isolate interior spaces from daylight), a significant percentage ofthe staff and the operations of a company remain in enclosed interiors, removed from avisual connection to the outside.
Meanwhile, in the last 30 years, research in fields of study ranging from evolutionary
biology, cognitive neuroscience, environmental psychology, biological anthropology,social ecology, and sustainable design have all contributed to the consensus thatconventional building design runs counter to what the human physiology intrinsicallyneeds for optimal performance.
Over time, we’ve discovered that sustainable interiors for human occupancy aredefined by a connection to open, natural spaces that provide access to unimpededviews to nature from a place of safety; what environmental psychologists refer to as
Prospect & Refuge, a spatial pattern each of us intuitively recognizes and prefers.
The Biophilia Hypothesis, first proposed by Harvard biologist and Pulitzer Prizewinning author Edward O. Wilson, to describe our innate, genetic-based need toaffiliate with other living systems, provides a scientific explanation for an experience we
all intuitively understand:
We are part and parcel of the natural environment and maintaining this connection in
the experience of our buildings allows our physiology to resonate with a deeply ingrained
spatial pattern—that of wide open natural spaces.

9These two conflicting developments, the prevalence of windowless interiors and thediscovery of their effect on our mind and body, have propelled the rise of biophilic
design, a field that seeks to create buildings that connect their occupants with thenatural surroundings, providing a psycho-physiologically sound working environment
where the opportunity for attention to be directed outdoors facilitates cognitive
restoration throughout the day.
Even before the rise of biophilic design as a distinct discipline, architects, interior
designers, and facility planners employed a scientific process in the planning, design,and construction of commercial buildings called evidence-based design (EBD). Startingin the 1970s, these architectural researchers studied the impact of hospital design, but it
wasn’t until Roger Ulrich’s seminal healthcare study on the effects of a window view onpatient recovery that EBD began to explore the multifaceted benefits of incorporating
biophilic attributes into the built environment.
However, in spite of the rapid ascent of the key elements of biophilic design—ample
daylighting, green spaces, and views to nature—in new buildings, we’ve developed ablind spot concerning the design of the buildings most people currently occupy, andwill continue to occupy, for the next couple of decades.

The Long Goodbye of Older Buildings
It is important to note that in 2015 any building over 20 years old dates back to a time
before biophilic design strategies were well known, let alone implemented.
According to Edward Mazria, the visionary architect and founder of Architecture 2030,
an organization dedicated to achieve carbon neutrality in new building design, theaverage global life span of a building is 80 years.
Unlike automobiles, airplanes, and even most applied technologies, commercial
buildings have long life spans. Given their long turnover rate: how long will it be before
everyone lives, works, studies, heals, and shops in newer, better-designed buildingsthat incorporate the basic elements of biophilic design?
The American Physical Society calculates new building growth rate in the United States at
1% to 2% per year, which means our cities are many decades away from offering thealready well established benefits of biophilic design to the bulk of commercial building
occupants, whether they are employees, residents, students, patients, or shoppers.
What is the cost to property owners and tenants of occupying older buildings?

10

The Hidden Cost of Enclosed Interiors
According to the Institute for Building Efficiency, over 50% of the buildings that will still
be in use by 2050 have already been built.
In other words, a large percentage of the work force can be expected to work inoutmoded buildings for the next 35 to 50 years.
Furthermore, a 2010 survey by the U.S. Energy Information Agency found that nearly ¾ ofthe floor stock in the U.S., equivalent to 46 billion square feet, belong to buildings over
20 years old, before the principles of biophilic design were well understood, let alone
widely applied.
On the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, the European Buildings Performance Institutecalculates that a substantial share of the 5 billion m2 of useful floor space in the EU 27,
Switzerland and Norway, is older than 50 years and that many of the renovation
projects take place in buildings over 200 years old.
While green design and sustainable technologies are incorporated in new buildings, thepressing question is:
What solutions are available for billions of square feet of completely or partially enclosed
interiors that will continue to be used for decades to come?
What can we do to create sustainable interiors for long-term human occupancy in older
buildings that we already know are not optimal for human performance and health?
Particularly, when we consider that out of the 5.6 million commercial buildings in the
U.S., the largest deep plan buildings—structures over 100,000 square feet, despite
accounting for less than 2% of the building count—are responsible for 35% of the total
floorspace. In other words, their impact on human wellness is substantial.
Terrapin Bright Green, an environmental consultancy and strategic planning firm basedin New York City, published a remarkable white paper in 2012 called The Economics ofBiophilia, which quantified the economic advantages of biophilic design strategies.
Among the many remarkable studies cited, Terrapin underscores the fact that there’s adirect correlation between the proximity an office lies to a window with a view tonature and the amount of sick leave an employee takes. Employees in offices without
views to nature take 15% more sick leave time. In other words, building design impacts
human productivity through it symbiotic relationship with health and wellness.

11

Furthermore, an analysis by Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), a non-profit research andeducational foundation dedicated to foster efficient and sustainable use of resources,
indicates that salary costs are about 100 times higher than energy costs.
Given that a company’s primary expense is human resources, increasing employee
productivity by even a small percentage—say 10% or 15%—has a much larger impact
on a company’s bottom line than reducing energy costs, oftentimes the overriding goalof green design.
RMI calculated that in the U.S., an average annual salary, with benefits, is about $75,000with an office space allocation of 250 gross sq. ft. per employee, which takes into
account common areas and corridors. Dividing the salary cost by the worker density ina standard building yields an annual salary expense of $300 USD/sq. ft. If employees
take, on average, 8 sick days out of a total of 250 working days, then about 3.2% of theoverall salary cost, or $9.60/sq. ft., accounts for the expense of sick leave time.
Along these lines, reducing sick leave time by just 15% would deliver a hidden healthdividend to any company of about $1.44/sq. ft. on an annual basis. Companies cancompare this figure to the average annual energy bill of $3/sq. ft. that most corporations
pay and management can grasp the financial implications of even a modest reduction in
employee absenteeism resulting from a more sustainable interior space.
It is also worth noting that the trend towards collaborative and flexible workspaces has
driven the mean allocated space per worker downwards. Today, many companies
average less than 50% of the 250 gross sq. ft. mentioned above. If we took the trending
average of 125 sq. ft. per employee, the impact of salary costs on space would double to$600/sq. ft., making the savings on improved productivity even more dramatic—not$1.44/sq. ft.—but $2.88/sq. ft., nearly equaling the annual energy costs of the averagecompany ($3/sq. ft.).
In other words, investments made to improve human productivity in the interior
envelope of a building that result in gains of as little as 10-15% could ostensibly pay thelion’s share of a company’s annual energy bill.
The Economics of Biophilia also documents the difference in absenteeism rates between
employees with offices overlooking green spaces (59 hours/year) versus employees inworkspaces without views to nature (68 hours/year). The difference between bothgroups also comes out to 15%, mirroring the results obtained by RMI’s absenteeism
analysis.

12

Over the years, numerous studies have also documented improvements in staff
retention, job performance (less mental stress/fatigue), and workplace satisfaction. Static
office environments in particular, exacerbate presenteeism, a phenomenon that describes
when employees clock in for work, but are mentally removed from the workplace. The
lack of multisensory stimulation indoors, which views to nature easily provide, tax ourability to focus and recharge, compounding the problem as the work day advances.
Considering that attracting and retaining the best qualified personnel is a top priority intightening labor markets, the loss of anyone due to dissatisfaction, stress and fatigue, orpoor work environment could cost the organization an average $25,875 per employee.10
Such figures had not been scrutinized in relation to building design until recently.
In summary, the building you currently occupy has a direct impact on your firm’s
bottom line. Barring a wholesale move into a new building designed with the principles
of biophilic design in mind, what can the majority of building owners and commercial
building residents do to reduce this erosion on health, productivity, and profits?
While Rocky Mountain Institute’s analysis focused on corporate environments, theargument applies to a number of commercial applications such as healthcare, education,and specialty retail. Each of these environments are similar in that they feature enclosed
spaces that deprive occupants of humankind’s innate, genetic-based need to connect
with open space in nature.
In this light, government buildings, department stores, research institutes andlaboratories, hospitality and retail spaces, schools and universities, hospitals andclinics—most sectors of our predominately urban society—are exposed to thedeleterious effects of confined interiors on the health, productivity, and well-being of
the people who reside in these structures, day in and day out.

LEED… Has Led Not
While the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) through its Leadership in Energy& Environmental Design (LEED) initiative has made great strides in promoting building
design that emphasizes resource conservation and the use of benign construction_____________________________________________________________________________
10

Loftness, Vivian, Volker Hartkopt, Beran Gurtekin (2007). “Building Investment Decision Support (BIDSTM).”
Carnegie Mellon University Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics. Pittsburgh, PA., as cited in Terrapin
Bright Green, The Economics of Biophilia (Chap. 2.1.2 Presenteeism) retrieved fromhttp://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/the-economics-of-biophilia/#footnote-mark-29

13

materials, there really hasn’t been a concerted emphasis on the importance of restorative
occupant outcomes, particularly in terms of healthy spatial design and a meaningfulconnection to the cyclical nature of living systems.
The healthcare sector, which has embraced green design, reveals the deficiencies in
LEED when it comes to environmental features that provide lasting restorative benefits
to occupants; in their case, medical staff.
In the summer of 2015, the Journal of Hospital Administration published an article, Returnon investment of a LEED platinum hospital: the influence of healthcare facility environments on
healthcare employees and organizational effectiveness (2014, Vol. 3, No. 6) that set out toexamine the relationship between hospital environments and employee engagement,
turnover, illness, and injury.
Among the methods to examine the impact of the built environment of LEED platinum
hospitals versus non-LEED hospitals was a 69-question staff survey. Although theresults of the study concluded that employees’ perceptions of the interior environment
do impact employee engagement, health, and well-being (total impact factor onorganizational effectiveness was 14%), the deficiencies in building design, even for
LEED Platinum projects, was apparent.
The unique challenge of infiltrating natural light into the core of the building wheremost employees spend their working day was noted:
Given the LEED credit for 75% daylight penetration at the LEED Platinum hospital,
access to natural light and views within the nursing station and other occupied work
areas were limited; much of the natural light is located in patient environment and public
corridors where healthcare employees are less likely to spend their working hours…
The layout of the LEED hospital is different than those of the comparison [non-LEED]
facilities with patient unit pods rather than the traditional racetrack design, yet thefindings indicated similar dissatisfaction with participants at the other facilities.
Future design of facilities would benefit from careful analysis of layout and organizationof spaces with consideration to employee work processes.11_____________________________________________________________________________
11

Harris, D. Debra. “Return on Investment of a LEED platinum hospital: the influence of healthcare facility
environments on healthcare employees and organizational effectiveness.” Journal of Hospital Administration Vol.
3, No. 6 (2014): 51.

14

While the challenge for future building design remains in the hands of architects, it isapparent that even the best certification in green design has not been able to resolve thefundamental quandary of achieving long term sustainable human occupancy inenclosed interiors.
In fact, we may find that as long as deep plan buildings continue to operate, thesolution to their detrimental effect may not be found within their walls as much, as
within our perception of their surface as a spatial boundary.
Neuroscientific research has revealed how dynamic and plastic our brains are and how
our ability to map out an environment is as much a function of cognitive perception as
it is a function of actual sensory input. In other words, even when the built environment
is fixed—like the walls and ceiling of a basement room—it is still possible to alter our
experience of that space by modifying the environmental cues that we perceive (in thiscase with our eyes and brain), causing our organs of perception to arrive at a different
interpretation of the original environment.
This change in emphasis allows us to consider visual/spatial technologies within thecontext of less than ideal, existing working environments.
Taking the healthcare industry as an example again, we find that the renewed focusedon enhancing the patient experience due to the rise in pay-for-performance (P4P) andpublic release of data from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers
and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, has revealed the relevance of environmental design inaffecting workplace outcomes. An article in The Atlantic magazine noted that:
A recent Health Affairs study found comparing patient-satisfaction scores withHCAHPS surveys of almost 100,000 nurses showed a better nurse work environment
was associated with higher scores on every patient-satisfaction survey question.12
In this light, the ramifications of proper environmental design for the workplace,
regardless of industry, cannot be stressed enough, considering that staff performance
drives profitability as well as patient/client outcomes.

_____________________________________________________________________________
12

Robbins, Alexandra. “The Problem with Satisfied Patients.” TheAtlantic.com 17 Apr. 2014
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/04/the-problem-with-satisfiedpatients/390684/#disqus_thread.

15

II.

Environmental Design & the Mechanics of Perception

Now, taking a historical outlook, even the first builders understood the power thathuman perception plays in the built environment. Architects have traditionally sought
to leverage our habits of perception to orchestrate complex architectural compositions,
including interior spaces designed to be experienced as environmental illusions.
Although much research in biophilic design yields insight into why we engage
emotionally with the built environment, the history of human habitat itself has shownthat architects and artists understood early on that human perception is malleable. By
malleable we mean that by orchestrating the context in which sensory input ispresented in the built environment, designers can give rise to a wide range of cognitive
experiences in the observer. Typically, all good design accounts for this phenomenon in
the creative process.
During medieval times, for example, the great European cathedrals like Chartres andNotre Dame in France became not only benchmarks of engineering feat, but sublime
conduits of human perception. By shepherding visitors’ awareness upward withgravity-defying arches and exquisitely ribbed vaults, cathedrals inspired awe with anarchitectural language and aesthetic fashion unequalled by even the outsideenvironment.
One memorable occasion involved famed 19-Century architecture critic Eugène
Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc who, upon entering Notre Dame for the first time, thought
the glorious organ music he heard in the dimly lit space emanated from the natural
skylight framed by the cathedral’s rose stained glass windows.
He was so overwhelmed with emotion that he needed to be escorted out.13
Although architecture may not always strike such a deep emotional chord, it is worth
noting a cathedral, according to Stephen Murray, Professor of Art History and Archeology
at Columbia University, is a medium intended as a transport to somewhere else, andheaven is one of those places. In other words, the built environment can be design totransport the viewer elsewhere—to a physical or metaphysical place.
Fortunately, it is not necessary to design a new building from the ground up to change
how a person feels within its walls. Architecture history is also full of techniques that_____________________________________________________________________________
13

Ruiz, Rebecca. “Europe’s Can’t Miss Cathedrals.” Forbes.com 12 Feb. 2008
http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/12/travel-europe-cathedrals-forbeslife-cx_rr_0212travel.html

16altered the observer’s perception of interior spaces with dramatic effect.
Trompe l’oeil’s rich history in art, photography, filmmaking, and architecture has leadneuroscientists to discover that sensory illusions, whether optical or multisensory, occur
due to the unique way that human perception operates. Using techniques like forced
perspective, shading, and relative size, visual artists are able to influence spatial
perception through a selection of materials and composition techniques—arranged ascognitive cues—that lead our brain to attribute spatial properties to otherwise flat
environments in a way that alters our psycho-physiological response to enclosed spaces.
The advent of modern large format, ultra high resolution digital technology, leads to
new opportunities to capture, design, and reproduce visual stimuli in a way that our
habits of perception experience biophilic engagement, the bone fide automatic“relaxation response” that is the evolutionary advantage gleaned from naturalenvironments.
The field of neuroscience has done much to uncover how the visual system makes
inferences from the outset and fills in the gaps from missing or misleading visual input.
Our brain routinely makes assumptions about sensory input. This confirms that ourperception is born of a process of interpretation, not static transmission of one-to-one
correlations from environmental cues.
In other words, the rich tapestry of visual experience that we cognize is actually aninternal composite presented by our senses and organized by the internal algorithms(habits of perception) used to interpret and give rise to meaningful perceptions. Thisphenomenon, according to neuroscientists Stephen L. Macknik and Susana MartinezConde, authors of the fascinating book Sleights of Mind, is an unavoidable result born of
the “sheer limitations in the numbers of neurons and neural connections underlying oursensory and mental processes.”14
We are accustomed to the notion that our perception of reality of what is “out there” isaccurate, but this simply is not true. Our visual circuits are not passive transmitters of
sensory input, but actively “amplify, suppress, converge, and diverge all incoming
visual information,” to use Macknik and Martinez-Conde’s words.
They go further and assert, “You perceive what you see as something different from______________________________________________________________________________
14

Macknik, Stephen L., and Susana Martinez-Conde. Sleights of Mind (New York, Henry Holt & Company, 2010), 13.

17

reality. Perception means resolving ambiguity.”15 They provide a great example. Why
does the full moon look enormous as it rises over the horizon among trees or buildings
whereas it looks minuscule when spotted high in the sky?
The discrepancy in perceived size is due to the influence of visual context. Adjacent totrees, hills, or mountains, plus the atmospheric haze of the horizon line, our brain infers
the size of the lunar disc. But it does so by actually enlarging the size we “see” based onthese environmental or contextual cues. Up in the sky, with only the vastness of the sky
to provide context, our visual circuits again reduce its perceived size.
Which size is “true”? Hard to say!
And this is just one example of how our perception is not as static as we believe it to be,
but is a dynamic process that is sensitive to the environmental cues surrounding visual
input. Furthermore, scientists have been able to categorize what we would recognize asattention–our ability to direct our focus—not as a single and uniform phenomenon, but
as a number of discrete cognitive processes.
Of particular relevance to environmental design and the mechanics involved in how weexperience a given space is the cognitive phenomenon of the “spotlight of attention,”
the ability to regulate sensory input by bearing down on a particular region of visual
space while, at the same time, tune out data or stimuli outside the “tunnel vision” offocus.
When we direct our focus to a given area, our spotlight of attention falls on what iscalled “retinotopic” space. As Macknik and Martinez-Conde explain, “neurons fromhigher levels of your visual system increase the activation of the low-level circuits andenhance their sensitivity to sensory input. At the same time, neurons in the surrounding
regions of visual space are actively inhibited.”16
It is interesting to note that another neuroscientist, Dr. Steven Rose, author of The Futureof the Brain, notes a fascinating study where the perceived sensory input actually
increases when the context changes. That is, the same visual stimulus presented under adifferent context does, in fact, lead to a more or less engaging cognitive experience.
This is the stuff of which unexpected illusions are made.
______________________________________________________________________________
15

Macknik and Martinez-Conde. Sleights of Mind, 12.

16

Macknik and Martinez-Conde. Sleights of Mind, 64.

18In one of his lectures discussing his book, Dr. Rose wonders what is wrong with theworld around us considering that clinical depression, which the World HealthOrganization has called the epidemic of the 21st century, has become the malaise ofcontemporary humanity.
Considering what we now know about the importance of multisensory stimuli andenvironmental context, could the unprecedented global spike in clinical depression
have an architectural origin?
Could the lack of a “neurologically complex” environment, which is the hallmark ofvisual access to nature, coupled with the wholesale migration to static, artificial
interiors that provide little sensory stimuli be largely responsible for this dramaticchange in modern humanity’s psychological well-being and neural chemistry?
Instead of living and working in natural environments, a substantial percentage of the
population labors within intricate, labyrinth-like buildings in high-density metropolitan
areas. Nothing could be further away from our innate biophilic need for open space.
The healing canopy of open skies, one of the circadian synchronizers that help entrain
or reset our circadian rhythm, is the spatial connection that artificial interiors mustaccount for, if they’re to support occupants who spend the majority of their workday
within their walls.

What is the biophilic response?
Biophilic engagement is our innate response to natural environments; how ourphysiology reacts when we walk along the seashore, look out a secluded bluff, or dip
our toes in the currents of a wild river. In other words, when our senses are immersed
in a natural environment, we experience biophilic engagement. That’s why people
gravitate to the outdoors.
In nature, our biometrics show optimal performance. When we are at ease, ourphysiology behaves differently. A cardinal aspect of this dynamic is well known as the“Relaxation Response,” the opposite of the Fight-or-Flight response. In nature, ourphysiology is relaxed while our mind remains alert, allowing for optimum cognitive
performance.
On the reverse, when we’re stressed and fatigued our productivity plummets. Further
compounding our physiological reaction to an overload of activity, prolonged periods
in enclosed interiors precipitate both stress, anxiety, and fatigue.
19

To alleviate these symptoms, we must learn to elicit biophilic engagement in confined,
artificial environments.

Human Perception and Spatial Design
While cognition itself is a complex subject, it is enough to note that human spatial
cognition is fundamental to human life. By spatial cognition Hart and Moore (1973)
refer to “the knowledge and internal or cognitive representation of the structure,
entities, and relations of space; in other words, the internalized reflection andreconstruction of space in thought.”17
In the healthcare industry, where the construction costs can reach $400/sq. ft. formedium sized buildings (4-8 stories) and taller buildings easily reach 4X times this cost,it has been imperative to ensure that building design contributes to enhance, rather thanhinder, clinical outcomes.18 In the last 30 years, the field of evidence-based design has
taken a prominent role in studying the environmental features most conducive to ahealing environment, building a knowledge base that now guides architectural designin healthcare settings.
Over this period, healthcare researchers and designers have embraced the benefits ofnature art imagery in providing “positive distraction” features in clinical settings.
Positive distraction is defined as “an environmental feature that elicits positive feelings
and holds attention without taxing or stressing the individual, thereby blocking
worrisome thoughts” (Ulrich, 1991).19
In other words, the restorative impact of nature art was attributed to the emotional
response it elicits due to its representational or symbolic properties. And this affective
attribute in turn was valued because, according to neuro-scientific studies, the____________________________________________________________________________
17

Mark, D.M., 1993. “Human spatial cognition.” In Medyckyj-Scott, D., and Hearnshaw, H. M., editors, Human
Factors in Geographical Information Systems, Belhaven Press, 51-60.

18

Carrick, Alex, 2012. RSMeans’ dollar-per-square-foot construction costs for medical facilities and a high-rise
residence. <http:// http://www.cmdgroup.com/market-intelligence/articles/rsmeans-dollar-per-square-footconstruction-costs-for-medical-facilities-an>.
Ulrich, R.S., 1991. Effects of interior design on wellness: Theory and recent scientific research. Journal of HealthCare Interior Design, 3, 97-109.

19

20

emotional response is immediate and can occur before other higher-level cognitive
responses (Nanda, 2011).20
Interestingly enough, until recently, neither designers of nature art imagery nor the
researchers involved in documenting the clinical properties of nature art haveconsidered the cognitive implications of introducing a more profound visual
phenomenon—optical illusions—in healthcare settings.
Virtual skylights are such visual illusions. When properly designed, they give rise to a
powerful architectural tool—biophilic illusions of natureTM—that incorporate bothmaterials and techniques ranging from art and photography to filmmaking andarchitecture. Taken together, they become an artistic tool and a unique image
technology which engage our cognitive organs in such a way that our hardwired habitsof perception experience something else—they transport us somewhere else.
Ultimately, they induce a restorative experience of biophilic engagement in interior
spaces.
Biophilic Engagement in Enclosed Interiors
Our innate, genetic-based need to affiliate with living systems, as first proposed by
Edward O. Wilson in his Biophilia Hypothesis, provides the scientific premise behind
why leveraging the biophilic properties of illusions of nature alters spatial perception.
Our genetic memory of natural environments is so robust that we can trick the eye andthe brain into experiencing a visceral connection to outdoor space through a properly
executed simulation of sky phenomena.
At The Sky Factory, we call this design framework Open Skies Image Technology, theability to capture, reproduce, and reassemble static or dynamic nature events like open
skies in such a way that our spatial perception is engaged, lending virtual skylights andwindows a unique element of perceived depth and palpable expansion.
This unique cognitive presentation allows for a much deeper response, not only anaffective or psychological one, but a broader neuro-physiological response to theperceived change in enclosed environments. In other words, the observer not only
engages with the surroundings in a new way, their physiology reacts differently as well.
____________________________________________________________________________
Nanda, U., 2011. Impact of Visual Art on Waiting Behavior in the Emergency Department. The Center for Health
Design, Acknowledgements iv.
20

21

This is biophilic engagement.
The observer becomes more relaxed and mental agitation is reduced when theperceived surroundings lose their confining or claustrophobic dimensions. Using
carefully crafted illusions of nature to trigger biophilic engagement evokes our innate
predilection for comfortable spaces that afford a panoramic view of the surroundings(Prospect & Refuge Theory).
Restorative illusions not only compound the benefits of positive distraction, but also
evoke how we instinctively feel in natural environments: engaged, relaxed andreceptive.
After a dozen or so years of noting recurrent patient experiences of vastness—a
palpable sensation of openness—when exposed to biophilic illusions in enclosed clinicalenvironments, it became evident that peering into the neuroarchitecture of nature
stimuli could be illuminating.
The Sky Factory partnered with Texas Tech University’s Neuroimaging Institute on apioneering study that was, not only published in the peer-reviewed academic journal
Health Environments Research & Design, but also earned a Design & Health International
Academy Award for the Best International Research Project (2014).
In 2017, this pioneering study also earned a Certificate of Research Excellence (CORE),
granted by the Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA). The study was not only
recognized for its rigorous methodology, but also for its interdisciplinary nature. It shed lighton a practice-based application and advanced design thinking by noting that multisensory sky
images can have a tangible and restorative effect on interior architecture.

The Neuroarchitecture of Illusions of Nature
The award-winning study, Neural Correlates of Nature Stimuli: an fMRI Study, revealed
that specifically designed Sky Factory’s open sky photographic compositions not only
share the characteristic neural activations present in positive images—including nature
images, but also uniquely engaged areas of the brain involved in spatial cognition. Of
particular interest to the researchers were the activations found in the cerebellum as it isoften associated with aspects of spatial cognition or the experience of extended space.
The positive impact of nature images on health outcomes has been traditionallymeasured using behavioral and physiological indicators, leaving much to beunderstood about the neural mechanisms that explain their positive influence. The
Texas Tech University study was designed to uncover the neural pathways involved in22the perception of open sky photographic compositions (representing nature stimuli) as
compared to other positive, negative, and neutral images.
With a neurological understanding of the power of biophilic illusions to alter perceived
space in enclosed interiors, indoor spaces can leverage a research-based approach to
mitigate the deleterious impact of deep plan buildings. Using such tools, isolated areas
can be adapted to provide long-term sustainable interiors for human occupancy.
There is a growing interest in studying biophilic illusions to pinpoint how they mitigate
the consequences of prolonged exposure to enclosed interiors. Future studies will detail
how the incorporation of biophilic illusions alter our psycho-physiological response indiverse spaces.
To this effect, it is important to note that creating an illusion rests on a combination offactors. Among these are the fidelity of the reproduced visual content, the seamlessintegration of compositional elements into the architectural context—including the useof architectural reveals—and the proper color temperature and intensity of light thatwhen put together synthesize a new perceived sense of environment.
Essential in this cognitive palette are the fractal patterns inherent in the visualcompositions (i.e., ordered details arranged in a nestled scaling hierarchy) that give riseto the signature neurological complexity our senses prize in natural environments.
Authors like Nikos Salingaros and Kenneth Masden III have even gone so far as toemphasize that a “neurological basis for aesthetic response is now being established.”21
Coinciding with other leading researchers, they go further and reason that “the parallel
between built fractal patterns and possible cerebral organization is too strong to be acoincidence.”21a_____________________________________________________________________________
Salingaros, N. A. 2006. A Theory of Architecture. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing
Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin Mador, eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008. 62.

21

Salingaros, N. A., and K. G. Masden III. 2006a. Architecture: Biological Form and Artificial Intelligence. Biophilic
Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, andMatin Mador, eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008. 62.

21a

23

In healthcare alone, research in the field of evidence-based design has “uncovered theundisputed clinical advantages of natural environments, including artificial
environments mimicking the geometrical qualities of the natural environment.” 22 22a 22b
Furthermore, in situations where an interior space cannot incorporate an organic visualconnection to nature, it is still possible to mimic the geometry of natural environmentsby reproducing two fundamental biophilic spatial relationships—the zenith and thehorizon line—within the architectural framework of interior spaces.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Frumkin, H. 2001. Beyond Toxicity: Human Health and the Natural Environment. Biophilic Design: The Theory,
Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin Mador, eds.
Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008. 62.

22

Ulrich, R. S. 1984. View through Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery. Biophilic Design: The Theory,
Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin Mador, eds.
Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008. 62.
22aUlrich, R. S. 2000. Evidence Based Environmental Design for Improving Medical Outcomes. Biophilic Design: The
Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin Mador,eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008. 62.
22b

24

III.

Perceived Zenith & Perceived Horizon Line:The Restorative Barometer of Spatial Cognition

In any environment—natural or artificial, exterior or interior—the zenith, the point in
the celestial sphere directly above the observer, and the horizon line, the apparent
junction of earth and sky, serve as environmental anchors that shape our experience of
space. We cannot underestimate the importance of visual input and spatial awarenessto our well-being.
When we have our eyes open, vision accounts for two-thirds of the entire electricalactivity of the brain, a full 2 billion of the 3 billion firings per second.23
In fact, 50% of our neural tissue is directly or indirectly related to vision.24 Both frontal
and peripheral vision automatically map out the space we occupy, but our psychophysiological relationship to space is much more than a mechanical function. Space
plays a profound role in behavior, mental acuity, and performance. It should not be a
surprise that interior environments enhance or detract from our ability to perform
optimally in those spaces.
Environmental psychologists DeLong and Lubar (1979) have suggested that humanbeings perceive a strong relationship between the space that surrounds them andpassage of time. In their research, it has been shown that larger spaces slow perceived
time while smaller spaces speed up perceived time.25
Outside, particularly in nature, wild, open spaces create a distinct sense of comfort andexpansion. An open blue-sky overhead coupled with a panoramic view of undisturbed
nature—whether it’s a mountain range, the savanna, a body of water or an undulating
forest—provides a palpable sense of spatial infinity that registers along a vertical,
horizontal and transversal axis.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Jensen, Eric. (2008). Brain-Based Learning: The New Paradigm of Teaching, as cited in True or False? Vision Rules
the Brain. Retrieved on October 22, 2015 from http://www.imagethink.net/imagethink-2/true-or-false-visionrules-the-brain/
23

24

Ibid.

DeLong, A. J., and J. F. Lubar. 1979. Effect of Environmental Scale of Subjects on Spectral EEG Output. Society for
Neuroscience Abstracts 5:203. In Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life.
Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin Mador, eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008. 309.

25

25

When we feel our body, our entrained measure of scale, to be smaller in relation to thespace we occupy, we perceive time to slow down. This clinical observation echoes thescale proportions found in views to nature that offer Prospect & Refuge where we have
unimpeded visual and spatial access from a small and secure spot like a balcony, asecluded outlook or a room with windows looking out into an expansive environment.
In light of this recurrent scale relationship, it is not surprising that panoramic views ofnature remain a hallmark of ideal aesthetic design.
A breathtaking view to nature is not only a poetic way of describing the swing ofawareness that humans find intrinsically enticing and healing. It also literally describes
the physiological transformation that occurs during biophilic engagement. When thebreath slows down or is momentarily suspended, it is the direct result of the quieting of
the mind and reflects an experience of the deep connection between the observer andthe observed. This visceral recognition and conscious amazement is the innate kinshipbetween living systems, humankind and nature, that Biophilia defines.
When we perceive a small relative scale (our body) in the context of a much larger
relative scale (environment or geography), the juxtaposition of contrasting scales creates
an unparalleled experience of wholeness, a perceptual experience conducive toreflection, contemplation, mental clarity, and emotional balance. When we experiencevastness, time appears to slow down, become abundant, and feel infinite. And in theexperience of infinity, the mind finds much more than solace; it discovers its own
unbounded nature and experiences deep rest.
On the other hand, smaller spaces, particularly enclosed artificial spaces, tend to crowd
us in. Our perceived sense of time speeds up, leading to the common experience of timepressure, task-related stress, and anxiety. As a matter of fact, small, enclosed spaces
make occupants feel like the walls are literally closing in, which given the research,might finally be understood as an accurate expression of cognitive perception.
In this sense, a body of research does indicate that space-time interactions in humanvision are asymmetrical; spatial cognition has a larger effect on temporal cognition thanthe other way around (Merritt et al., 2010 as cited in Homma and Ashida, 2015).26 This
fundamental insight into cognitive perception provides fascinating design possibilities.
______________________________________________________________________________
Homma, C. T., and Hiroshi Ashida (2015). What makes space-time interactions in human vision asymmetrical?
Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 6, article 756, Retrieved December 9, 2015 fromhttp://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00756/full26

26

If we account for how our neurophysiology reacts in relation to perceived space, thenwe can also, to an extent, modulate the occupant’s subjective relationship with time,
which in turn affects his or her productivity, work satisfaction, and health.
Interior environments that provide a visual and spatial connection to open, naturalenvironments foster a calm, grounded psycho-physiology. On the converse, isolated
interior spaces without a visual and spatial connection to a natural exterior will—bydesign—speed up time, contributing to a compressed feeling of unease.
This happens because we measure time in terms of space. After all, time is an abstract
concept whereas space is a concept we can measure and quantify given that we literally
map out spatial relationships in our brain. As a matter of fact, some neuroscientists like
Jennifer Groh speculate so far as to declare that abstract thought is intimately linked tospatial cognition, and the way we map out our sense of space may also be responsible
for the nature of human thought itself.
In order to understand this far-reaching proposition, it is important to understand thatthe sensory and motor processing regions of our brain overlap by a remarkable measurewith the cerebral areas responsible for cognitive faculties such as memory, attention,and planning.
In her book, Making Space, How the Brain Knows Where Things Are, Groh asserts that,“much of the information stored in our memory systems is intrinsically spatial. We findthings by remembering where to look. Many of the brain’s sensory and motor regions
also exhibit memory-related activity.”27 She goes on to say that the parietal cortex seems
to play a role in unlocking memories by calling to mind spatial frame references “basedon one’s imagined perspective on the scene.”28
She gives a fascinating example, from a 1978 study by Italian researchers, Edoardo
Bisiach and Claudio Luzzatti, who tested patients who suffered from damage to one
hemisphere of the parietal cortex, on how well they could recall familiar settings. The
researchers asked the patients to “imagine themselves standing at the foot of thefamous Piazza del Duomo, in Milan, and to name as many landmarks around thesquare as they could. The patients had trouble naming landmarks from the side of thesquare that corresponded to their impaired region of space.”29______________________________________________________________________________
27

Jennifer M. Groh. (2014). Making Space, How the Brain Knows Where Things Are. Cambridge, Massachusetts,
The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Ch. 9, p. 190.

28

Jennifer M. Groh. Ibid, p. 196.

27

However, the fascinating discovery came when the researchers asked the patients to“switch mental perspectives and imagine themselves standing on the other end of thesquare, facing the opposite direction. The change in vantage point, even though only
imagined, allowed their patients to recall landmarks from the opposite side of thesquare! So memories were there all along.”30 Conscious access to these memories was
only a matter of recreating the proper spatial reference frame in the mind’s eye of thepatients.
In similar fashion, when we create visual stimuli in enclosed interiors with the proper
spatial frame reference—a design element unique to illusions of nature and not found indecorative photography--we reestablish a neural connection to our past experience oflooking up at the sky.
Even when the environmental context is virtual, that is, simulated in an isolated
interior, we can trigger spatial memories of experienced environments—our biophilic
memory--because the hippocampal region has a profound sensitivity to one’s own
spatial location in relation to the past memories formed under similar sensory stimuli.
Certainly, it seems reasonable that if we can imagine a place and recall details of theenvironment (as in the Italian experiment), an illusion, being yet more concrete than amemory, should yield similar results.
These neural dynamics indicate the central role that spatial reference frames play inchanneling stored (biophilic) memories of spatially similar experiences. This mechanism
may explain why a biophilic illusion of open sky inside a building can also evoke the“Relaxation Response” that open natural environments so easily reveal. Our spatial
memory of looking up at an open sky, or into an open natural landscape, is engaged ina multisensory fashion—visually and spatially—in such a way that our organs ofperception evoke the psycho-physiology of the original spatial mapping of sky orlandscape.
Again quoting Dr. Groh, we discover that research confirms this understanding. “Withthe advent of imaging techniques to assess human brain activity, some clues to theneural basis of this kind of phenomenon have emerged. Some studies have shown thatmentally picturing a visual stimulus elicits activity in the primary visual cortex and,_____________________________________________________________________________
29

Jennifer M. Groh. Ibid, p. 195-6.

30

Jennifer M. Groh. Ibid, p. 195.

28

furthermore, that the extent of this activity varies with the size of the object being
imagined—tying in to the visual cortex map of space.”31
These assertions provide a neurological basis to understand why natural environments
have played such a fundamental role in the development of our neural circuitry andwhy now, more than ever, when humankind’s daily urban experience is one of limited
built space rather than interconnected open space, the negative consequences to our
cognitive functions like performance and wellness cannot be stressed enough.
Dr. Groh’s argument brings us back full circle to the Biophilia Hypothesis and theimpact of natural environments on our ability to restore and recharge. She says, “suchstudies suggest that mental representations for space are not merely co-opted from thesensory and motor domains, but that those domains may in turn shape thinking in the
abstract domain…The implication of this is that perhaps many aspects of our ability tothink and reason may be shaped by the nature of the neural “wetware” that originally
evolved in the context of sensory and motor processing.”32
Therefore, if our brain acquired its neural complexity in direct response to the naturalenvironment that enveloped our earlier psycho-physiological experience on Earth, it is
no wonder that our sense of time has a direct correspondence to the space we occupy.
When we find ourselves outdoors, surrounded by nature with a palpable sense of
infinite space, our minds feel expanded, serene, induced to abstract thought,
daydreaming, free association, creativity, and foresight.
On the other hand, with the modern march to limited, disconnected space, society has
seen the rise of urban pathologies, most notably hypertension, chronic stress, andattention-deficit affective disorder. These acquired behaviors lose much of their neurotic
hold when the subject is immersed in a larger spatial frame of reference. We can literally
recover our sense of self, our mental and emotional balance, when we find ourselves in
the presence of a vast, visual connection to nature. Such a spatial reference frame
always exhibits the unique features of Prospect & Refuge.
Terrapin Bright Green’s second white paper, 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design, selected themost pervasive patterns in nature that bring the highest restorative value to the humanphysiology. According to the empirical evidence gathered by leading scholars, the two
attributes of nature with the largest amount of peer-reviewed research, both_____________________________________________________________________________
31

Jennifer M. Groh. Ibid. p. 207.

32

Jennifer M. Groh. Ibid, p. 210.

29

quantitative and qualitative, that back their restorative qualities are:a) Visual Connection to Natureb) Prospect & Refuge
Both of these patterns provide multiple psycho-physiological benefits for humanperformance and well-being, including significant stress reduction (i.e. lower bloodpressure and heart rate), cognitive performance (i.e. improved mental engagement andattentiveness), and emotion, mood and preference (i.e. improved comfort and perceived
safety).33
On the other hand, enclosed interiors that do not offer an organic connection to anatural exterior preclude our entrained sense of scale from finding a restorative exit or“window” that can ground our senses and maintain the much needed biophilic
connection to the exterior. Particularly in deep plan buildings, experiencing prolonged
compression, distortion, or removal of the zenith and horizon line diminish our
productivity and negatively impacts our health.
However, it is now possible to simulate these two fundamental biophilic spatial
relationships. Extension of the interior zenith from the ceiling plane to a much moredistant perceived zenith outside the building can also be accomplished by incorporating
an illusion of nature that provides multisensory points of reference.
Sky Factory’s Open Sky Image Technology not only incorporates an image’s rich tapestryof visual information, but also engages our vestibular system as it pertains to balanceand spatial orientation, reinforcing the spatial reference frame. A multisensory
approach to image composition, among other elements of design, is fundamental increating such a successful illusion.
The combined environmental cues tie the overhead image to its architectural context,
thereby making the boundaries of the ceiling “transparent” to the eye and awareness ofthe observer. The closer the image appears to “belong” within the unseen, but
presumed confines of the exterior envelope, the more our habits of perception reinforce
amodal perception, the hardwired reflex of filling in the unseen portions of an occluded_____________________________________________________________________________
Browning, W., Ryan, C. & Joseph Clancy. 2014. 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design, (chapter 2.4 Nature-Health
Relationships). Terrapin Bright Green, LLC. Retrieved on October 23, 2014 fromhttp://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/14-patterns/

33

30

shape. If the observer sees a portion of sky or a few “windows” of the same outdoor
area, a very powerful illusion is automatically induced: such an illusion conveys aperception that behind the ceiling plane there is open space.
The suggestive quality of the environmental cues, image composition and light quality
married to architectural context, can similarly “weaken” the boundaries of interior
walls. It is possible to recess the horizon line represented by interior walls by
incorporating a series of virtual windows (two or more) that depict a single panoramicview separated by a calibrated distance (mullions). This architectural arrangement willautomatically trigger binocular vision, which brings a powerful element of spatial
cognition.
When the scale of the horizon line is recessed, thereby connecting the observer with aperceived natural exterior, an enclosed, interior setting can be experienced as a restorativeenvironment. Such space will naturally offer the positive attributes of a view to nature
possessing the wellness visual hallmarks of Prospect & Refuge.
These two spatial relationships, perceived zenith and perceived horizon line, represent a
visual and cognitive technology that has just begun to be leveraged in deep planinteriors. It is particularly useful when other avenues to bring biophilic design relief
indoors are not structurally possible or economically feasible. Today, by taking thiscognitive framework into account in the visual design process, it is possible to have a
research-based visual technology that can turn billions of square feet of enclosed
interiors into comfortable, healthy, and restorative indoor spaces for long-term humanoccupancy.

Fractals, Wellness, and Space
Our intent in this paper has been to summarize the well-documented, restorative
benefits of nature environments and the ability of biophilic illusions to transmit, notonly the visual content experienced in nature, but mimic its spatial properties. In thislight, enclosed spaces no longer pose an impenetrable barrier to bring a meaningfulmeasure of wellness, indoors. It is not so much a question of available physical space, asmuch as well-designed perceived space.
As such, management can begin to calculate the productivity savings and the wellness
benefits to their workforce, particularly those relegated to the interior of deep planbuildings. By incorporating biophilic illusions in isolated offices, conference rooms, call31

centers and other areas, these virtual portals to natural exteriors will reduce older
buildings’ drag on human performance and health. This new architectural approach to
the design of interior space will allow companies to monetize the hidden wellness
dividend trapped in enclosed interiors.
This knowledge is already leading to new standards for building design and is raising
the bar for sustainable occupancy in interior spaces. This paradigm shift can be seen in
the new WELL Building Standard® created by the International WELL Building InstituteTM,
which is the first standard of its kind that focus attention solely on the health andwellness of building occupants.
The WELL Building Standard® is based on a thorough review of the research on theeffects of indoor spaces on individuals, and identifies 102 performance metrics, design
strategies, and procedures that can be implemented to achieve WELL Certification,
spaces that marry the best practices in design and construction with evidence-based
health and wellness interventions.
Among the key elements in the section devoted to lighting, WELL recognizes thefundamental impact that outdoor views and daylight have on our psycho-physiology.
For this reason, in its “Right to Light” section of the Standard, WELL recommends thatthe lease depth (the distance between the building core and the exterior façade) does notexceed 7.5 m (25 ft.) for 75% of the area of all regularly occupied spaces. 34
WELL also recommends that 75% of all desks are within 7.5 m (25 ft.) of an atrium or awindow with views to the exterior and that 95% of all desks are within 12.5 m (41 ft.) of
an atrium or a window with views to the exterior.35
This represents a paradigm shift in the importance of wellness in architectural design.

Buildings as Structure, Environment, and Habitat
Up until now, urban development has relied on high-density occupancy buildings to
maximize the limited space found in highly competitive metropolitan areas. At thesame time, large-scale construction projects rely on economies of scale in order to makethis type of construction profitable.
______________________________________________________________________________
34

Delos Living LLC. 2014. WELL Building Standard version 1.0, (section of the Standard on Light, 61 - Right to Light,
p. 101). Retrieved on April 8, 2015 from http://www.wellcertified.com/well

35

Ibid.

32

What has been completely lost in this economic model is the unaccounted impact ofexternalities. In economics, negative externalities refer to economic burden affecting a 3rdparty who did not choose to incur that cost.
In this case, the negative externality caused by deep plan corporate, institutional, andcommercial spaces is the underreported impact on the health, productivity and wellbeing of captive populations in all types of commercial buildings. Developers reap therewards of more profitable mega structures while corporate tenants and their agents,
who labor in enclosed spaces, suffer the consequences of inert structural spaces thatafford none of the benefits of restorative environments.
Given the emerging evidence, the time has come for buildings to be considered living
environments and habitats, not static, monolithic structures. New development of deepplan buildings should be considered with a keen eye to the health implications ofoccupant exposure to enclosed interiors, seeking to remedy their primary design pitfall
by incorporating biophilic design strategies from the outset.
Case in point, Bank of America’s One Bryant Park Tower was designed from the outset toprovide views to green spaces to 90% of their employees. The bank figured even a 1%
increase in productivity would save 10 million dollars annually.36 This is the net financial
impact of building design. Calculations of this nature indicate that while new
construction can lock their savings at the planning stage, older structures will have tomarshal retrofit solutions for their current portfolio to stem future projected losses.

The Cost Effectiveness of Biophilic Illusions
Here’s where biophilic illusions of nature offer an innovative, cost-effective, evidencebased solution. By leveraging our ingrained habits of perception, it is possible to use
imagery within an architectural context to engage the areas of our brain involved inspatial perception, devising a meaningful connection to a perceived natural exterior.
This is a distinct approach from the one taken by faux skylights, which are widely
recognized for their use of representational images. Genuine virtual skylights provide
the necessary cues that engage our neurophysiology, giving rise to a bone fide biophilic
illusion. When designed as architectural features in enclosed interiors, virtual skylights______________________________________________________________________________
36

Intercongreen.com. 2009. Green Buildings: One Bryant Park. Retrieved on March 31, 2014 fromhttp://intercongreen.com/2009/05/14/green-buildings-one-bryant-park/33

leverage amodal perception. Due to the widespread use of the grid system in commercial
construction, and the possibility for mullions, the matrix of panels in a hung ceilingoffers an ideal structure for exploiting not only amodal perception, but binocular visionand other cognitive habits of perception that allow designers to alter perceived space.
The cost of these installations represents a fraction of the cost when compared tostructural changes and building code implications. Considering their effectiveness andrapid deployment, this visual technology has the potential to change buildings that
otherwise have no alternatives to resolve the implications of their enclosed interiors.
At the same time, the next generation of biophilic illusions is already underway. While
LED lighting systems have begun to understand the wellness implications of the color
temperature of light, no one yet has attempted to marry these traits to visual content.
Circadian illusions will soon be able to mimic the properties of light that orchestrate
photopic (day) vision, which is absorbed by the chromophores (chemicals that absorb
light) in the cones of the eye (blue, green, or red opsins), as well as stimulate the innerretinal sensors (the melanopsin photoreceptors) that regulate the circadian cycle or the
non-visual, biological effects of light.
These new circadian biophilic illusions will be dynamic architectural features like a real
skylight or window. They will hold our attention for restorative purposes in the subtle
and organic way both masterpiece art and nature effortlessly do. In addition, they will
be visual and spatial tapestries that mimic the natural oscillations in light intensity andfrequency that our neurophysiology recognizes when connected to the outdoors. This
technology will enable older structures that are likely to remain occupied for decades tocome to reduce their negative impact on the people they serve during the longtransition to a new, fully developed biophilic architecture.
The Healing Sky: A Universal Experience
The sky is humanity’s most universal experience of nature. As our modern lives have
kept us indoors for longer periods, it is only natural that our environments maintainthis life-affirming bond. While building designs adapt to this fundamental truth in theyears to come, we are left with billions of square feet of inhabitable interior spaces thatare not sustainable for long-term human occupancy.
In the meantime, in view of the research, the available technology and the prevailingurban landscape, biophilic illusions can bridge the gap and create restorativeenvironments in a cost-effective way. Open skies belong inside because no matter who
we are or where we live, everyone in every culture has experienced lying on their back34

looking up into cloud floating across a blue canopy. Humanity’s generational
experience with natural environments, particularly an open sky, across time and spaceremains unchanged—we’re all nourished by a sense of inner peace, spatial
unboundedness, and peak sensory wellness that it evokes—the hallmarks ofhumankind’s biophilic response.
Even our bodies are attuned to the blue of the sky. It is no accident that our eyes andmind register the coolness of blue as distant space. (This is a fundamental principle
behind “Impressionism” and bright red stoplights.) As a matter of fact, “blue sky” iswell-recognized as a symbol for freedom and infinite possibilities.
Furthermore, the clouds that inhabit the sky occur in patterns and these patterns are
actually exquisite visual expressions of the physical laws of nature that govern fluid
dynamics. (We can see these same patterns repeated in the sand at the seashore, thebottom of streams or even in the large-scale erosion of patterns on Mars.) In short, thesky is not only beautiful but also a place where the workings of nature are easily
accessed by all of us.
And it’s from this colossal visual display of nature’s forces that we can also reflect on
the scale and meaning of man-made architecture and interior design. The psychophysiological relief the sky provides outdoors can be astutely leveraged indoors. Our
innate, genetic-based need to affiliate with nature, our biophilia, is most apparent in ouremotional and awe-inspiring spatial relationship with views of nature and the majestyof open skies.
For more information of how Sky Factory’s Open Skies Image Technology can create
restorative environments in your project or building, please contact us at:
The Sky Factory, LC
801 North 18th Street, PO Box 1177
Fairfield, IA 52556
www.skyfactory.com
info@skyfactory.com(866) 759-3328

35

References
Browning, W., Ryan, C. & Joseph Clancy (2014), 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design (Chap. 2.4 NatureHealth Relationships), Terrapin Bright Green, LLC. Retrieved October 23, 2014 fromhttp://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/14-patterns/
BuildingEfficiencyInitiative.com (2010). Why Focus on Existing Buildings? Retrieved on May 16,
2014 from http://www.buildingefficiencyinitiative.org/articles/why-focus-existing-buildings
Carrick, Alex. (2012). RSMeans’ dollar-per-square-foot construction costs for medical facilities and ahigh-rise residence. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://www.cmdgroup.com/marketintelligence/articles/rsmeans-dollar-per-square-foot-construction-costs-for-medical-facilitiesan
DeLong, A. J., and J. F. Lubar. (1979). “Effect of Environmental Scale of Subjects on Spectral EEG
Output.” Society for Neuroscience Abstracts 5:203. In Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science,
and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin
Mador, eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008.
Delos Living LLC. 2014. WELL Building Standard (version 1.0). Retrieved on April 8, 2015 fromhttp://www.wellcertified.com/well
Ellis, E.V., Gonzalez, E.W. & Donald L. McEachron (2013), Chronobioengineering Indoor Lighting
to Enhance Facilities for Aging and Alzheimer’s Disorder, Bau Architecture. Retrieved Nov. 20,
2015 from http://www.bauarchitecture.com/research.chronobioengineering.shtml
Figueiro, Mariana (2006), Lighting isn’t just for Vision Anymore, The International Society for
Optical Engineering. Retrieved December. 3, 2015 from http://spie.org/newsroom/technicalarticles-archive/03-0400/0304-light-isnt-just-for-vision-anymore
Graham, D. M. and Kwoon Y. Wong. “Melanopsin-expressing, Intrinsically Photosensitive
Retinal Ganglion Cells (ipRGCs).” Webvision (August 2015). Retrieved Dec. 14, 2015, from:http://webvision.med.utah.edu/book/part-ii-anatomy-and-physiology-of-theretina/melanopsin-expressing-intrinsically-photosensitive-retinal-ganglion-cells/
Jennifer M. Groh. (2014). Making Space, How the Brain Knows Where Things Are. Cambridge,
Massachusetts, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Harris, D. Debra. (2014). Return on Investment of a LEED platinum hospital: the influence of
healthcare facility environments on healthcare employees and organizational effectiveness.
Journal of Hospital Administration Vol. 3, No. 6.
36

Homma, C. T., and Hiroshi Ashida (2015). What makes space-time interactions in human vision
asymmetrical? Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 6, article 756, Retrieved December 9, 2015 fromhttp://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00756/fullIntercongreen.com (2009). Green Buildings: One Bryant Park. Retrieved on March 31, 2014 fromhttp://intercongreen.com/2009/05/14/green-buildings-one-bryant-park/
Jensen, Eric (2007). Brain-Based Learning: The New Paradigm in Teaching), as cited in True or False?
Vision Rules the Brain. Retrieved on October 22, 2015 fromhttp://www.imagethink.net/imagethink-2/true-or-false-vision-rules-the-brain/
Loftness, Vivian, Volker Hartkopt, Beran Gurtekin (2007). Building Investment Decision Support(BIDSTM). Carnegie Mellon University Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics.
Pittsburgh, PA., as cited in Terrapin Bright Green (2012), The Economics of Biophilia (Chap.
2.1.2 Presenteeism). Retrieved May 16, 2013 fromhttp://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/the-economics-of-biophilia/#footnote-mark-29
Macknik, Stephen L., and Susana Martinez-Conde. (2011). Sleights of Mind. New York, Henry
Holt & Company.
Mark, D.M. (1993). Human spatial cognition. In Medyckyj-Scott, D., and Hearnshaw, H. M.,
editors, Human Factors in Geographical Information Systems, Belhaven Press.
Merritt, D. J., Cassanto, D., and Brannon, E. M. (2010). Do monkeys think in metaphors?
Representations of space and time in monkeys and humans. Cognition 117, 191-202. Retrieved
December 8, 2015 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2952654/
Nanda, U. (2011). Impact of Visual Art on Waiting Behavior in the Emergency Department. The
Center for Health Design’s Research Coalition. Concord, CA: The Center for Health Design.
Robbins, Alexandra (2014). The Problem with Satisfied Patients. TheAtlantic.com 17 Apr. 2014
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/04/the-problem-with-satisfiedpatients/390684/#disqus_thread.
Salingaros, N. A. (2006). A Theory of Architecture. In Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, andPractice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin
Mador, eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008.
Salingaros, N. A., and K. G. Masden II. (2006). Architecture: Biological Form and Artificial
Intelligence. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life.
Kellert, Stephen, Judith Heerwagen, and Matin Mador, eds. Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2008.

37

Terrapin Bright Green, LLC (2012). The Economics of Biophilia, Why Designing with Nature in Mind
Makes Financial Sense. Retrieved May 16, 2013 fromhttp://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/the-economics-of-biophilia/
Ulrich, R.S. (1991). Effects of Interior Design on Wellness: Theory and Recent Scientific
Research. Journal of Health Care Interior Design, Vol. 3.

38