## 4 Results and Discussion
### Observation Analysis: Physical Features, Interactions and Creativity  
For the non-participatory observations, nine locations across the campus were selected for the analysis. This illustrates the extent to which the physical features of the built environment play a role in the high or low potential for creativity, and how their quality enables or inhibits creative encounters. Figure 8 shows photographs of the nine public spaces, which comprise three spaces in each colour category (red, yellow and blue). The observations of public spaces in the red category illustrate why Landleven Street and the internal corridor in the Duisenberg building are the public spaces with the highest potential for creativity. They provide diversity, with amenities such as cafes, the library, the supermarket, water features, shared spaces, and seating opportunities. Such a concentration of amenities has established these spaces as 'community-gathering places' [61]. This shows the importance of clustering physical features, and the extent to which they can facilitate contacts of the 'right kind' [11] through 'common activities', such as buying a coffee, going to the canteen, or sitting on the same bench. The results for the yellow category (high VGI and low NACH R800m) imply that creative encounters in public spaces can be facilitated mainly by social activities and physical features, while the potential for movement and co-presence plays a minimal role. For example, the walkway between the football fields shows low potential for movement (0.53) but high opportunities for _meeting people from outside the campus_ (20 respondents). It does not seem to matter that this space has low accessibility, because what attracts people is the sporting activity and the opportunity to encounter others. Figure 7: Axial lines and scatterplot analysis, representing the interface between the space syntax analysis and the VGI values for spontaneous encounters, socialization, and meeting people from outside the campus (MPFOC). For the blue category (low VGI and high NACH R800m), the observation was conducted at the intersection of the Kadijk and Zernikelaan streets. This intersection is a typical vehicular and cycling-oriented environment, and forms a physical separation between the academic activities and companies located in the north of the campus. The observations show that this intersection is mainly used for goal-oriented pedestrian movement, when people walk to have lunch. As well as trees that provide shade, vehicular and cycling routes, and narrow sidewalks, the physical features of this public space do not encourage stationary activities, for example, and could inhibit creative encounters. In summary, the present results are significant in at least two major respects. One is in regards to the primary focus of this research, which was to empirically test the interface between spatial configuration and the perceptions of a sense of place through a mixed-methods approach. The findings of the yellow and blue categories suggest that a high potential for pedestrian movement and co-presence measured by NACH R800m does not determine whether or not people will engage with the built environment or creative encounters. Therefore, public places (or segments) indicated with high opportunities for spontaneous encounters, socialisation and MPFOC do not appear to depend entirely on their spatial configuration, but rather on the availability of activities, urban functions and physical features. In other words, a low potential for movement does not mean a low engagement between people and the built environment, as observed in the yellow category between the football fields. Furthermore, the high potential for movement determines the high engagement between people and the built environment, as seen in the blue category at the intersection of the Kadijk and Zernikelaan streets (see Figures 4 and 5). Figure 8: Observation spots illustrating the scatterplot analysis results.