Virtual Reality Technology Applied in the Building Design Process: Considerations on Human Factors and Cognitive Processes

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 485)


This paper discusses the most relevant human factors and cognitive aspects associated to the use of three-dimensional virtual reality models within the conceptual design phase in the construction industry. It contributes to the knowledge on the designer’s cognitive functioning throughout the creative thinking and decision-making in design, as well as in what extent VR technology helps in these cognitive processes, pointing out relevant aspects that must be considered in the development of new VR-based tools for conceptual design. At the end, this study presents a concise knowledge on the meaning, impacts and effectiveness of VR technology for the Building Construction domain. The mechanism of human cognition involved in the building design process and the role of VR technology in this context are presented and final considerations are made.


Virtual reality Building design process Cognition Human factors Knowledge representation 



The authors gratefully acknowledge (a) the Brazilian National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) for the scholarship provided through the Science without Borders program; and (b) the Georgia Institute of Technology for the financial and infrastructural support.


  1. 1.
    Goel, A.K., Vattam, S., Wiltgen, B., Helms, M.: Cognitive, collaborative, conceptual and creative—four characteristics of the next generation of knowledge-based cad systems: a study in biologically inspired design. Comput. Aided Des. 44(10), 879–900 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chandrasegaran, S.K., Ramania, K., Sriram, R.D., Horváth, I., Bernard, A., Harik, R.F., Gao, W.: The evolution, challenges, and future of knowledge representation in product design systems. Comput. Aided Des. 45(2), 204–228 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Choo, C.W.: The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge and Make Decisions. Oxford University Press, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Irizarry, J., Gheisari, M., Williams, G., Walker, B.N.: InfoSPOT: a mobile augmented reality method for accessing building information through a situation awareness approach. Autom. Constr. 33, 11–23 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Florio, W.: Análise do processo de projeto sob a teoria cognitiva: sete dificuldades no atelier. Arquiteturarevista 7(2), 161–171 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Okamoto, J.: Percepção Ambiental e Comportamento. IPSIS, São Paulo (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lawson, B.: How designers think: the design process demystified. Architectural Press, Oxford (1980)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schön, D.: Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. Jossey Bass, San Francisco (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alvarenga, L.: Representação do conhecimento na perspectiva da ciência da informação em tempo e espaço digitais. Encontros Bibli: Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação 8(15), 18–40 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eastman, C.M., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., Liston, K.: BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors. Wiley, New Jersey (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paes, D.C., Arantes, E.M.: A realidade virtual imersiva como tecnologia de suporte à compreensão de modelos computacionais. In: VII Encontro de Tecnologia de Informação e Comunicação na Construção, pp. 1–12. ANTAC, Porto Alegre; Blucher Engineering Proceedings, São Paulo (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rohrer, M.: Seeing is believing: the importance of visualization in manufacturing simulation. IIE Solutions 29(5), 24–28 (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gifford, R.: Environment Psychology: Principles and Practice. Optimal Books, Colville (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Endsley, M.R.: Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum. Factors: J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 37(1), 32–64 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Castronovo, F., Nikolic, D., Liu, Y., Messner, J.I.: An evaluation of immersive virtual reality systems for design reviews. In: 13th International Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality, London, pp. 22–29 (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heydarian, A., Carneiro, J.P., Gerber, D., Becerik-Gerber, B.: Immersive virtual environments, understanding the impact of design features and occupant choice upon lighting for building performance. Build. Environ. 89, 217–228 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Steuer, J.: Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence. J. Commun. 42(4), 73–93 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dunston, P., Arns, L., Mcglothlin, J., Lasker, G., Kushner, A.: An immersive virtual reality mock-up for design review of hospital patient rooms. Collaborative Des. Virtual Environ. ISCA 48, 167–176 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kalisperis, L., Muramoto, K., Balakrishnan, B., Nikolic, D., Zikic, N.: evaluating relative impact of virtual reality system variables on architectural design comprehension and presence: a variable-centered approach using fractional factorial experiment. In: 24th eCAADe, Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, Volos, pp. 66–73 (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Faas, D., Bao, Q., Frey, D.D., Yang, M.C.: The influence of immersion and presence in early stage engineering designing and building. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 28(2), 139–151 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Building ConstructionGeorgia Institute of Technology, College of ArchitectureAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations