Architecture basically deals with human needs, that is why it is fundamentally a human-centered discipline, its main purpose is to create environments that provide comfort and improve efficiency in human life. During the past few decades, many interdisciplinary studies have demonstrated that architectural spaces shape psychological processes such as perception, cognition, emotion, behaviour, and social interaction significantly. This paper presents a comprehensive literature-based review examining the role and importance of psychology in architecture, trying to extract established theories, peer-reviewed research, important books, academic lectures, and publicly accessible educational platforms such as TED Talks. The review does not involve primary data collection, surveys, interviews, or experiments; instead, it synthesizes existing knowledge from environmental psychology, cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and architectural theory. The paper tries to extract the historical development of psychological thought in continuous architectural studies, from early behavioural and environmental psychology to contemporary neuroarchitecture. This is an attempt to explore spatial perception, sensory experience, emotional and cognitive responses to build environments, social and cultural parameters of space, and the design of therapeutic, educational, and workplace environments. The review highlights how architectural features such as light, scale, materials, textures, colours, forms and their spatial organizations, and proximity and relation with nature influence stress, comfort, efficiency, learning, and social behaviour. By integrating psychological considerations into architectural design, architects can create environments that are not only functional and aesthetically pleasing but also supportive of mental health and in turn physical health, inclusive nature, and human betterment. The paper concludes by identifying critical research gaps and emphasizing the need for stronger integration of psychological principles into architectural education and professional practice. This review contributes to ongoing interdisciplinary discourse by consolidating varied aspects of research into a unified framework for related scholars, practitioners, and educational experts.
Subodh Arun Dixit (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: