Perceptions About Commercial Advertising Signs on Street Landscape and Shopping Preferences: The Sample of Kişla Street, Malatya-Turkey
[1]
Furuzan Aslan, Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Fine Arts and Design, Inonu University, Malatya, Turkey.
[2]
Atilla Atik, Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Fine Arts and Design, Inonu University, Malatya, Turkey.
Aim: The aim of this study is determining the physical properties of commercial advertising signs such as size, color, shape, etc. on the perception of street landscape and shopping preferences of the people. Methodology: A questionnaire was used with 272 participants to determine the viewpoints of the townspeople on the commercial advertising signs of the shops on the Kışla Street in the city of Malatya. 6 independent variables, gender, marital status, age group, occupation, education and income level, were developed with the purpose of determining the socio-demographic properties of the participants. 7 variables were determined for the purpose of determining the effects of the commercial advertising signs on the shopping preferences and street landscape perception of the participants (dependent variables) were used. The Chi Square Goodness of Fit Test, Chi Square Independence and Chi Square Trend Tests were used to determine the socio-demographic properties that had effects on the dependent variables. Results: When the data obtained after the questionnaire were evaluated, it was observed that commercial advertising signs had an effect on the shopping preferences of people and that this effect was related with the size, color, shape and their being lit or not. In addition, it may also be claimed that the commercial advertising signs on the Kışla Street in the city of Malatya influence the general view of the street and cause chaos. Conclusion: It has been determined that the commercial advertising signs on the Kışla Street in the city of Malatya affects the general view of the street and lead to a chaos in the street. The reason of this negative situation may be considered as the variety and density of the commercial advertising signs on the street. In order to correct this negative situation, aesthetic, specific and ecological urban design projects are needed in which researchers and practitioners from different disciplines who take into consideration the viewpoints, demands and expectations of the users based on participative approach work together for the same purpose.
Commercial, Advertising Signs, Landscape, Perception, Shopping, Preference, Questionnaire, Malatya
[1]
Atik A, Yılmaz B, Taçoral E, Bayazıt Ş.İ, Kılıç M. Urban forests and their contributions to urban sustainability, Urban And Urbanization, St. Kliment Ohridski University Press Sofia, 2014; 134-148.
[2]
FAO. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2011 Revision, CD-ROM Edition, 2012.
[3]
Öztürk Ö. Kentsel Kimlik Oluşumunda Güzel Sanatların Yeri: İzmir Örneği, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara, 2007. (in Turkish).
[4]
Ocakçı M. Kimlik Elemanlarının Şehirsel Tasarıma Yönlendirici Etkisi, Kentsel Tasarım ve Uygulamalar Sempozyumu, Kentsel Tasarıma Ekolojik Yaklaşım, 1994; 239-245. (in Turkish).
[5]
Yılmaz T. Yazıcıoğlu I. Şavklı F. Effects of commercial advertising boards on shopping preferences and landscape perception of Street: A case study of Antalya Güllük Street. Inonu University Journal of Art and Design. 2012;2(4):15-25.
[6]
İşbir E. Açma B. Kentleşme ve çevre sorunları. Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayını No:1645, Eskişehir, 2005;237. (in Turkish).
[7]
Ulu, A. Karakoç, İ. Kentsel değişimin kent kimliğine etkisi, TMMOB Şehir Plancıları Odası Yayını, 2004;29:59-66. (in Turkish).
[8]
Uçkaç L. Kentsel tasarımın kent kimliği üzerine etkileri: Keçiören Örneği, Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, 2006 (in Turkish).
[9]
Güley K. Kent Kimliği Değişim Sürecinin Gazimaguşa Örneğinde İncelenmesi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul, 2001 (in Turkish).
[10]
Erton M. Kent Kimliği: İznik ve Mudurnu Yerleşmeleri Örneği, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul, 1995 (in Turkish).
[11]
Önem B, Kılınçaslan İ. Haliç bölgesinde çevre algılama ve kentsel kimlik. İTÜ Dergisi, 2005;4(1):115–125. (in Turkish).
[12]
Ertürk H. Çevre Bilimlerine Giriş. Uludağ Üniversitesi Güçlendirme Vakfı Bilimsel Araştırma ve Basın Yayın İşletmesi, 1996;36-41. (in Turkish).
[13]
Keleş R, Harmancı C. Çevrebilim. İmge Yayıncılık, 1993;312. (in Turkish).
[14]
Madanipour A. Design of Urban Space; An Inquiry into a Socio-spatial Process, John Wiley and Sons, England, 1996; 40-77.
[15]
Greene S. Cityshape: communicating and evaluating community design. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1992;58(2):177-189.
[16]
Günay B. Urban design is a public policy. METU Faculty of Architecture Press, 1999;p.82.
[17]
Lynch K. City Sense and City Design. 1995;866 p.
[18]
Tekeli İ. Modernite Aşılırken Kent Planlaması, İmge Kitabevi, 2001. (in Turkish).
[19]
Southworth F. An urban goods movement model: framework and some results. Papers in Regional Science, 2005;50(1):165-184.
[20]
Çakcı I. Peyzaj planlama çalışmalarında görsel peyzaj değerlendirmesine yönelik bir yöntem araştırması, Doktora Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, 2007. (in Turkish).
[21]
Saatcı B. Kent Parklarında Peyzaj Unsurlarının Algılanması: Antalya Atatürk Kültür Park’ta Çocuklar ve Yetişkinlerle Bir Araştırma, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, Antalya, 2009. (in Turkish).
[22]
Anonymus. Apricot research report. Fırat Development Agency Papers. Malatya, TR, 2010; 63p.
[23]
Newbold P. Statistics for Business and Economics, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1995;867p.
[24]
Miran B. Basic Statistics. Aegean University Printing Office, İzmir, 2003;24-50.
[25]
Turkish Statistical Institute (TSI). Population, demography, housing and gender. Accessed March 2015, available at http://www.tuik.gov.tr.
[26]
Likert R. The method of constructing an attitude scale. readings in attitude theory and measurements. Ed. Martin Fishbein. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, USA. 1967;90-95.
[27]
Tezbaşaran A. Likert type scale development guide. Turkish Psychological Association Publications, Ankara, TR. 1997;65p.
[28]
Büyüköztürk Ş. Araştırmaya yönelik kaygı ile cinsiyet, araştırma deneyimi ve araştırma başarısı arasındaki ilişki. Eğitim ve Bilim, 1999;23(112):29-34. (in Turkish).
[29]
Keleş R. Kentleşme Politikası, Ankara, İmge Kitabevi, 2012. (in Turkish).
