Page - 128 - in Critical Issues in Science, Technology and Society Studies - Conference Proceedings of the 17th STS Conference Graz 2018

Conclusion This study was the pilot study of a Ph.D. research. It revealed critical qualitative results in search of biophilic effects on the user preferences. Even it does not seem to be directly related to sustainability; it has a significant value to understand the motivations behind the user decision mechanism. This research is expected to bring a new perspective to the sustainability of user behaviors through new design methods by considering biophilic effects on users. Orians indicated that loving an object which had helped to the survival of our predecessors was genetically transferred, which means that skill had been natural selected. Similarly, the displeasure of an object that had endangered the survival and proliferation was also coded in our brains (Orians, 2014). In support of Orians’ words, this study has shown that there is the need to be aware of the functionality and the productivity of the objects which can dominate the user preferences. That would also be the main issue to be considered in the design process to manipulate the user behaviors by encouraging more sustainable ways of use. Bibliography Fromm, Erich (1964), The Heart of Man. Electronic Book. New York: Harper & Row. Benyus, Janine M. (2002), Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. New York: Harper Perennial. (Original work published in 1997). Heerwagen, Judith H. (2003), Bio-inspired Design: What can we learn from nature? U.S. Green Building Council, http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Archive/External/Docs8542.pdf [downloaded 13 April 2013] Heerwagen, Judith H. (2011), ‘Biophilia, health and well-being.’ in Campbell, Lindsay and Wiesen, Anne (Eds.), Restorative Commons: Creating Health and Well-being through Urban Landscapes. Pennsylvania: USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station, 38-57, https:/ /www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr-nrs-p-39papers/04-heerwagen-p-39.pdf [downloaded 27 April 2018] Kellert, Stephen. R. (1993), ‘The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature.’ In Kellert, Stephen R. and Wilson, Edward O. (Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis. Electronic Book Washington: Island Press, 42–70. Kellert, Stephen. R. (2008), ‘Dimensions, elements, and attributes of biophilic design.’ In Kellert, Stephen R., Heerwagen, Judith H. and Mador, Martin L. (Eds.), Biophilic design: The theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 3-19. Orians, Gordon H., 2014. Snakes, Sunrises, and Shakespeare: How Evolution Shapes Our Loves and Fears. Electronic Book, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pantzar, Mika (1997), ‘Domestication of Everyday Life Technology: Dynamic Views on the Social Histories of Artifacts.’ Design Issues 13 (3): 52-65. Salingaros, Nikos A. (2015), Biophilia and Healing Environments: Healthy Principles For Designing the Built World. New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC. Ulrich, Roger (2008), ‘Biophilic Theory and Research for Healthcare Design’. In Kellert, Stephen R., Heerwagen, Judith H. and Mador, Martin L. (Eds.), Biophilic design: The theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 87-106. Wilson, Edward O. (1984), Biophilia: The human bond with other species. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 128