A Study on Indoor Wayfinding Characteristics and Improvement Strategies According to Digital Literacy Differences : Focusing on Complex Commerical Spaces = 디지털 리터러시 차이에 따른 실내 길찾기 특성 및 개선방안 연구 : 복합상업공간을 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Beyond the physical act of moving, wayfinding involves intricate cognitive tasks to ensure safe and efficient spatial navigation; inefficiencies in this system are known to provoke both physical and psychological stress for users.
In modern complex commercial spaces, users with diverse purposes and circulation paths coexist due to the spatial characteristics combining commercial, cultural, and leisure functions. Therefore, wayfinding in complex commercial spaces holds significance beyond simple evacuation. Efficient circulation and clear guidance systems within complex commercial spaces lead to spatial satisfaction, which influences the increase in dwell time and improvement of revisit rates. Accordingly, unlike the past where traditional wayfinding elements were placed, wayfinding efficiency is being enhanced by actively utilizing digital technologies such as kiosks and smartphone apps. However, this digital-centric method of information provision acts as a new accessibility barrier for the digitally excluded class who are unskilled in using digital devices.

Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the physical environmental characteristics of complex commercial spaces, identify wayfinding behaviors according to the difference in digital literacy between generations, and derive inclusive wayfinding improvement measures for all generations. To this end, first, the concepts of wayfinding theory and digital literacy were established through a literature review. Second, field surveys and Depthmap analysis were conducted on five complex commercial spaces located in Seoul to quantitatively diagnose physical and spatial characteristics. Third, a survey was conducted targeting 290 adults residing in the metropolitan area to analyze the differences in wayfinding experiences and tool utilization between the digital native generation and the digital immigrant generation. Fourth, sustainable inclusive wayfinding improvement strategies were derived through interviews with experts in the fields of interior architecture and architecture.

The results of this study are as follows: First, it was confirmed that the ease of wayfinding in complex commercial spaces is complexly determined not only by physical connectivity on the plan but also by the cognitive clarity and information environment provided by the space. As a result of spatial analysis, even in spaces with high visual integration, the actual users' perceived ease of wayfinding appeared low due to environmental factors such as low ceiling heights or the repetition of similar environments. Second, it appeared that the difference in digital literacy between generations has a significant influence on digital-based indoor wayfinding ability and the types of signage used. The digital natives showed a tendency to actively utilize digital devices such as 'smartphone apps' to solve problems, whereas the digital immigrants tended to rely on physical information such as 'information desks'. However, both generations pointed out 'repetition of similar environments', 'insufficient number of signs', and 'difficulty in securing visibility due to crowds' as common discomfort factors, suggesting that securing the intuitiveness of the physical environment must precede the introduction of digital technology. Third, to create an inclusive wayfinding environment, the principles of 'Flexibility in Use', 'Perceptibility of Information', and 'Tolerance for Error' must be prioritized. In particular, expert interview results analyzed that a 'Dual-track Strategy'—where 'Advancement of Digital Technology' for the digital natives runs parallel with 'Reinforcement of Physical Environment' such as landmark planning and granting identity by zone for the digital immigrants—is effective for resolving the digital literacy gap between generations, rather than integration into a single system.

This study is significant in that it re-examines the wayfinding problem in complex commercial spaces from the perspective of digital literacy and demonstrates the necessity of a hybrid wayfinding environment where the physical environment and digital technology operate complementarily. It is expected that the results of this study will be utilized as basic data for inclusive commercial space planning responding to the future super-aged society and the era of digital transformation.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

길찾기란 단순히 이동 행위를 넘어 공간 이용자가 원하는 목적지로 안전하고 효율적으로 이동하기 위해 수행하는 일련의 인지적 문제해결 과정이다. 비효율적인 길찾기는 신체적·심리적 스트레스를 유발하기도 한다.
현대의 복합상업공간은 상업, 문화, 여가 기능이 결합된 공간 특성 상 다양한 목적과 동선을 가진 이용자가 한 공간에 공존한다. 이에 복합상업공간에서의 길찾기는 단순한 탈출 이상의 의미를 가진다. 복합상업공간 내의 효율적인 동선 및 명확한 안내 체계는 공간의 만족도로 이어지며, 이는 체류 시간 증가 및 재방문율 항상에 영향을 준다. 이에 전통적인 길찾기 요소가 배치되었던 과거와 달리, 키오스크, 스마트폰 앱 등의 디지털 기술을 적극적으로 활용함으로써 길찾기 효율성을 높이고 있다. 하지만 이러한 디지털 중심의 정보 제공 방식은 디지털 기기 활용에 미숙한 디지털 소외 계층에게 새로운 접근성 장벽으로 작용하고 있다.

이에 본 연구는 복합상업공간의 물리적 환경 특성을 분석하고, 세대 간 디지털 리터러시 차이에 따른 길찾기 행태를 규명하여 모든 세대를 위한 포용적 길찾기 개선방안을 도출하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 이를 위해 첫째, 문헌 고찰을 통해 길찾기 이론과 디지털 리터러시의 개념을 정립하였다. 둘째, 서울에 위치한 복합상업공간 5곳을 대상으로 현장조사와 Depthmap 분석을 실시하여 물리적·공간적 특성을 정량적으로 진단하였다. 셋째, 수도권 거주 성인 290명을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하여 디지털 네이티브 세대와 디지털 이민자 세대 간의 길찾기 경험 및 도구 활용 차이를 분석하였다. 넷째, 실내건축 및 건축 분야의 전문가 인터뷰를 통해 지속가능한 포용적 길찾기 개선방안을 도출하였다.

본 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 복합상업공간의 길찾기 용이성은 평면상의 물리적 연결성뿐만 아니라 공간이 제공하는 인지적 명확성과 정보 환경에 의해 복합적으로 결정됨을 확인하였다. 공간 분석 결과, 시각적 통합도가 높은 공간이라도 낮은 천장고나 비슷한 환경의 반복과 같은 환경 요인으로 인해 실제 이용자들의 체감 길찾기 용이성이 낮게 나타났다. 둘째, 세대 간 디지털 리터러시 차이는 디지털 기반의 실내공간 길찾기 능력과 사용 사이니지 형태에 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 디지털 네이티브 세대는 ‘스마트폰 앱’과 같은 디지털 기기를 능동적으로 활용하여 문제를 해결하려는 반면, 디지털 이민자 세대는 ‘안내데스크’ 등의 물리적 정보에 의존하는 경향을 보였다. 그러나 두 세대 모두 ‘비슷한 환경의 반복’와 ‘사이니지 수의 부족’, ‘인파로 인한 시야 확보의 어려움’을 공통적인 불편 요소로 지적하여 디지털 기술 도입 이전에 물리적 환경의 직관성 확보가 선행되어야 함을 시사하였다. 셋째, 포용적 길찾기 환경 조성을 위해서는 ‘유연한 사용’, ‘정보의 인지성’, ‘오류에 대한 관용성’ 원칙이 우선적으로 적용되어야 한다. 특히 전문가 인터뷰 결과, 세대 간 디지털 리터리시 차이를 해소하기 위해 단일 시스템으로의 통합보다는 디지털 네이티브 세대를 위한 ‘디지털 기술 고도화’와 디지털 이민자 세대를 위한 랜드마크 계획, 구역별 정체성 부여 등의 ‘물리적 환경 강화’가 병행되는 ‘이원화 전략’이 효과적인 것으로 분석되었다.

본 연구는 복합상업공간의 길찾기 문제를 디지털 리터러시 관점에서 재조명하고, 물리적 환경과 디지털 기술이 상호보완적으로 작동하는 하이브리드(hybrid) 길찾기 환경의 필요성을 실증하였다는 점에서 의의가 있다. 본 연구의 결과가 향후 초고령화 및 디지털 전환 시대에 대응하는 포용적 상업 공간 계획의 기초 자료로 활용되기를 기대한다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• LIST OF FIGURES ·················································································· v
• LIST OF TABLES ··················································································· vi
• ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH········································································· ix
• 1. Introduction ························································································· 1
• 1.1. Research Background ······································································· 1
• 1.2. Research Purpose ············································································· 3
• 1.3. Research Questions ··········································································· 4
• 1.4. Research Scope ············································································· 6
• 1.5. Definition of Key Terms ··································································· 8
• 2. Literature Review ················································································· 9
• 2.1. Wayfinding ···················································································· 9
• 2.1.1. Concepts of Wayfinding and Environmental Elements ························ 9
• 2.1.2. The Image of City ····································································· 13
• 2.1.3. Review of Domestic and International Prior Research for Wayfinding Ability Assessment ··································· 15
• 2.2. Complex Commercial Spaces ······························································ 22
• 2.2.1. Concept and Types of Complex Commercial Spaces ·························· 22
• 2.2.2. Wayfinding in Complex Commercial Spaces ···································· 24
• 2.3. Digital Litercay ·············································································· 26
• 2.3.1. Diffusion of Innovations Theory ···················································· 26
• 2.3.2. Concept and Types of Digital Literacy ············································ 29
• 2.3.3. Review of Domestic and International Prior Research for Digital Literacy Assessment ···································· 32
• 2.4. Design Standards Considering Diverse Users ········································· 34
• 2.4.1. Universal Design ······································································ 34
• 2.4.2. Inclusive Design ········································································ 39
• 2.4.3. Design for All ········································································ 42
• 3. Research Method ·················································································· 44
• 3.1. Field Survey ················································································· 46
• 3.1.1. Survey Subjects ········································································· 46
• 3.1.2. Survey Methods and Procedures ···················································· 47
• 3.1.3. Survey Tools and Contents ·························································· 48
• 3.2. Depthmap Analysis ··········································································· 49
• 3.2.1. Survey Methods and Procedures ···················································· 49
• 3.2.2. Survey Tools and Contents ·························································· 49
• 3.3. Questionnaire Survey ····································································· 51
• 3.3.1. Survey Subjects ········································································· 51
• 3.3.2. Pilot Survey ············································································· 51
• 3.3.3. Survey Methods and Procedures ···················································· 52
• 3.3.4. Survey Tools and Contents ·························································· 52
• 3.3.5. Analysis Methods ······································································· 60
• 3.4. Expert Interview ············································································· 62
• 3.3.1. Survey Subjects ········································································· 62
• 3.1.2. Survey Methods and Procedures ···················································· 62
• 3.1.3. Survey Tools and Contents ·························································· 62
• 4. Research Results ·················································································· 65
• 4.1. Field Survey Results ········································································ 65
• 4.1.1. Lotte World Mall Field Survey Results ··········································· 65
• 4.1.2. I-Park Mall Field Survey Results ··················································· 68
• 4.1.3. Times Square Field Survey Results ················································ 71
• 4.1.4. COEX Mall Field Survey Results ··················································· 74
• 4.1.5. The Hyundai Seoul Field Survey Results ········································ 77
• 4.1.6. Comprehensiv Analysis ································································ 79
• 4.2. Depthmap Analysis Results ······························································· 82
• 4.2.1. VGA Analysis Results ······························································· 82
• 4.2.2. Axial Map Analysis Results ························································ 85
• 4.2.3. Comprehensive Analysis ······························································· 87
• 4.3. Questionnaire Survey Results ····························································· 88
• 4.3.1. Pilot Survey Results ······························································· 88
• 4.3.2. General Information of Survey Participants ······································ 88
• 4.3.3. Reliability Analysis by Item ························································· 90
• 4.3.4. Digital Literacy Levels by Age Group ··········································· 92
• 4.3.5. Verification of Differences in Digital Literacy and Indoor Wayfinding Ability Between Generations ·························· 94
• 4.3.6. Correlation Analysis Between Digital Literacy and Indoor Wayfinding Ability ·························· 97
• 4.3.7. Frequency and Reason for Visiting Complex Commercial Spaces ·········· 100
• 4.3.8. Ease of Wayfinding in Complex Commercial Spaces ·························· 103
• 4.3.9. Analysis of Differences in Signage Usage Rates Between Generations ······································ 105
• 4.3.10. Discomfort Factors When Using Complex Commercial Spaces ············ 107
• 4.3.11. Improvement Measures for Wayfinding in Complex Commercial Spaces ········································· 113
• 4.3.12. Sub-conclusion ········································································· 120
• 4.4. Expert Interview Results ·································································· 123
• 4.4.1. General Information of Expert Interview Participants ························· 123
• 4.4.2. Current Status of Wayfinding in Complex Commercial Spaces ············· 124
• 4.4.3. Architectural Wayfinding Elements in Complex Commercial Spaces ······ 128
• 4.4.4. Wayfinding Operation Methods in Complex Commercial Spaces ··········· 135
• 4.4.5. Improvement Measures for Wayfinding in Complex Commercial Spaces ··········································· 139
• 4.4.6. Sub-conclusion ··········································································· 141
• 4.5. Comprehensive Discussion and Improvement Strategies ···························· 144
• 5. Conclusion and Suggestion ····································································· 147
• 5.1. Research Summary and Conclusion ····················································· 147
• 5.2. Limitations and Suggestions ······························································· 151
• REFERENCES ························································································· 152
• ABSTRACT IN KOREAN ·········································································· 159