by victoria.bremer -

Blogpost #1 – First prototype and speed-dating

Prototype
For my first Prototype I picked up my research topic from last semester, where I looked into loneliness from different angles and standpoints. The central question I’ve been researching, was wether interaction design can help combat feelings of loneliness. I added the factor of interaction in public spaces as a research component, because loneliness itself is already such a big and complex topic. What I looked into during my research were installations, interactions with strangers and oneself, building communities and finding out what creates a feeling of community. For my prototype I wanted to try out a slightly different angle, where I was not primarily trying to fix the loneliness part by eliminating it through interaction with several people or creating a community, but rather focus on getting familiar or even comfortable with the feeling itself. The approach was to take away the stigma and fear around being alone somewhere and associating this with negative emotions, but rather reframing it and embracing solitude. The very basic goal here was to find out wether it could be beneficial being mindful and present in a situation and understand that being alone isn’t a bad thing and doesn’t equate to being lonely.

I chose the form of an App as a quick and easy first approach. This wouldn’t be a medium I would want to use for an actual project, since I believe we should shift our focus away from phones and screens ESPECIALLY when it comes to mindfulness and getting more in touch with our selves and other people. However, for the sake of the prototype this medium was fine for now. It’s a simple set of three screens that invite a person to sit with their solitude and focus on different things like their surroundings and their thoughts, instead of overthinking their aloneness (in a public space). The prototype serves as a reminder of how you spend your time alone and maybe even appreciate it.
The people I talked to during the „speed-dating“ process understood my topic pretty well and were able to see where I was going with this. I think it would have needed a bit more quiet time to fully test wether this concept works, but the approach itself was accepted pretty nicely.

Interview
Another thing that confirmed this and validated the approach was my interview with a classmate that I conducted for an exercise. When I asked her about loneliness, she said that she often feels most alone not necessarily when she’s by herself in public, but when she doesn’t feel understood, for example in a past relationship. She admitted that she doesn’t enjoy being out alone and prefers to share experiences with someone else. What was really helpful to hear for me in the context of this prototype was her comment on what helps her feel less alone: “Wenn viele Menschen im selben Raum sind, fühlt man sich automatisch weniger alleine. Das Teilen des Alleinseins kann verbinden.” She described a feeling of shared solitude (not needing to talk, but not feeling invisible either). Another thing she mentioned was also very interesting because this was the approach I had for a second prototype I considered. For this one I had made small cards with conversation starter topics for public spaces. This later aligned with something I talked about with my interview classmate, because she said that in order for her to actually start an interaction with a strange in a public space the context needed to be right. She described needing somewhat of an „invitation“ or in this case maybe just a conversation-starter-promt to initiate an interaction.

Reflection
Especially with social media, constant online connectedness and availability we’re not used to being alone anymore. While the loneliness epidemic is very real (!), maybe sometimes we’re not as lonely as we think we are, we’ve just developed a warped sense of the feeling. Starting to understand that our own company is also worth something can be an important step to a less lonely society.

This prototype helped me shift my own thinking. It showed me that I don’t have to solve loneliness by pushing people toward social connection. Sometimes, it can support connection with oneself by creating small spaces of reflection, comfort, or acceptance. I’m still not sure whether this is the direction I want to continue in, and I’ve since decided to pivot my topic. But this early experiment still valuable and insightful.

by victoria.bremer -

Where do we go from here? Possible approaches for designing connection

What I’ve discovered is that there’s a strong awareness of loneliness as a problem, especially in the research community. There are countless studies, statistics, and even political measures addressing it, but what’s missing are concrete steps and ideas on how to tackle it.
There are some considerations, such as guidelines for urban planners and architects, that lay the groundwork. But direct, creative, and innovative approaches are harder to find. Most existing solutions focus on open spaces, but few actively invite specific forms of interaction. What’s needed is a deep understanding of both the structural aspects of loneliness and the personal experience of it. This means understanding what people need in order to change their behavior and the way they operate in the world we currently live in. Is it the online world and our phone addiction? The fast paced life style? The way and amount we work? The ways our offices, homes an cities are designed and built?

It might be helpful to focus on specific scenarios where loneliness occurs, as its causes and effects vary depending on the context. Loneliness looks different for an older person in a retirement home than it does for a young person who just moved to a new city. Patients in hospitals or reha centers face different challenges than single parents with little time for social interaction. Immigrants who have been separated from their families and cultures experience isolation differently than someone struggling with mental health issues. People who have been removed from or disconnected from their communities also face unique forms of loneliness.

So what can design do? There are different angles and scales from which to approach this issue. One possibility is rethinking urban planning to create spaces that naturally foster human interaction. Another is shifting public perception by raising awareness and reducing the stigma around loneliness, making it something we can talk about openly rather than something to be ashamed of. Smaller interventions can also play a role, like simple design elements that spark interaction and connection, allowing relationships to develop organically.

The next step is to explore possible directions. Should this take the form of a framework or set of guidelines for urban design? A workshop that actively engages communities? A game or interactive tool that initiates connection? A digital platform that helps people meet in meaningful ways? Maybe physical installations or experimental spaces designed to encourage spontaneous interactions. Or maybe artistic works that highlight and address loneliness could invite reflection and conversation.

To move forward, more research is needed and the questions that came up during research need to be answered. Interviews, testing, and case studies could provide valuable insights into what actually works. Understanding the real experiences of people struggling with loneliness and setting a direction for a project are key to designing solutions that go beyond theory and make a real impact.

by victoria.bremer -

Designing for connection – Part 2

DESIGNING INTERACTION

In the previous post I have discussed what is important when designing the public space itself. Now it is also important to look at what aspects to consider and incorporate when designing interaction and human connection. To build successful products like installations or experiences that are meant to bring people together and create or nurture connection we must understand key elements that create connections between people.

Human connection comes from a mix of emotional, physical, and psychological factors, all of which can guide how we design interactions that bring people closer together. Physical touch is an important aspect – it releases hormones like oxytocin, reduces stress, and builds trust. Designs can for example use haptic feedback, like vibrations or warmth, to mimic touch or encourage real-life gestures and touch like handshakes or hugs [1]. Physical proximity also plays a big role – being near others naturally makes connection easier. Spaces that bring people closer, like small gathering spots can create more chances for spontaneous interaction. Similarly, eye contact creates intimacy and trust.
Shared experiences are also something that bring people together by creating a sense of belonging and togetherness. Things like group activities, team challenges, or even shared virtual spaces can help foster these bonds [2]. Another aspect that gives people a sense of identity and connection are rituals and traditions. This could mean designing recurring events or encourage and help the development of little rituals specific to an experience [3].
Active listening makes people feel heard and valued, and Emotional sharing deepens relationships when people feel safe enough to open up. Design ideas could include anonymous spaces for sharing or lighthearted prompts that encourage people to talk about their feelings [4].

WHAT DO WELL DESIGNED PLACES AND INTERACTIONS LOOK LIKE?
The Loneliness Lab is a „global collective of people and organizations on a mission to design connection in to the places where we live, work and play.“ They for example made a toolkit for tackling loneliness in areas for people involved in urban planning and helped create several projects and concepts addressing the issue.

Designing public spaces that are inclusive, welcoming, and engaging can significantly impact social interactions and well-being. Accessible wayfinding, paths, and facilities ensure these spaces are available to everyone, especially those with disabilities or those who may feel excluded. Community-generated art empowers locals to reclaim and transform neglected spaces into safer, more inviting areas. Features like lighting, street furniture, and creative installations bring life to underused spaces, as seen in Derry’s pop-up meeting pods paired with mental health training, fostering connection and well-being. Temporary or “meanwhile use” spaces, such as Story Garden in London, allow communities to actively shape their environment while policymakers learn about long-term needs. Programs like this build creative skills and tackle local issues through collaborative projects. Lighting also plays a crucial role, it can help create a feeling of safety and encourage positive behaviors, as seen in Phillips’ LED installations, which extended children’s outdoor playtime and reduced device usage. A sense of place and identity strengthens connections between residents, businesses, and organizations. For example, “Elephant Says Hi!” unites over 30 groups in Elephant and Castle to create a welcoming environment for all. Thoughtful design, such as flexible seating, human-scale areas and elements, and moveable furniture, enhances the comfort of large spaces for both individuals and groups. Long-term administration is vital for sustainability, as demonstrated by the Gillett Square Partnership, which fosters ongoing collaboration to transform a once-deprived area into a vibrant community hub [5].
Further approaches from these ideas could also go more in the direction of installations and artistic displays, that follow a specific goal or have a specific message, for example creating awareness about the topic or making a statement.

Pods in Derry
Collaborative Creative Spaces in London

Source

  1. A. H. Tejada, R. I. M. Dunbar, and M. Montero, “Physical contact and loneliness: Being touched reduces perceptions of loneliness,” Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 292–306, May 2020, doi: 10.1007/s40750-020-00138-0.
  2. V. Chung, R. Mennella, E. Pacherie, and J. Grezes, “Social bonding through shared experiences: the role of emotional intensity,” Royal Society Open Science, vol. 11, no. 10, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1098/rsos.240048.
  3. D. Robson, “The secret to long-lasting connection? Shared rituals,” Dec. 30, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20241218-michael-nortons-rituals-key-to-connection-family
  4. S. Myers, “Empathic Listening: Reports on the Experience of being Heard,” Journal of Humanistic Psychology, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 148–173, Apr. 2000, doi: 10.1177/0022167800402004.
  5. “Knowledge on Loneliness — The Loneliness Lab | Loneliness in urban spaces,” The Loneliness Lab, Dec. 29, 2020. https://www.lonelinesslab.org/knowledge-hub

by victoria.bremer -

Designing for connection – Part 1

In the last blogposts I have established, that public spaces offer a great opportunity for design to combat loneliness. Concepts like Third Places provide and ideal starting point for designers to tackle the loneliness issue ans shape social networks.
Based on my current research I would say that designing against loneliness means designing for connection. But what is important when designing public spaces with the purpose of community building in mind? How do we design spaces to nurture connection? In the following I will take a closer look at design principles, guidelines and important aspects for spaces, installations and interactions and maybe even seemingly counterintuitive design approaches addressing the problem.

DESIGNING PLACES
Designing places to combat loneliness and foster connection requires thoughtful consideration of how we interact with our environment. Accessibility is the foundation, ensuring that spaces are inclusive, safe, and easy to navigate for everyone, such as parks, libraries, or pocket spaces (a micro space serving a function different to the room or area it’s located in) seamlessly integrated into neighborhoods. Creating spaces that feel welcoming also starts with comfort – designing environments that invite people to stay. Incorporating nature boosts mental health and also fosters sociability. Adding elements of activation, like strategically placed seating, amenities, and refreshments, brings energy and encourages interaction.
It’s also important to offer choice and flexibility. People have different needs – sometimes we crave stimulation, and other times we just want a quiet spot to rest. Spaces that adapt to these preferences are more likely to feel inclusive. Designing at a human scale (the proportion of space in relation to human dimension, eg. not making spaces too large or small) adds to this sense of comfort that naturally invite connection. A strong sense of place is equally essential. Spaces that reflect local culture and shared values signal belonging and create identity. Purposeful programming (placemaking), or giving a space a specific focus – like catering to a particular group with shared needs or interests – can lower barriers to connection. For example, a park designed with community gardening in mind brings people together over a shared activity, making it easier to strike up conversations and build connections [1,2,4]. The project “the loneliness lab” uses a metaphor to define the essential elements of place making. The physical environment is considered the „hardware“ (buildings, parks), the programming of these spaces is the „software“ (activities, events, services) and the policies and standards that bring people together and prevent loneliness are the „code“ [3].
Thoughtful integration of technology can also enhance these spaces, make them more accessible and extend the sense of community beyond the physical world. But technology should always support the space, not take over, and it needs to be used carefully so it doesn’t get in the way of the real human connections these spaces are meant to create. [2]

In practice this means understanding the unique needs of a community. Conducting a needs assessment helps identify gaps in existing spaces and uncovers the types of activities people value most. Collaboration is equally vital – partnering with local businesses, organizations, and community groups builds a support network that strengthens the foundation of these spaces. Securing funding through grants, sponsorships, and partnerships ensures their creation and long-term sustainability [2].
Third places are more than just physical spaces, they play a crucial role in reducing social isolation by encouraging meaningful connections and interactions. They also act as places for civic engagement, giving people opportunities to participate in and contribute to their communities. Beyond this, third places support well-being by providing spaces where people can relax, connect with others, and share experiences. They promote a sense of belonging, strengthen social bonds, and cultivate vibrant, inclusive communities [2].

SUCCESSFUL EXAMPLES

“Gathering place” in Tulsa is a concept of a park that offers a diverse amount of activities from learning and education to events and culinary experiences: „Gathering Place aims to serve as a cornerstone for our vibrant community while improving social, economic, and environmental sustainability in Tulsa.“
https://www.gatheringplace.org/


“The High Line” in New York used to be an old elevated abandoned railroad track and was transformed into a park and community space in the middle of the city. Ideas for dEsigns were created through contests by anyone who wanted to participate and much of it is therefore created by public participation. Most of it is supported by funding and it offers many activities from food, art, performance and nature: „The High Line is both a nonprofit organization and a public park on the West Side of Manhattan. Through our work with communities on and off the High Line, we’re devoted to reimagining the role public spaces have in creating connected, healthy neighborhoods and cities.“

https://www.thehighline.org/

The implications for interaction design projects could be developing design guidelines, such as workshops or a framework, to guide the creation of third spaces for urban planners, architects, community leaders or involved citizens. Another approach could be to create a platform that fosters the development of communities dedicated to designing third places tailored to their needs, thereby encouraging active citizen participation in urban planning.

Sources

  1. HKS Architects, “Healing Loneliness: Six Ways to design for Social Connection and Community | HKS Architects,” HKS Architects, Jun. 24, 2024. https://www.hksinc.com/our-news/articles/healing-loneliness-six-ways-to-design-for-social-connection-and-community/
  2. M. Abdelhamid, “Third place theory: creating community spaces,” Urban Design lab, Oct. 20, 2024. https://urbandesignlab.in/third-place-theory-creating-community-spaces/
  3. “Knowledge on Loneliness — The Loneliness Lab | Loneliness in urban spaces,” The Loneliness Lab, Dec. 29, 2020. https://www.lonelinesslab.org/knowledge-hub
  4. “Eleven Principles for Creating Great Community Places.” https://www.pps.org/article/11steps

by victoria.bremer -

What are Fourth Spaces?

After discussing the concept of third places (informal gathering spots like cafes, libraries, and parks) I would now like to shine light on a relatively new idea that has emerged in the recent years: fourth spaces. While third places serve as a “home away from home,” fourth spaces are (depending on the definition) a response to the increasing blurring of physical and digital boundaries in our lives. They go beyond the physicality of third places, incorporating hybrid, inclusive, and adaptive elements to address the evolving ways people connect and build community today. But what exactly are fourth spaces, and how can they shape a sense of belonging?

Definition
Like with loneliness and Third Places there isn’t one single definition for fourth spaces. Some interpretations focus on the physical world and informal interactions in places that are undefined, similar to third places, while others place more emphasis on the digital world [3] and how it interacts with physical spaces. Fourth spaces can be seen as in-between places, blending traditional environments with digital layers. Not all definitions consider the digital aspect in the same way, but all highlight the role of these spaces in fostering spontaneous, casual connections that contribute to shared public life. [1, 2]

Fouth Places as the “in-between” [3]

Fourth Spaces as the digital realm [5]

Fourth spaces can counteract the impersonal aspects of “non-places” by embracing in-betweenness and publicness in their design. These spaces often include open, diverse layouts that are intentionally flexible, allowing people to adapt them for various uses that encourage spontaneous interactions.

Novel typologies – new forms of spatial design

Fourth space frameworks blend elements from traditional public spaces with modern innovations, such as integrating green spaces into urban environments or combining digital and physical interactions. In the context of fourth spaces, typology focuses on creating new forms of environments that encourage interaction, creativity, and adaptability to meet modern societal needs. These strategies ensure inclusivity and dynamic social interactions, creating environments where diverse individuals can connect and feel a sense of shared experience. By doing so, fourth spaces move beyond sterile functionality, fostering creativity, community, and belonging. [3]

An example approach to actively creating a fourth space is a project called „The Commons“. It is described as: „A modern-day town square for communal meaning-making, personal discovery, and self-expression in the heart of San Francisco.“ This concept focuses mostly on creating a place that is versatile and open in its functionality and can become whatever it needs to be at any given time. So in reference to the earlier definition, this is less an approach of combining digital and real world places, and follows more the idea of in-between places and meaning-making. They themselves define Fourth spaces as follows: „A physical space that facilitates meaning-making through intentional programming and pluralistic discussion, where individuals explore questions of ultimate concern without seeking conclusive answers. It honors the authenticity and uniqueness of each person’s path while fostering deeper bonds through consistent encounters in a supportive holding environment.“ [4]

Designing Fourth spaces is not an easy task, since it is quite hard to grasp what exactly fourth places are and how they fit into our lives. In terms of digital Fourth spaces the concept is just now emerging and changing constantly. It is important to clearly define the Fourth space in order to utilize it for designing in the context of loneliness. Is a fourth space an in-between place with unlimited potential that needs to be programmed and directed? Or is it the digital world that has emerged in the past few years? And if so, do we integrate it into the real world and try to find ways to combine the two? Or is it maybe even those places where the two meet?

Sources

  1. P. S. Aelbrecht, “‘Fourth places’: the contemporary public settings for informal social interaction among strangers,” Journal of Urban Design, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 124–152, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1080/13574809.2015.1106920.
  2. “The fourth place and re-imagining the city | Urbanarium.” https://urbanarium.org/journal/fourth-place-and-re-imagining-city
  3. D. Hardegger, “A First Holistic ‘4th Space’ Concept,” Mdpi, p. 72, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3390/proceedings2022081072.
  4. “The Commons” https://www.thesfcommons.com/
  5. T. Masuku, “The fourth place,” Showit Blog, Jun. 15, 2024. https://ticamasuku.com/the-fourth-place/

by Selina Allerstorfer -

#06 Designing for Connection: Prioritizing People in Public Space Design

Public spaces can foster social connections, promote inclusivity, and nurture a sense of community. In today’s fast-paced world, where technology often replaces face-to-face interaction and individuals retreat into private spaces, designing public areas that encourage connections has become more crucial than ever. Achieving this goal, however, requires a more human-centered approach — one that focuses not just on the physical environment, but also on how individuals experience and interact with the space. Eric Klinenberg’s concept of social infrastructure provides a compelling framework to understand why these spaces are vital for addressing inequality, polarization, and community resilience. 1 2

Social Infrastructure

Klinenberg believes that a healthy community is not only about shared values, but also about shared spaces so he defines social infrastructure as “the physical places and organizations that shape the way people interact.” As mentioned in the previous posts such places include libraries, playgrounds, parks, but also sidewalks or community gardens. Klinenberg states that the social infrastructure is as essential for society as the infrastructure for power or transportation. 1 2

Designing for people not just for purposes

People have diverse needs, given a wide range of demographics, abilities, and social backgrounds, yet surprisingly often, design decisions for public spaces are done either in favor of functionality or aesthetics alone. Designing public spaces needs to address this diversity by prioritizing accessibility, visibility and inclusivity. In the book “Life Between Buildings” Gehl highlights, that a human-centered approach to public spaces creates meaningful social interactions. 3

First life, then spaces, then buildings. The other way around never works. – Jan Gehl

Principles of Human-Centered Public Space Design

Designing public spaces with a focus on people, rather than just on aesthetic or functional objectives, is guided by human-centered principles. These principles aim to meet users’ physical needs while also addressing their emotional, social, and cultural well-being. These are some qualities of human-centered public urban spaces: 

Spatial qualities:

Accessible: Public spaces must be accessible to all individuals, regardless of socio-economic status, gender, ethnicity, or ability. Everyone should have equal opportunities to use and benefit from the space and its amenities.

Walkable: Neighborhoods designed with walkable pathways and well-connected bike lanes promote physical activity while decreasing dependence on cars. This is especially important in rural areas, where limited transportation options often make car travel the primary means of getting around.

Safe: Well-lit, open spaces without blind spots enhance safety and make public areas more inviting. Gehl highlights that poor visibility fosters fear and exclusion, while transparent, well-lit environments promote comfort, interaction, and community.

Delightful: Public spaces need to incorporate human-scale design, aesthetics and pleasant microclimate like greenery, clean streets and inviting storefront to turn these areas into destinations that foster social connections. 

Comfortable: A comfortable space for spending time and engaging in various activities like walking, standing, sitting, people-watching, and having conversations.

Socio-spatial qualities:

Liveable: Public spaces should be designed with areas for a variety of activities, from quiet reflection to lively social gatherings. This multifunctionality allows individuals to engage with the space in ways that suit their preferences and needs.

Inclusive: Inclusive and welcoming to all, free and open. Urban spaces that foster a diverse range of users and activities.

Sociable: Spaces should be designed to foster social engagement by encouraging natural gatherings. Key elements include thoughtfully arranged seating, pedestrian-friendly walkways, and dedicated areas for social interaction. 1 3 4 5 6

Participation in Urban Planning

While human-centered design provides a strong foundation, its true value lies in practical application that prioritizes community voices. A truly human-centric approach relies on understanding “what people want” by using qualitative tools that assess the social and emotional well-being of residents, including their perceptions, motivations, emotions, ways of living, and values, rather than focusing only on quantitative metrics like the number of blocks or units installed. Tools such as focus groups, workshops, and community-led design sessions help planners shape spaces that align with community needs and wishes while strengthening shared civic identities. However, often the easiest way to gain insights is by talking to the people who are affected by infrastructural proposals. 7

Meaningful public participation becomes increasingly important and is also identified as a core human need. This participation is vital for upholding the principles of participatory democracy, enhancing the effectiveness and quality of the planning process, and improving as well as validating political decision-making. In such a perspective, residents are empowered to have their say in decisions influencing their daily life, ensuring better community involvement. The goal of participatory planning is to incorporate public perspectives into the design of public spaces, recognizing residents not only as stakeholders but as active users, alongside organizations, experts, and professionals. 8

Sources:

[1] E. Klinenberg, Palaces for the People: How Social Infrastructure Can Help Fight Inequality, Polarization, and the Decline of Civic Life, New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group, 2018.

[2] Palaces for the People,” 99% Invisible, Spotify. [Online]. Available: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7fE5rzAYtoCyVMzJnuwf0H?si=b64OVUphRBaOdbErUuyFtg&t=2399. [Accessed: Jan. 13, 2025].

[3] J. Gehl, Life Between Buildings, New York: Van Nostrand-Reinhold, 1987.

[4] M. Almahmood, N. M. Gulsrud, O. Schulze, T. A. Carstensen und G. Jørgensen, „Human-centred public urban space: exploring how the ‘re-humanisation’ of cities as a universal concept has been adopted and is experienced within the socio-cultural context of Riyadh“, Urban Research & Practice, Bd. 15, Nr. 1, S. 1–24, Okt. 2018, doi: 10.1080/17535069.2018.1539512.

[5] “Human-centered design for inclusive urban environments: Building cities that embrace diversity and accessibility,” Buildings. [Online]. Available: https://www.buildings.com/architecture/article/55139034/human-centered-design-for-inclusive-urban-environments-building-cities-that-embrace-diversity-and-accessibility. [Accessed: Jan. 13, 2025].

[6] R. Oldenburg, The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community, New York: Marlowe & Company, 1999.

[7] “Making Cities Human-Centric,” One Works. [Online]. Available: https://www.one-works.com/journal/relate/making-cities-human-centric/. [Accessed: Jan. 13, 2025].[8] E. J. Cilliers und W. Timmermans, „The Importance of Creative Participatory Planning in the Public Place-Making Process“, Environment And Planning B Planning And Design, Bd. 41, Nr. 3, S. 413–429, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1068/b39098.

by victoria.bremer -

The living room of society

When talking about loneliness and human connection so called „third places“ often come up. The term was first coined by Ray Oldenburg who defined first places (home), second places (work) and finally the idea of third places, which he defines as spaces for „informal, free social interaction“, for example libraries, cafés, restaurants, museums etc. He even goes so far as to say that as places of free speech (and allowing a certain level of equality), third spaces can be seen as the “precursors of democracy“. They are places in which we meet friends and strangers, foster connections and create new ones [1]. This is especially interesting when talking about loneliness, since even small and short social interactions can improve mental wellbeing and create a feeling of belonging and connection [2].

When designing Third Places it is important to remember that they are dynamic spaces that are constantly changing, evolving and adapting: „A public space cannot be finished any more than the city in which it resides can be“ [3]. This also means that a key element of a good public space is good management, to be able to keep up with the needs and constant changes of the communities and people. Big issues when creating spaces (besides real estate prizes and restrictive regulations [4]) has been that much of the planning and building has been done from the top down, by experts such as architects and urban planners. The main factor however are the people: „Normal citizens are the best experts that you can ask for when planning how a place should be designed or used“ [3]. Citizen participation could therefor be an interesting topic for the design process of third places, asking questions like How can people be motivated to engage and participate in community building? And How can we make Third Spaces accessible for all people? [5]

“Libraries shouldn’t shush, they should roar”
In her Talk Maarya Rehman makes an interesting case about libraries as good Third Places, even or especially in the digital age. She opens up an entirely new angle to think about libraries, describing her own experience when she was given the opportunity to reopen a library in Pakistan. Rehman states that a place like a library doesn’t have just one function and can be many different things to many different people, depending on their needs. Another important attribute – as mentioned previously – is that Third Places act as social levelers. This means that it doesn’t matter who a person is (where they come from, how much money they make, etc), in Third Places like libraries they are simply a citizen. Finally she makes the point, that the existence of these Places in the real world is as relevant as ever with a large amount of our lives shifting into the digital online world where our connections become intangible data and we are constantly overloaded with information. Libraries can take many forms and help people connect over one thing at a time. Be it a common interest or a shared problem that can be solved together. [6, 7]

Several places have taken up this idea and basic concept of a library and adapted it to their needs. One of the most famous examples is Finland with its Oodi library, that not only rents out books, but is an entire three story building detected to bringing people together for creative collaboration, co-working and connecting [7]. It has a restaurant and cafe for people to eat and chat, but also several different areas of creative work like sewing machines. It is a small ecosystem with everything that is needed for different types of communities and connection. It makes co-working possible but also offers workshops for people to learn and bond over new experiences. Studios with expensive equipment can be rented to work on projects and create together. It is also inclusive to all generations offering family solutions for people with children. All in all it is an incredibly diverse place, designed for many types of different interaction and existing for many different people and a very interesting starting point for thinking about the potentials of public spaces.

Oodie Public Library, Finland https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oodi

Sources

  1. R. Oldenburg, The great good place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Da Capo Press, 1999.
  2. J. Murray, “Are third places the cure for loneliness?,” Wondermind, May 16, 2024. https://www.wondermind.com/article/third-place/
  3. “To make a great third place, get out of the way.” https://www.pps.org/article/to-create-a-great-third-place-get-out-of-the-way
  4. C. Diaz and S. M. Butler, “‘Third places’ as community builders,” Brookings, Sep. 14, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/third-places-as-community-builders/
  5. M. Lerner, “Redefining third spaces: Modern approaches to informal urban gathering places – Urban Land Magazine,” Urban Land, Aug. 16, 2024. https://urbanland.uli.org/redefining-third-spaces-modern-approaches-to-informal-urban-gathering-places
  6. M. Rehman, “Libraries – the good (third) place,” TED Talks. [Online]. Available: https://www.ted.com/talks/maarya_rehman_libraries_the_good_third_place?subtitle=en
  7. “Home – Oodi,” Oodi, Jan. 02, 2025. https://oodihelsinki.fi/en/

by victoria.bremer -

Connection as the opposite of loneliness

Having explored loneliness in depth – what it is, how it’s defined, and how it manifests – I now want to approach the topic from a different angle. Rather than solely asking how we might design loneliness away, we should also consider its opposite: connection. I want to take a closer look at how we can foster connection and community. This perspective could serve as a powerful starting point for design. After all, connection is a basic human need. In one of the best known models of human needs (Maslow’s Pyramid) it is located on the second and third level: social security, love and belonging and sense of connection [1]. This is also backed by the self-determination theory of Deci and Ryan, who propose three basic human needs, one of them being relatedness (feeling socially connected to others) [6]. Just as loneliness can isolate and harm our well-being, connection has the potential to uplift and create belonging.

But what is connection? And what makes it meaningful instead of superficial? Many people nowadays consider themselves well connected. They largely attribute this to connections via technology based mediums like social media. But while this bridges distances, it undermines deep human connections due to digital distractions and overload and lack of crucial elements for meaningful and deep connection.

In a world dominated by digital distractions, fostering meaningful connections requires intentional effort. The ease of digital interaction often leads to diminished presence – multitasking during family time, taking calls on dates, or scrolling through social media instead of engaging with friends. These habits dilute the depth of our relationships. To counter this, we can focus on strategies like prioritizing thoughtful communication, using technology to enhance rather than replace connections, building emotional literacy, practicing presence, and stepping away from devices. By doing so, we can recenter on genuine human connections and enrich our relationships, seeking out quality interactions over digital convenience [3]. This can even mean just short exchanges with people we love to increase wellbeing and make us feel better [2].

„our relationships have broadened in scope yet diminished in depth. In our pursuit of speed and convenience, we’ve inadvertently sacrificed the intentionality and deliberate slowness that enrich connections.“ [3]

There are of course several definitions of connection, each with different focus and intention. I have chosen this one as it considers interaction and fits into the research conducted thus far:
„connection is the dynamic, living tissue that exists between two people when there is some contact between them involving mutual awareness and social interaction. The existence of some interaction means that individuals have affected one another in some way, giving connections a temporal as well as an emotional dimension.“ [7]

In reference to non-places I would like to add this quote:
„Technology makes it easier to connect but often replaces in-person contact with less meaningful interactions. Even the increase in self-service kiosks and checkouts at stores cuts down on small talk with strangers, which can help with feeling connected. The shift to remote work and Zoom calls means we might be seeing our colleagues less, leading to fewer opportunities for socializing.“ [2]

It is however worth mentioning that even small talk can enhance well-being, build relational diversity, and foster belonging. Research shows casual interactions improve mood, energy, and confidence, even for introverts. Overcoming the “liking gap” (underestimating others’ enjoyment of conversations) helps people feel more connected. Techniques include viewing small talk as a “treasure hunt,” using shared surroundings as conversation starters, and moving from surface topics to personal ones. Compliments on unique self-expression or avoiding sensitive topics can deepen interactions. Practicing small talk strengthens social confidence and thereby the feeling of belonging and capability of creating connection [4].

Based on general research and theories on connection, the following summarizes the key elements of genuine human connection:
Emotional Presence – Feeling seen, heard, and understood is critical for connection (active listening and empathy)
Shared Experiences – Shared activities and experiences foster a sense of belonging and mutual understanding
Trust and Vulnerability – Trust allows people to share their true selves, and vulnerability strengthens emotional bonds
Physical Proximity and Touch – Nonverbal communication, such as eye contact, hugs or other forms of physical contact create a sense of closeness (connection is a neuro-biological phenomenon)
Shared Values and Goals – Having common beliefs or working toward shared objectives builds connection
Reciprocity – Giving and receiving support and care create mutual feelings of appreciation and connection

Relevant paper and an extensive look at connection: “The connection prescription: Using the power of social interactions and the deep desire for connectedness to empower health and wellness”

Sources

  1. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
  2. D. Henley, “The secret to feeling less lonely in only 8 minutes,” Thrive Global, Apr. 05, 2024. https://community.thriveglobal.com/the-secret-to-feeling-less-lonely-in-only-8-minutes/
  3. C. Steinhorst, “The way people people has forever changed — focuswise,” Focuswise, Mar. 18, 2024. https://www.focuswise.com/blog/from-superficial-to-significant-transforming-how-people-connect-in-the-digital-age
  4. A. Haupt, “7 Ways to Get Better at Small Talk—And Why You Should,” TIME, Jun. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://time.com/6280607/small-talk-tips-benefits/
  5. J. Martino, J. Pegg, and E. P. Frates, “The connection prescription: Using the power of social interactions and the deep desire for connectedness to empower health and wellness,” American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 466–475, Oct. 2015, doi: 10.1177/1559827615608788.
  6. Deci E L, Ryan RM. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum; 1985
  7. Dutton JE, Heaphy E. The power of high quality connections. In Cameron KS, Dutton JE, Quinn RE, eds. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler; 2003:263-278 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262725459_The_Power_of_High_Quality_Connections

by victoria.bremer -

Loneliness as a human experience

Having already defined and analyzed loneliness I will now take a phenomenological approach in order to gain a more rounded and holistic understanding of the concept. This means looking at the actual experience of what it means, feels and looks like for individuals to be lonely.
This can mean asking how loneliness is experienced physically, how it shapes our experience of time and sense of space, how it affects our relationships with others, our attitude towards other experiences or how loneliness is approached in general (negatively or positively).

Barbara Schellhammer initially sees loneliness as a structural problem and criticizes measures such as the ministry of loneliness as an approach against the loneliness epidemic. They simply treat a symptom, however the fundamental problem and one of the the origins of society’s increasing loneliness lies primarily in the fact that in recent years politicians have cut back on the funding of communal spaces that are essential for community and connection (more on this in Post 5 on Third Places). It raises the question of which loneliness should be addressed at all and clearly shows how loneliness can be a completely different experience for different people in different scenarios: From the lonely senior citizen who is only cared for by robots, to single households who almost exclusively virtually search the internet for a partner or the homeless, uprooted refugee separated from their family [1].

Nicht-Orte (Non-Places)
“Loneliness never exists in itself, but only for someone who experiences it in a very unique way. It results from a history that extends far beyond one’s own, it is rooted in lived time, in specific cultural structures and nests itself stubbornly in certain places” [1]

„[The] weakening of the identity of places to the point where they not only look alike but feel alike and offer the same bland possibilities for experience“ – Edward Relph

The phenomenon of non-places was first described by Marc Augé and describes places, especially in urban areas, that are used monofunctionally (train stations, airports, shopping centers), which is in stark contrast to traditional anthropological places that are full of culture, history, identity, communication and relation [see also: Heterotopia – places with predetermined experience that are restrictive in experience and access, such as retirement homes or hospitals]. These places are often characterized by a functionality that does not promote social contact or interpersonal interaction. They offer little space for the development of individual identity or for genuine connections between people. One reason why non-places are associated with loneliness lies in their temporary and functional nature. They are designed to be transit places where people generally only stay for a short time. This fast-paced, anonymous atmosphere can reinforce feelings of isolation [2]. As a counterpart to this, there is the idea of „in-between places“ (Zwischenorte) that promote community and open up spaces for encounters. The aim is to create spaces that promote openness, dialog and emotional contact, something that is often lost in everyday life [1,4].

Loneliness as a negative experience
Loneliness is often perceived as strange, wrong, shameful, or even taboo. Society frequently associates it with lower status or a personal deficit, creating pressure to avoid being alone. Many feel the need to justify their solitude with excuses like being unwell or having work, as if simply choosing to be alone is unacceptable. This societal stigma stems from deeply ingrained childhood experiences and cultural norms, making it difficult for some to embrace solitude. It’s not just being alone but feeling unwanted, forgotten, or unnecessary, especially by those you value most and often rooted in rejection, exclusion, or abandonment. This form of loneliness is defined by the loss of connections, a longing for companionship, and a sense of invisibility or lack of place. It can have an affect on both mind and body, leading to stress, discomfort, or unhealthy coping mechanisms.
When feeling unseen or misunderstood, loneliness can even occur when surrounded by other people.This can mean feeling isolated in social settings like parties due to superficial interactions or feeling lonely in a close relationship when feeling overlooked or unappreciated, leading to emotional invisibility. Also feeling isolated due to differences like disability, lifestyle, or personal choices can make a person feel lonely. In all cases, loneliness arises from a lack of emotional connection and the pain of feeling unseen or misunderstood, emphasizing the importance of being acknowledged and valued by others. [3]

However, loneliness does not have to be negative – it can even be appreciated or seen as positive when separated from these harmful views.

Loneliness as a positive experience
Loneliness, when chosen or voluntary, can be a source of rest, creativity, and serenity. Unlike painful loneliness, this form is experienced as harmonious, calming, and even empowering. It allows one to connect with oneself, recharge, and reflect. While virtual interactions can reduce feelings of isolation, they lack the embodied richness of real-life interactions. Occupations like reading, crafting, or listening to music can also transform loneliness into a meaningful experience. This positive form of loneliness requires personal strength and the ability to face oneself. 

Over time, one can develop an appreciation for solitude, realizing it is not a sign of inadequacy but a way to connect more deeply with oneself and even enhance future social interactions, as long as you connect with something in some way. [3] The contrast and balance between solitude and connection enhance both: those who embrace solitude can connect openly with others, and healthy relationships enable solitude to become a source of strength and inspiration [1].

Sources

  1. B. Schnellhammer, “Eine phänomenologische Annäherung an die Erfahrung der Einsamkeit”, April 2020, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340502352_Eine_phanomenologische_Annaherung_an_die_Erfahrung_der_Einsamkeit
  2. M. Augé “Orte und Nicht-Orte”, https://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de/Medienoekologie/uploads/auge-ortenichtorte.pdf
  3. K. Dahlberg, “The enigmatic phenomenon of loneliness”, July 2009, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232058607_The_enigmatic_phenomenon_of_loneliness
  4. H. Rosa, “Resonanz”, https://books.google.at/books?hl=en&lr=&id=MUeWCwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT3&dq=soziologie+der+weltbeziehung&ots=zNQRoPz929&sig=mbBXxjo9zRRTtzeJy4XLK5h8Ho0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=soziologie%20der%20weltbeziehung&f=false

by victoria.bremer -

Interaction Design, Loneliness and Public Spaces

In an increasingly urbanized and digital world, public spaces are no longer the main place for community and interaction they once were. However, while global connectedness has rapidly increased thanks to modern technology, smartphones and social media many people, despite being surrounded by others, feel disconnected, isolated and lonely. Public spaces, like parks, libraries, and cafés, have always served as places where people come together. But as our lives become more fast-paced and technology-driven, these spaces are not the first choice for seeking connection, with most digital online solutions being more convenient and accessible.

I find the paradox of a rapidly evolving world, where global connectedness and interaction are increasing, yet loneliness is at an all-time high, to be a fascinating premise. It is a topic that – at least to a certain degree – almost everyone is affected by, and understanding what differentiates different kinds of interaction and connection (e.g. online and face to face) will only become more important in the future, especially for interaction designers. I see designing connection and interaction as an important starting point to tackling many different societal issues, loneliness being only one of them.

Interaction design is the practice of designing the way people interact with technology, environments, and most importantly: each other. It therefore offers the potential to rethink how public spaces function. By creating interactive experiences, design can invite people to slow down, engage with their surroundings, and connect with others in creative and meaningful ways.
With the increasing issue of loneliness, the principles of interaction design and the potential of public spaces I want to ask and aim to answer the question how design can combat loneliness by reshaping the way we interact in public spaces.

When diving deeper into the topic of loneliness, several sub-questions arise for further exploration and understanding. To tackle loneliness at its core, it is important to understand what loneliness is exactly and what the root causes are. These foundational questions help define the phenomenon and uncover why it emerges in various contexts. The effects should also be looked at more closely, posing questions such as: What does loneliness do to us? – physically, emotionally, and socially. Especially when it comes to exploring and developing possible solutions exploring the flip side, will be important. Questions like What is connection? How do we connect? and examining the mechanisms of building (meaningful) bonds are important. Researching on a broader scale, learning about basic human needs and how communities are built is another important aspect that should be considered.

More specific topics for interaction design could include reimagining third spaces like parks or cafes to encourage interactions, designing interactive and participatory experiences, or developing digital platforms that prioritize meaningful engagement over superficial connections. Additionally, incorporating haptic and sensory elements, such as touch-based installations or shared experiences, can evoke a stronger feeling of presence and connection. It’s essential to ask whether the spaces we design truly foster connection, and whether technological connectedness actually equals connection – fulfilling our need to be understood and supported. 
Some interesting ideas for design spaces with connection and community in mind have already been implemented. In many cities, including Graz, places like „Repair Cafés“ [1] can be found. These are spaces where people can not only fix their broken items, but also socialize, connect and learn from each other. “Maggie Centers” [2] provide a place for people affected by cancer in which they can come together, talk, connect and bond over workshops and activities.

It is important to keep in mind that loneliness is a very large and hard to grasp topic. There is existing research, however the approaches and understanding of the topic still vary. Even a general consensus on how to define the term itself hasn’t been found. It can mean different things to different people and it can have various root causes, which means a solution could look very different for many people. An interesting approach could therefore be focusing on human needs in terms of social connection, belonging and purpose, which are things that directly contrast loneliness. When working on possible solutions it is important to keep in mind that there is no one cure, since loneliness as well as connection are complex and deeply personal.

In the upcoming blogposts, I will explore the broader topic of loneliness, connection, and community to gain a solid understanding and foundation of the topic. From there, I will investigate more specific elements of the research question by taking a look at spaces and environments that foster social interaction, such as third and fourth spaces, as well as principles of designing for connection and belonging. I will also look at case studies and examples of successful design interventions to draw inspiration. This journey will ideally give valuable insights and opportunities for addressing loneliness through thoughtful and intentional interaction design.

Repair Café: https://www.repaircafe-graz.at/
Maggie Centers: https://www.maggies.org/our-centres/
The UK has recently launched a campaign to end loneliness: https://www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/
The loneliness lab is a global collective of people and organizations on a mission to design connection: https://www.lonelinesslab.org/