IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i16p7527-d1728735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on Design of Underground Space for Refuge Based on Environmental Psychology and Virtual Reality

Author

Listed:
  • Yufei Liu

    (College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Yukuan Ou-Yang

    (The Architectural Design & Research Institute of Zhejiang University Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310028, China)

  • Jian Wang

    (The Architectural Design & Research Institute of Zhejiang University Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310028, China
    Center for Balance Architecture of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310028, China)

  • Lei Wang

    (The Architectural Design & Research Institute of Zhejiang University Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310028, China)

  • Bing Li

    (The Architectural Design & Research Institute of Zhejiang University Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310028, China
    Center for Balance Architecture of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310028, China)

  • Zimo Chen

    (Jangho College of Architecture, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China)

Abstract

Underground spaces hold significant potential for enhancing urban resilience against disasters, a key dimension of sustainable urban development. However, due to persistent associations of underground environments with negative psychological perceptions, these spaces—despite their superior protective advantages—are often overlooked as viable refuge options during emergencies. Guided by the theoretical framework of environmental psychology, this research focuses on underground parking garages in Hangzhou, China as its primary research object. The target participants are residents of Hangzhou aged 18–58 years (encompassing diverse occupations such as students, office workers, and service industry employees), who represent potential users of such spaces as refuges. To explore human behavioral patterns, psychological responses, and needs related to underground refuge spaces, we employed a two-phase methodology: first, a questionnaire survey to capture broader behavioral tendencies and subjective perceptions; complementing this, Virtual Reality (VR) experiments—a more immersive method—utilizing semantic analysis and the Likert scale to assess psychological indicators influenced by underground environments. The experimental data were analyzed via mean analysis, correlation analysis, and multiple linear regression analysis to identify the key environmental factors that influence psychological responses, as well as their optimal design parameters. These analyses reveal significant correlations between various environmental factors and psychological indicators. This research synthesizes individuals’ psychological tendencies in underground environments and proposes quantitative physical design guidelines to meet fundamental psychological needs. The findings provide theoretical and practical support for the design of underground space for refuge and the development of sustainable urban emergency shelter systems, thereby contributing to resilient and sustainable urban development.

Suggested Citation

  • Yufei Liu & Yukuan Ou-Yang & Jian Wang & Lei Wang & Bing Li & Zimo Chen, 2025. "Research on Design of Underground Space for Refuge Based on Environmental Psychology and Virtual Reality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-32, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:16:p:7527-:d:1728735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/16/7527/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/16/7527/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yuting Wu & Hongyan Wen & Meichen Fu, 2024. "A Review of Research on the Value Evaluation of Urban Underground Space," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-28, April.
    2. Volchko, Yevheniya & Norrman, Jenny & Ericsson, Lars O. & Nilsson, Kristina L. & Markstedt, Anders & Öberg, Maria & Mossmark, Fredrik & Bobylev, Nikolai & Tengborg, Per, 2020. "Subsurface planning: Towards a common understanding of the subsurface as a multifunctional resource," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Jelle Brands & Jochem Milan Jansen & Janne van Doorn & Remco Spithoven, 2025. "Measuring and Explaining Situational Fear of Crime: An Experimental Study Into the Effects of Disorder, Using Virtual Reality and Multimodal Measurement," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 65(3), pages 673-690.
    4. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Annabelle Workman & Penelope J. Jones & Amanda J. Wheeler & Sharon L. Campbell & Grant J. Williamson & Chris Lucani & David M.J.S. Bowman & Nick Cooling & Fay H. Johnston, 2021. "Environmental Hazards and Behavior Change: User Perspectives on the Usability and Effectiveness of the AirRater Smartphone App," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Zha, Wenbin & Li, Jian, 2025. "Understanding commuters' perceived accessibility and travel intentions under rainstorm warnings in Shanghai, China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 276-294.
    3. Peng Dai & Song Han & Guannan Fu & Hui Fu & Yanjun Wang, 2023. "Optimization Path of Metro Commercial Passageway Based on Computational Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-20, July.
    4. Lucie Kubalíková & Marie Balková & Aleš Bajer & Karel Kirchner, 2024. "Is It Always Advisable to Promote Geodiversity and Geoheritage in a Traditional Recreational Area? A Case Study from Brno Reservoir and Its Surroundings (Czechia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-29, November.
    5. Julia S. Becker & Sally H. Potter & Lauren J. Vinnell & Kazuya Nakayachi & Sara K. McBride & David M. Johnston, 2020. "Earthquake early warning in Aotearoa New Zealand: a survey of public perspectives to guide warning system development," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. David V. Pynadath & Bistra Dilkina & David C. Jeong & Richard S. John & Stacy C. Marsella & Chirag Merchant & Lynn C. Miller & Stephen J. Read, 2023. "Disaster world," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 84-117, March.
    7. Choi, Sunkyung & Maharjan, Rajali & Hong, Tran Thi Nhat & Hanaoka, Shinya, 2024. "Impact of information provision on tsunami evacuation behavior of residents and international tourists in Japan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 264-273.
    8. Yuting Wu & Hongyan Wen & Meichen Fu, 2024. "A Review of Research on the Value Evaluation of Urban Underground Space," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-28, April.
    9. Lucie Kubalíková & Aleš Bajer & Marie Balková & Karel Kirchner & Ivo Machar, 2022. "Geodiversity Action Plans as a Tool for Developing Sustainable Tourism and Environmental Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, May.
    10. Manqing Wu & Guochun Wu, 2020. "An Analysis of Rural Households’ Earthquake-Resistant Construction Behavior: Evidence from Pingliang and Yuxi, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.
    11. Lingxin Min & Zhiyuan Yu, 2025. "Intergenerational Information-Sharing Behavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China: From Protective Action Decision Model Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-25, August.
    12. Ji Yun Lee & Fangjiao Ma & Yue Li, 2022. "Understanding homeowner proactive actions for managing wildfire risks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 114(2), pages 1525-1547, November.
    13. Iva Kolenković Močilac & Marko Cvetković & David Rukavina & Ana Kamenski & Marija Pejić & Bruno Saftić, 2025. "Climbing the Pyramid: From Regional to Local Assessments of CO 2 Storage Capacities in Deep Saline Aquifers of the Drava Basin, Pannonian Basin System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-23, July.
    14. Michael R. Greenberg & Marc D. Weiner & Robert Noland & Jeanne Herb & Marjorie Kaplan & Anthony J. Broccoli, 2014. "Public Support for Policies to Reduce Risk After Hurricane Sandy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 997-1012, June.
    15. Jiaqi Liu & Xiaodan Yu, 2025. "Social Media as a Catalyst for Sustainable Public Health Practices: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis of Protective Behaviors in China During the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-23, May.
    16. Graf, Julia & Renner, Renate & Klebel, Thomas, 2025. "Bridging Warning and Adaptation Addressing Risk Communication Strategies for Short-Term Natural Hazard Warnings and Long-Term Risk Adaptation – A Scoping Review," SocArXiv tmwrv_v1, Center for Open Science.
    17. Andrea Cerase & Lorenzo Cugliari, 2023. "Something Still Remains: Factors Affecting Tsunami Risk Perception on the Coasts Hit by the Reggio Calabria-Messina 1908 Event (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    18. Taixiang Duan & Hechao Jiang & Xiangshu Deng & Qiongwen Zhang & Fang Wang, 2020. "Government Intervention, Risk Perception, and the Adoption of Protective Action Recommendations: Evidence from the COVID-19 Prevention and Control Experience of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-17, May.
    19. Raul P. Lejano & Muhammad Saidur Rahman & Laila Kabir, 2020. "Risk Communication for Empowerment: Interventions in a Rohingya Refugee Settlement," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2360-2372, November.
    20. Joop de Boer & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Teun Terpstra, 2014. "Improving Flood Risk Communication by Focusing on Prevention‐Focused Motivation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 309-322, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:16:p:7527-:d:1728735. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.