Journal of Urban Studies on Space and Place

Reconfiguration of Social Interaction Patterns in Contemporary Urban Spaces in the Face of Interactive Technologies

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Marziyeh Moatarian
Mohammad Reza Noghsan Mohammadi

Department of Urbanism, School of Art and Architecture, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22034/jspr.2026.2078498.1211
Abstract
Introduction




Journal of Urban Studies on Space and Place
Vol., No | https://jspr.jdisf.ac.ir/
ISSN: 3060-6985 | EISSN: 3060-7094




DOI: https://doi.org مقاله پژوهشی
Received: Revised: Accepted: Published:




Reconfiguration of Social Interaction Patterns in Contemporary Urban Spaces in the Face of Interactive Technologies




Public urban spaces have traditionally been studied through Gehl’s framework of necessary, optional, and social activities. Emerging interactive technologies, however, are reshaping these patterns by mediating encounters and altering motivations, rhythms, and spatial use. Chaharbagh Abbasi in Isfahan, with its high walkability, mixed uses, and social significance, provides an ideal case to examine this shift. An agent-based model was developed to simulate how technology changes the distribution, co-occurrence, and intensity of these activities, revealing broader transformations in urban interaction.
The theoretical framework of this study builds upon classical and contemporary perspectives on urban space and social interaction. Traditionally, urban spaces have been shaped by cultural, social, and economic forces, and their vitality has been understood to depend on human presence and face-to-face interaction. Gehl’s typology of necessary, optional, and social activities emphasizes that improved environmental quality enhances opportunities for social interaction, reinforcing urban liveliness. Similarly, Lefebvre’s conception of space as both product and producer of social relations highlights the centrality of interaction in shaping urban identity.
In recent decades, rapid technological transformation has fundamentally reconfigured the meaning and function of urban space. With the emergence of interactive technologies, smart infrastructures, and spatial data networks, cities have evolved into hybrid environments where physical and digital layers coexist. Technology no longer acts merely as a supportive tool but as an interactive agent capable of shaping user behavior and mediating new forms of engagement. Consequently, interaction in contemporary urban space is no longer limited to human–human encounters; it now encompasses human–technology and technology–technology relations, giving rise to hybrid spatial experiences and redefining the components of interaction—actors, goals, temporalities, spatial settings, and modes of exchange.
These shifts challenge traditional urban design criteria, which relied primarily on human-scale, visibility, accessibility, and face-to-face engagement. As technological infrastructures become integral to urban experience, new criteria such as environmental interactivity, data integration, spatial adaptability, and responsive behavior emerge as determinants of design quality. Urban spaces must now support dynamic, multi-agent patterns of interaction shaped by both human and technological actors.
Grounded in this conceptual transition, the present research employs agent-based modeling to examine how evolving interaction goals—from human-human to human-technology and technology-technology—reshape behavioral patterns in urban environments. The study argues that understanding these transformations is essential for redefining urban design principles in the era of intelligent, interactive spaces.

Keywords

Social Interaction
Urban Space
Interactive Technology
Subjects
-         Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction (Center for Environmental Structure Series). Oxford University Press..
-         Askarizad, R., He, J., & Dastoum, M. (2025). Gender disparity in public spaces of Iran: Design for more inclusive cities. Cities, 158, Article 105651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105651
-         Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (2023). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge (Original work published 1966). Penguin Social Sciences.
-         Carr, N. (2011). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton & Company.
-         Castells, M. (1992). The informational city: Economic restructuring and urban development (Reprint ed.). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
-         Castells, M. (2009). The Rise of the Network Society (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
-         Collins, R. (2005). Interaction Ritual Chains (Princeton Studies in Cultural Sociology). Princeton University Press.
-         Cosgrave, C., Malatzky, C., & Gillespie, J. (2022). Sense of place, place attachment, and belonging-in-place in empirical research: A scoping review for rural health workforce research. Health & Place, 74, Article 102756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2022.102756
-         Crosas, C., Gómez-Escoda, E., & Villavieja, E. (2024). Interplay between Land Use Planning and Functional Mix Dimensions: An Assemblage Approach for Metropolitan Barcelona. Sustainability, 16(17), 7734. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177734
-         de Souza e Silva, A. (2006). From cyber to hybrid: Mobile technologies as interfaces of hybrid spaces. Space and Culture, 9(3), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331206289022
-         de Souza e Silva, A. (2009). Hybrid reality and location-based gaming: Redefining mobility and game spaces in urban environments. Simulation & Gaming, 40(3), 404–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878108314643
-         Evans, L., & Saker, M. (2017). Location-based social media: Space, time and identity. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49472-2
-         Feng, J., & Hou, H. (2023). Review of research on urban social space and sustainable development. Sustainability, 15(22), 16130. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152216130
-         Foth, M., Brynskov, M., & Ojala, T. (Eds.). (2015). Citizen’s right to the digital city: Urban interfaces, activism, and placemaking. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-919-6
-         Gao, F., Cheng, H., Li, Z., & Yu, L. (2024). Revisiting the impact of public spaces on the mental health of rural migrants in Wuhan: An integrated multi-source data analysis. International Journal of Health Geographics, 23(1), Article 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-024-00365-8
-         Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings: Using public space (6th ed.). Island Press. (Original work published 1971)
-         Gordon, E., & de Souza e Silva, A. (2011). Net locality: Why location matters in a networked world. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340679
-         Hampton, K. N., & Wellman, B. (2018). Lost and saved . . . again: The moral panic about the loss of community takes hold of social media. Contemporary Sociology, 47(6), 642–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094306118805415
-         Holland, C., Clark, A., Katz, J., & Peace, S. (2007). Social interactions in urban public places. Policy Press.
-         Jennings, V., & Bamkole, O. (2019). The relationship between social cohesion and urban green space: An avenue for health promotion. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(3), Article 452. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030452
-         Kitchin, R., Cardullo, P., & Di Feliciantonio, C. (2019). Citizenship, justice, and the right to the smart city. In P. Cardullo, C. Di Feliciantonio, & R. Kitchin (Eds.), The right to the smart city (pp. 1–24). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78769-139-120191001
-         Lee, J. H., Ostwald, M. J., & Kim, M. J. (2021). Characterizing Smart Environments as Interactive and Collective Platforms: A Review of the Key Behaviors of Responsive Architecture. Sensors, 21(10), 3417. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21103417
-         Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Blackwell. (Original work published 1974)
-         Licoppe, C. (2004). ‘Connected’ presence: The emergence of a new repertoire for managing social relationships in a changing communication technoscape. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22(1), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1068/d323t
-         Lim, C., Cho, G.-H., & Kim, J. (2021). Understanding the linkages of smart-city technologies and applications: Key lessons from a text mining approach and a call for future research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 170, 120893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120893
-         Manzo, L. C., & Perkins, D. D. (2006). Finding common ground: The importance of place attachment to community participation and planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 20(4), 335–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412205286160
-         Mateo-Babiano, I., & Fong, A. (2024). Integrating multiculturalism in public space policy and place governance. Urban Governance, 4(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2024.01.001
-         Mitchell, W. J. (1996). City of bits: Space, place, and the infobahn (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
-         Nesbitt, L., Meitner, M. J., Girling, C., Sheppard, S. R. J., & Lu, Y. (2017). Who has access to urban vegetation? A spatial analysis of distributional green equity in 10 US cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 181, 51–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.08.007
-         Osasumwen, O., Rahimi, A., Arghavan, F. S., & Boussios, S. (2025). Urban microclimates and their relationship with social isolation: A review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(6), Article 909. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22060909
-         Pan, W., Ghoshal, G., Krumme, C., Cebrian, M., & Pentland, A. (2013). Urban characteristics attributable to density-driven tie formation. Nature Communications, 4, 1961. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2961
-         Peng, Y. (2022). Comfort in urban public spaces [Doctoral dissertation, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven]. TU/e Research Portal. https://research.tue.nl/en/publications/comfort-in-urban-public-spaces
-         Qi, J., Mazumdar, S., & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2024). Understanding the relationship between urban public space and social cohesion: A systematic review. International Journal of Community Well-Being, 7, 401–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42413-024-00204-5
-         Qiu, B., Song, P., Tao, X. et al. (2025). Construction of urban collective memory maps based on social media data: a case study of Nanjing, China. npj Herit. Sci. 13, 259. https://doi.org/10.1038/s40494-025-01806-8
-         Quiring, O., & Schweiger, W. (2008). Interactivity: A review of the concept and a framework for analysis. Communications, 33(2), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun.2008.009
-         Roe, J. (2020). Accessibility and spontaneous interactions in green urban spaces. Landscape Research, 45(6), 702–715. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2020.1748295
-         Sennett, R. (2018). Building and dwelling: Ethics for the city. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.5666735
-         Shi, S., Gou, Z., & Chen, L. H. C. (2014). How does enclosure influence environmental preferences? A cognitive study on urban public open spaces in Hong Kong. Sustainable Cities and Society, 13, 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.04.011
-         Shirazi, M. R., & Keivani, R. (2019). The triad of social sustainability: Defining and measuring social sustainability of urban neighbourhoods. Urban Research & Practice, 12(4), 359–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2018.1469039
-         Staples, S. L. (1996). Human response to environmental noise: Psychological research and public policy. American Psychologist, 51(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.143
-         Sugandha, Freestone, R., & Favaro, P. (2022). The social sustainability of smart cities: A conceptual framework. City, Culture and Society, 29, 100460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2022.100460
-         Townsend, A. M. (2001). Network cities and the global structure of the Internet. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(10), 1697–1716. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121957998
-         Van Neste, S. L., & Hillier, J. (2024). Public spaces of social interaction is there a role for social media platforms? International Social Science Journal, 74(251), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12548
-         Voordijk, H., Giezen, M., & Dewulf, G. (2019). Smart city technologies and figures of technical mediation. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 11(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2019.1634141
-         Whyte, W. H. (1980). The social life of small urban spaces. Project for Public Spaces
-         Yin, Y., Shao, Y., Meng, Y., & Hao, Y. (2023). The effects of the natural visual-aural attributes of urban green spaces on human behavior and emotional response. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1186806. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1186806
-         Zahnow, R., Walsh, M., & Mair, P. (2024). Place type or place function: What matters for place attachment? American Journal of Community Psychology, 73(3-4), 446–460. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12722
Journal of Urban Studies on Space and Place

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 22 July 2026

  • Receive Date 23 November 2025
  • Revise Date 20 April 2026
  • Accept Date 22 July 2026

Home

Submit Manuscript

Contact Us