Quantifying intergenerational differences in community public space perception: a multimodal EEG-eye tracking study


Abstract

Against the dual backdrop of global aging and urbanization, the design of community public spaces for intergenerational integration has become a crucial approach to enhancing the quality of life for children and the elderly. However, existing studies mostly rely on subjective questionnaires and interviews, which struggle to reveal the potential intergenerational neurocognitive differences—particularly lacking quantitative analysis of the subconscious mechanisms in spatial perception between the elderly and children. This study aims to construct a multimodal evaluation system by integrating EEG and Eye tracking technology to uncover the differences in neurobehavioral responses between the elderly and child groups in community public spaces. In this study, stratified random sampling was adopted to select community samples and collect spatial images. Based on computer vision (Segment Anything Model), spatial element identification and classification were conducted. Through controlled experiments, EEG and eye-tracking data of 40 participants (25 elderly and 15 children) were synchronously collected to reveal intergenerational differences in spatial cognition. The results show that the elderly and children exhibit significantly different "neuro-behavioral response patterns" in area typologies such as Community Service Area s and Leftover Area s . For instance, the elderly present a "high emotional arousal—high functional attention" pattern in Community Service Area s , while children demonstrate "high exploration—high dynamic attention" characteristics in Leftover Area s . These findings provide empirical evidence for the design of spaces for intergenerational integration from the neurocognitive perspective and offer scientific support for the refined and human-oriented construction strategies of community public spaces.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].