Letter to the Editor

It is the editorial policy of The Journal of Architecture to invite response from those whose work is reviewed. In Volume 2, Issue 4, (Winter, 1997), Patrick Hodgkinson examined the formal and theoretical concepts of the British Library in the light of two publications by its architect, 'Architectural Reflections' and 'The Other Tradition'.     

Letter to the Editor

Abstract

This article describes a decade-long research project that intersects the practices of architecture, engineering, teaching, surrealist methods of collage, and construction technology. Two specific examples illustrate the approach to design/research pursued in this work. The first is a studio teaching environment/method that uses analogue construction materials and processes to discover architectural forms and ideas. The second is a method of forming reinforced concrete structures in flexible fabric membranes that has extraordinary potential for both architectural design and civil engineering. The latter is a technical research practice that is indistinguishable from design speculation, while the former pursues methods of teaching design that are indistinguishable from technical invention.     

Letter to the Editor

It is the editorial policy of The Journal of Architecture to invite response from those whose work is reviewed. In Volume 2, Issue 4, (Winter, 1997), Patrick Hodgkinson examined the formal and theoretical concepts of the British Library in the light of two publications by its architect, 'Architectural Reflections' and 'The Other Tradition'.     

Letter to the Editor

While most trust scales have their original versions in English, few attempts have been made to study the reliability and validity of their translated versions. Among the trust scales available in the literature, McAllister's cognition‐ and affect‐based trust scale is a self‐rating scale, developed to test the trust relationship between managers and professionals. It is translated into Chinese with translation/back‐translation technique and used in a survey among architects in Mainland China to measure interpersonal trust in a design team. Reliability analysis shows that Cronbach alphas for cognition‐based and affect‐based trust are found to be high (0.803 and 0.841 respectively). First‐order and second‐order confirmatory factor analysis with Amos 6.0 are conducted to test the validity of the two‐dimensional structure. Structural equation modelling method is used to test the nomological validity of the translated trust scale with respect to architects' willingness to share knowledge in a design team. Findings suggest that the two‐dimensional structure of the McAllister's trust scale can be applied to Chinese architects. Moreover, the cognition‐ and affect‐based trust scale could be used in a more general context. The positive relationship between the two‐dimensional trust and architects' willingness to share knowledge is also confirmed, which substantiates the nomological validity of the translated trust scale.     

Letter to the Editor

Regional planning as an academic discipline is characterized by a concern with the clarification of social objectives in the ordering of activities in supra-urban space. This concept is used to identify the principal issues of public policy that may challenge the professional competence of regional planners. Although regional planning is most appropriate for societies in transition to a mature industrial economy, continuing preoccupation with developing areas suggests the desirability of establishing regional planning as a field of specialization within leading planning schools in the United States. A curriculum is proposed.     

Letter to the Editor

Social policy is concerned with the integration of values, the principles by which these values are translated into policies and programs, assessments of the outcomes of implementing these principles in terms of the values asserted, and the search for strategies of feasible change which promise a better fit between values, principles, and outcomes. One aspect without the others is not policy analysis. Yet, current efforts have failed to integrate effectively these tasks, thus raising questions about whether social policy is a legitimate discipline. Rather than prematurely forcing a grand synthesis, this article tries to extend our understanding of the often partisan nature of policy analysis. Specifically, it illustrates how beliefs intrude at each level of analysis—in definitions of the purposes of policy, in the priorities assigned, in the institutional forms which translate beliefs to programs, in the evaluation of outcomes, and in assessments of what changes are politically feasible. The conclusion that there is no one true policy analysis frustrates the development of an independent discipline, but suggests a stance that analysts of policy might follow.