نشریه علمی

چارچوب مفهومی تجربۀ مکان در گردشگری فرهنگ ایران: پیوند ادراک حسی-حرکتی و حافظۀ فرهنگی

دوره 7، شماره 25
تابستان 1405
صفحه 56-69

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

مرکز اسناد فرهنگی آسیا، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، خاورمیانه

چکیده
بخش مهمی از ادبیات گردشگری در ایران، تجربۀ بازدید از میراث را به رضایت، تصویر مقصد یا ویژگی‌های کالبدی تقلیل می‌دهد؛ در مقابل، کاربرد اصطلاح «پدیدارشناسی» نیز غالباً بدون دادۀ زیسته یا منطق روش‌شناختی روشن انجام می‌شود. در نتیجه، سازوکار پیوند میان بدن، حافظه، تعامل و تفسیر در تجربۀ مکان همچنان تبیین نشده است. این پژوهش با به‌کارگیری «گردشگری فرهنگ» به‌عنوان برچسبی تحلیلی برای وجه رابطه‌ای و فرایندی تجربه، چارچوبی برای تحلیل تجربۀ مکان در بافت‌های تاریخی ایران ارائه می‌کند. این اصطلاح گونه‌ای مستقل از «گردشگری فرهنگی» نیست، بلکه بر چگونگی شکل‌گیری معنا در رابطه میان بازدیدکننده، مکان و دیگر کنشگران تأکید دارد. این مقاله از نوع پژوهش‌های نظری-انتقادی و ترکیب نظری است. هستۀ تحلیلی از بیش از سی منبع بنیادین و پژوهش در حوزه‌های پدیدارشناسی ادراک، نظریۀ مکان، حافظۀ فرهنگی، مطالعات اجرا و تجربۀ گردشگری تشکیل شد. منابع براساس ارتباط مستقیم با سازوکار تجربه، قابلیت ردیابی کتاب‌شناختی و ظرفیت پیوند میان سطوح خرد و فرهنگی انتخاب شدند. تحلیل در چهار مرحلۀ مفهومی، مقایسۀ مستمر، تحلیل موارد ناسازگار و صورت‌بندی روابط انجام شد. تجربۀ مکان فرایندی پویا و بازخوردی است که از تعامل چهار سازوکار شکل می‌گیرد: توجه حسی‌ـ‌حرکتی، فعال‌شدن حافظۀ فرهنگی، شکل‌گیری مشترک معنا در تعامل اجتماعی و تفسیر نمادین. «بازنگری در خویشتن» پیامدی احتمالی و زمان‌مند است، نه مرحله‌ای ثابت از تجربه. ویژگی‌های حسی مکان نیز به‌تنهایی معنا تولید نمی‌کنند؛ معنا در ارتباط با پیش‌دانسته‌ها، روایت‌ها، کنش دیگران و موقعیت اجتماعی گردشگر شکل می‌گیرد. دستاورد اصلی پژوهش، ارائۀ چارچوبی برای بررسی تجربی تجربۀ مکان در بافت‌های تاریخی ایران است. این چارچوب، تجربه را پدیده‌ای ثابت و یکسان نمی‌داند، بلکه آن را وابسته به شرایط فرهنگی، اجتماعی و مکانی و قابل بررسی ازطریق سازه‌ها و نشانه‌های مشخص می‌داند. این چارچوب می‌تواند در طراحی تفسیر میراث، آموزش راهنمایان و پژوهش‌های میدانی به کار رود؛ بااین‌حال، بومی‌بودن آن تنها پس از بررسی و مقایسۀ تجربی در بافت‌های مختلف ایران قابل ارزیابی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

A Conceptual Framework for Place Experience in Iran’s Tourism of Culture: Integrating Sensorimotor Perception and Cultural Memory

نویسنده English

Zohreh Ataei Ashtiani
Asian Cultural Documentation Center/Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

Tourism research in Iran often approaches heritage experience through outcomes such as satisfaction and destination image or through the physical attributes of place. Phenomenological terminology is also sometimes used without systematic lived-experience data or a clear methodological logic. Consequently, the mechanisms linking bodily perception, memory, social interaction, and interpretation remain insufficiently theorized. How do sensorimotor perception, cultural memory, social interaction, and interpretation interact in shaping place experience in Iran’s historical contexts? This study uses “Tourism of Culture” as an analytical label for the relational, embodied, and interpretive dimensions of cultural tourism and develops a conceptual framework for place experience in Iran’s historical contexts. The term does not denote a distinct form of tourism; rather, it foregrounds how meaning emerges among visitors, places, narratives, and other social actors. The article adopts a theoretical-critical design based on theory synthesis, drawing on literature in phenomenology of perception, place theory, cultural memory, tourism performance, hermeneutics, and tourism experience. Sources were selected for relevance, traceability, and their capacity to connect individual experience with broader cultural and social contexts. Analysis involved conceptual extraction, cross-source comparison, examination of inconsistent cases, and formulation of theoretical relationships. Place experience is conceptualized as a dynamic feedback process involving four interacting mechanisms: sensorimotor attention, activation of cultural memory, co-construction of meaning through social interaction, and symbolic interpretation. Self-reappraisal is not a fifth mechanism but a possible, conditional, and time-dependent outcome. Sensory features do not generate cultural meaning by themselves; their significance emerges through prior knowledge, narratives, social encounters, and moderating factors. The framework is empirically examinable and treats place experience as culturally, socially, spatially, and temporally situated. It can inform heritage interpretation, tour guide training, and future field research. Its specifically Iranian applicability requires comparative empirical examination across diverse sites and visitor groups.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Tourism of Culture
  • Place Experience
  • Sensorimotor Attention
  • Cultural Memory
  • Co-construction of Meaning
  • Symbolic Interpretation
Agapito, D., Mendes, J., & Valle, P. (2013). Exploring the conceptualization of the sensory dimension of tourist experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 2(2), 62-73. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259172407_Exploring_the_conceptualization_of_the_sensory_dimension_of_tourist_experiences 
Assmann, J. (2011). Cultural memory and early civilization: Writing, remembrance, and political imagination. Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/Cultural_Memory_and_Early_Civilization.html?id=kxltuUm1KDcC 
Assmann, J., & Czaplicka, J. (1995). Collective memory and cultural identity. New German Critique, 65, 125–133. https://doi.org/10.2307/488538 
Azimi, S., & Partovi, P. (2020). The phenomenology of lived experiences of Yazd historical district residents in encountering tourism. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, 13(29), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.30480/aup.2020.2299.1454 
Babaie, S. (2008). Isfahan and its palaces: Statecraft, Shi‘ism and the architecture of conviviality in early modern Iran. Edinburgh University Press.
Burlingame, K. (2022). Presence in affective heritagescapes: Connecting theory to practice. Tourism Geographies, 24(2–3), 263–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2019.1696882 
Casey, E. S. (2000). Remembering: A phenomenological study (2nd ed.). Indiana University Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/Remembering.html?id=DRlmAQAAQBAJ 
Cohen, E. (1979). A phenomenology of tourist experiences. Sociology, 13(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/003803857901300203 
Crouch, D. (2001). Flirting with space: Tourism geographies as sensuous/expressive practice. Tourist Studies, 1(1), 5–23.
Ebrahimbay Salami, G., & Mahmoudi, M. (2022). Thick description of Ashura rituals in Iran: case study of the Nakhl-gardani ritual. International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage, 10(3), 10. https://doi.org/10.21427/9a1p-az65
Edensor, T. (2001). Performing tourism, staging tourism: (Re)producing tourist space and practice. Tourist Studies, 1(1), 59–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879760100100104 
Farhadi Uonaki, M., Jahanian, M., Pourtaheri, M., & Rokneddin Eftekhari, A. (2023). Providing an experience-oriented tourism model in creative cultural attractions case study: Tehran city. Journal of Urban Tourism, 9(2), 13–26. https://www.magiran.com/paper/2542782/providing-an-experience-oriented-tourism-model-in-creative-cultural-attractionscase-study-tehran-city?lang=en 
Finlay, L. (2009). Debating phenomenological research methods. Phenomenology & Practice, 3(1), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.29173/pandpr19818 
Fouseki, K., & Alexopoulos, G. (2019). Senses of place, senses of past: The case of Antikythera and its castle, Greece. Heritage, 2(2), 1274–1285. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage2020082 
Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Truth and method (2nd rev. ed.; J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). Continuum. (Original work published 1960) https://www.academia.edu/104070730/Truth_and_Method_by_Hans_Georg_Gadamer 
Gnoth, J., & Matteucci, X. (2014). A phenomenological view of the behavioural tourism research literature. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-01-2014-0005 
Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory (L. A. Coser, Ed. & Trans.). University of Chicago Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/On_Collective_Memory.html?hl=it&id=GPhGukFWC84C 
Historic City of Yazd. (n.d.). UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved August 10, 2026, from https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1544/
Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology (D. Carr, Trans.). Northwestern University Press. (Original work published 1963) https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Crisis_of_European_Sciences_and_Tran.html?id=Ca7GDwz5lF4C 
Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0 
Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800406 
Kirillova, K., Lehto, X. Y., & Cai, L. (2017a). Existential authenticity and anxiety as outcomes: The tourist in the experience economy. International Journal of Tourism Research, 19(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2080
Kirillova, K., Lehto, X., & Cai, L. (2017b). Tourism and existential transformation: An empirical investigation. Journal of Travel Research, 56(5), 638–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287516650277
Küpers, W., & Wee, D. (2018). Tourist cities as embodied places of learning: Walking in the “feelds” of Shanghai and Lisbon. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 4(3), 376–390. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJTC-12-2017-0076 
Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology: The go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnography, 4(3), 455–485. https://doi.org/10.1177/146613810343007
Masberg, B. A., & Silverman, L. H. (1996). Visitor experiences at heritage sites: A phenomenological approach. Journal of Travel Research, 34(4), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759603400403?urlappend=%3Futm_source%3Dresearchgate.net%26utm_medium%3Darticle 
Matteucci, X., Koens, K., Calvi, L., & Moretti, S. (2022). Envisioning the futures of cultural tourism. Futures, 142, 103013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.103013 
Meidan Emam, Esfahan. (n.d.). UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved August 10, 2026, from https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/115/
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of perception (D. A. Landes, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945) https://books.google.com/books/about/Phenomenology_of_Perception.html?id=Lh_e0_y1YjgC 
Movahedi, S., Kashahni Hamedani, M., & Shahzeidi, M. (2017). Establishing experience centric accommodations by revitalizing of historic houses (case study: Ali-goli-agha Neighborhood, Isfahan, Iran). Journal of Tourism and Development, 6(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.22034/jtd.2020.110399
Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Genius loci: Towards a phenomenology of architecture. Rizzoli.
Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. Pion.
Richards, G. (2018). Cultural tourism: A review of recent research and trends. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 36, 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.03.005 
Richards, G. (2021). Rethinking cultural tourism. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Richards, G. (2025). Cultural tourism: An integrative review. Tourism & Management Studies, 21(4), 19-31. https://doi.org/10.18089/TMS.20250402 
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039 
Tuan, Y. F. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. University of Minnesota Press.
Urry, J., & Larsen, J. (2011). The tourist gaze 3.0. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Tourist_Gaze_3_0.html?id=Q1BdBAAAQBAJ
Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00103-0 
 Zhang, S. N., Ruan, W. Q., & Yang, T. T. (2021). National identity construction in cultural and creative tourism: The double mediators of implicit cultural memory and explicit cultural learning. SAGE Open, 11(3), 21582440211. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211040789 
  • تاریخ دریافت 09 آبان 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 27 مرداد 1405
  • تاریخ پذیرش 28 تیر 1405