Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42769075›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026

Toward evidence-based neuroarchitecture: a systematic mapping and framework for immersive spatial cognition.

Ezgi Yılmaz, Mehmet Sair Akkam, Fatma Sedes

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ezgi YılmazFaculty of Architecture, Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Mehmet Sair AkkamFaculty of Engineering and Architecture, İstanbul Gelişim University, Center for Environment, Urban Studies and Geology, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Fatma SedesFaculty of Architecture, Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuroarchitecture has developed rapidly at the intersection of architecture, environmental cognition, neuroscience, and immersive technologies, yet the field remains methodologically heterogeneous and its progression from measurement toward design application is insufficiently structured. This study addresses this gap through a PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic mapping review of neuroarchitecture and closely related architectural and spatial-cognition research published between 2015 and 2025. Expanded searches across Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection identified 510 records. After removal of 206 duplicates, 304 unique records were screened; 125 records entered the final eligibility and data-extraction audit, and four additional boundary or temporal exclusions resulted in a final corpus of 121 studies. The corpus comprised 61 human empirical studies, one non-human empirical study, 58 review or conceptual synthesis records, and one methodological/protocol record. Publication activity increased markedly in the later review period, with 81 studies (66.9%) published between 2023 and 2025. Among the 61 human empirical studies, questionnaire/self-report measures were used in 39 studies (63.9%), behavioral task/performance measures in 32 (52.5%), EEG in 32 (52.5%), eye tracking in 15 (24.6%), EDA/GSR in 14 (23.0%), HRV in six (9.8%), fMRI in three (4.9%), and fNIRS in one (1.6%). To organize this heterogeneous evidence base, the study develops an Immersive Spatial Cognition Framework (ISCF) linking spatial stimuli, environmental exposure, neurophysiological measurement, cognitive-emotional processing, evidence interpretation, design translation, and adaptive design, together with an Evidence-Based Neuroarchitecture Maturity Model (EBN-MM). EBN-MM classification indicated that 30.6% of the corpus remained at Stage I (Conceptual Interpretation), 35.5% reached Stage II (Experimental Validation), 33.1% reached Stage III (Evidence Integration), and only 0.8% reached Stage IV (Adaptive Design Operationalization). These findings indicate that neuroarchitecture is progressing beyond isolated experimental validation toward evidence integration, while translation into adaptive and operational design remains exceptional. The proposed frameworks provide a structured basis for comparing heterogeneous evidence and identifying methodological priorities for future evidence-based neuroarchitecture research.

Indexed as

electroencephalographyenvironmental psychologyevidence-based designEvidence-Based Neuroarchitecture Maturity Modelimmersive environmentsImmersive Spatial Cognition Frameworkneuroarchitecturespatial cognition

Identifiers

PMID42769075
PMCPMC13590291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.