Sensory Architecture in Relation to Quality of Life in Older Adults: An Evidence-Based Design Approach

Abstract

The accelerated aging of the population in vulnerable urban contexts poses significant challenges for architecture, particularly with regard to the quality of life of older adults. Within this framework, the present study aimed to analyze the association between sensory architecture and the quality of life of older adults and to translate this empirical evidence into context-informed design criteria for the development of a comprehensive center for older adults. The study adopted a quantitative approach with a non-experimental, cross-sectional, and correlational design. A structured questionnaire on sensory architecture and quality of life was administered to family members and caregivers acting as proxy respondents, demonstrating high internal consistency (Cronbach’s $\mathit{\alpha }>0.90$). Given the ordinal nature of the data, inferential analysis was conducted using Spearman’s rho coefficient. Within the analyzed dataset, the results revealed a statistically significant and strong association between sensory architecture and the quality of life of older adults ($\rho$ > 0.80). At the dimensional level, visual and tactile stimuli exhibited the highest associations, followed by the social relationships dimension, while therapeutic environments showed a moderate association, allowing the identification of an empirical hierarchy among the analyzed dimensions within this dataset. These findings support the interpretation of sensory architecture as a construct statistically associated with indicators of quality of life, from a non-causal perspective. Based on this hierarchy, the results were articulated into an evidence-based architectural structure, serving as analytical input to inform context-specific criteria for spatial organization, materiality, comfort, orientation, and social interaction derived from the observed statistical associations. The study contributes a methodological approach that systematically connects correlational quantitative findings with architectural design considerations, particularly in urban contexts characterized by limited specialized infrastructure. However, a key limitation is the use of proxy respondents (family members and caregivers), which should be considered when interpreting the results.

1. Introduction

Population aging is a global and increasingly pronounced demographic trend that has heightened the need to ensure better living conditions for older adults through specialized infrastructure for their care and quality of life. At the global level, 727 million people aged 65 years or older were recorded in 2020, representing 9.3% of the total population, and this proportion is projected to rise to 16.0% by 2050 [1]. This process is also observed with particular intensity in Europe, where in Spain the population aged 65 years or older accounted for 19.6% in 2020 and is projected to reach 26.5% by 2035 [1]. These figures underscore the magnitude of the phenomenon and the need to respond with approaches oriented toward quality of life in old age.

Within this global scenario, Latin America faces population aging under particularly complex conditions, as it is among the regions experiencing the most rapid aging processes while maintaining deeply fragmented health systems and limited economic resources, which may generate significant equity gaps in the care of older adults [2,3]. The scale of this process is reflected in the demographic and functional projections for the region, where countries such as Ecuador are expected to experience one of the most accelerated transitions, moving from an older adult population of 7.84% in 2022 to nearly 18% by 2050, while other countries exhibit high rates of functional dependency reported as being associated with aging [4,5]. In particular, the burden of dependency among older adults in Latin America is substantial, with percentages ranging from 5.8% in Argentina to 11% in Brazil for basic activities of daily living (ADL) and from 13.8% in Mexico to 35.7% in Brazil for instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), reflecting a significant increase in the demand for care across the region [5]. This situation is clearly illustrated in

Table 1. Projections of population aging and dependency in selected Latin American countries [5].

Country	Population ≥ 65 Years Old	Projection to 2050	Dependence for ADL	Dependence for IADL
Ecuador	7.84%	∼18%	-	-
Argentina	-	-	5.80%	-
Brasil	-	-	11.00%	35.70%
Mexico	-	-	-	13.80%

, which contrasts aging projections and levels of dependency in selected Latin American countries [4,5].

In addition, according to comparative regional evidence, between 54% and 70% of older adults experiencing functional dependency require some form of care, which falls predominantly on unpaid family-based caregiving strategies, carried out mainly by economically inactive women. This situation highlights the structural vulnerability of the prevailing care model in the region [6]. Taken together, these data suggest that aging in Latin America not only entails a sustained increase in the older adult population but also may place a growing strain on care systems that are often insufficiently prepared to respond to the functional, social, and quality-of-life needs of this population [2,3,6].

In the Peruvian context, these regional dynamics take on a particularly critical expression, marked by high levels of social vulnerability, institutional weakness, and limited specialized responses for the comprehensive care of older adults. Several studies conducted in urban settings across the country show that a significant proportion of older adults reach old age under extreme conditions, characterized by family abandonment, economic precariousness, and the progressive loss of support networks, frequently leading to unplanned institutionalization as the only available care alternative [7]. This situation is further exacerbated by the limited coverage of specialized mental health and quality of life services, as well as the persistent underuse of available resources, despite the high prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms in this population [8]. In particular, qualitative research conducted in urban areas of Lima indicates that older adults primarily attribute their mental health problems to factors such as loneliness, loss of autonomy, family conflicts, and traumatic experiences accumulated throughout the life course, shaping a scenario in which the everyday environment may play a relevant role in their quality of life [8]. Within this framework, the Peruvian reality reveals not only a shortage of formal long-term care services, but also a lack of physical environments designed to respond to the sensory, emotional, and social needs of a population aging under conditions of high structural fragility [7,8].

In this regard, phenomenological and multisensory approaches within architectural theory have conceptualized the built environment not as a neutral physical container but as a perceptual and experiential system that actively structures human–space interaction. From this embodied perspective, architectural experience is grounded in the integration of multiple sensory modalities rather than in vision alone. In this line, Pallasmaa argued that architecture is fundamentally experienced through the body, emphasizing that tactile, auditory, and peripheral sensory stimuli are central to the formation of spatial meaning and quality of life [9].

Building on this embodied perspective, Malnar and Vodvarka systematize multisensory architecture by proposing that built space can be analytically understood through differentiated sensory systems that may be intentionally configured through design decisions [10]. Within this framework, sensory dimensions are not incidental attributes but structured components that may shape user experience and environmental legibility.

This architectural understanding resonates with traditions in environmental gerontology that incorporate the environment as an explanatory component of quality of life. In particular, Lawton and Nahemow, through the Person–Environment Fit model, propose that quality of life in old age emerges from the dynamic interaction between individual competence and environmental press [11]. Within this logic, the built environment may operate as a contextual regulator that facilitates or constrains autonomy and functional performance in everyday life.

Complementarily, the World Health Organization (WHO), through the WHOQOL framework, conceptualizes quality of life as a multidimensional construct integrating physical health, psychological state, social relationships, and environmental context, explicitly recognizing the environment as a structural component of quality of life [12].

Consequently, this theoretical grounding allows quality of life to be framed within a perspective where the environment and its sensory qualities are part of everyday experience, which is consistent with the empirical evidence summarized next.

The scientific literature generally suggests that quality of life in old age may be progressively compromised by the sensory and functional decline associated with the aging process, affecting not only physical health but also autonomy, psychological quality of life, and the capacity for social interaction among older adults. Population-based studies show that hearing loss, visual impairment, and dual sensory disability are highly prevalent among individuals aged 65 years and older, with reported associations with functional independence and the performance of daily activities [13]. This sensory deterioration is not typically understood as an isolated health problem but rather has been associated with changes in physical functioning and the ability to maintain an autonomous life, with potential implications for dependency and social vulnerability [14]. In turn, reduced autonomy and functional limitations are associated with higher levels of social isolation, loneliness, and emotional quality of life deterioration, factors that negatively affect the overall perception of quality of life in old age [15]. In this context, several authors emphasize that the quality of life of older adults cannot be understood solely from a clinical perspective but must be analyzed by considering the environmental and spatial conditions that are associated with everyday experience, social interaction, and the sense of safety and belonging [16].

In this study, sensory architecture is defined as a design-oriented approach that deliberately configures built environments to engage and stimulate the human senses in order to support occupants’ quality of experience, considering the psychological, cognitive, emotional, and physical associations reported between architectural elements and individuals’ experiences [17]. Building on this definition, the study frames sensory architecture as a practical design construct that links sensory conditions with architectural decisions. This framing keeps the discussion connected to related perspectives, such as environmental psychology and therapeutic design, but emphasizes the design translation of sensory stimuli into spatial configuration as the basis for supporting everyday quality of life in non-clinical settings.

The accumulated empirical evidence suggests that sensory stimulation is associated with the physical, emotional, and cognitive dimensions of quality of life in older adults, supporting the view that the senses are a key component of their everyday experience. Comparative studies indicate that auditory stimuli have been associated with long-term stress reduction, in some cases surpassing the impact of visual stimuli when sustained responses over time are evaluated [18]. Complementarily, research has shown that environments integrating auditory and olfactory stimuli have been associated with improvements in overall quality of life and stress regulation, highlighting the importance of addressing sensory stimulation in an integrated rather than isolated manner [19,20]. Likewise, exposure to natural sounds and green environments has been associated with improvements in sleep quality among older adults, which has been linked to reduced perceived noise and decreased mental stress [21]. In the field of olfactory stimulation, it has been documented that even minimal interventions, such as nocturnal olfactory enrichment, can be associated with improvements in cognitive and neural functioning, suggesting that sensory stimuli may be associated with measurable differences in indicators of brain health indicators in old age [22]. Taken together, these findings suggest that sensory stimulation may be associated with improvements in subjective indicators of quality of life and has also been associated with observable and quantifiable differences in key dimensions of quality of life in older adults in the evaluated study contexts.

Building on evidence indicating that sensory stimuli are associated with measurable differences in the quality of life of older adults, several studies have examined the reported outcomes of structured sensory interventions, reporting even more consistent benefits when stimuli are combined. In this regard, experimental studies indicate that music therapy, as a modality of auditory stimulation, has been associated with lower stress and anxiety levels and has been linked to reduced use of neuroactive medications among older adults, supporting its potential value as a non-pharmacological intervention [23]. Complementarily, improvements in auditory perception have been linked to social interaction and community integration among older adults, aspects that are closely linked to quality of life in old age [24]. Likewise, research focused on multisensory interventions provides evidence that the controlled or structured combination of auditory, visual, tactile, and olfactory stimuli has been reported to be associated with improvements in quality of life, performance in daily activities, and mental aspects of quality of life, particularly among older adults with mild cognitive impairment [25,26]. These results suggest that multisensoriality not only may amplify the individual effects of each stimulus but also constitutes a comprehensive approach capable of responding to the complex needs of aging, thereby supporting the consideration of its systematic incorporation into the design of architectural environments oriented toward older adults’ quality of life.

Based on evidence supporting the effectiveness of multisensory interventions, the literature has emphasized the role of the built environment as an active mediator of quality of life in old age, suggesting that architecture may operate not only as a neutral container but also as an active contributor associated with everyday sensory experience. Several studies indicate that sensory stimuli embedded within architectural space are associated with changes in human perception of the indoor environment, with reported implications for dimensions such as safety, comfort, and autonomy among older adults [27]. In particular, the strategic incorporation of elements such as textures, specific lighting, and acoustic treatments has been associated with greater spatial awareness, lower risks associated with limited mobility, and higher functional independence [28]. Research on materiality and environmental perception indicates that textures evoking natural elements, such as wood, have been associated with reported positive emotional experiences related to feelings of warmth, relaxation, and psychological quality of life, and may also be associated with stress reduction [29,30,31]. Furthermore, it has been documented that the textural characteristics of surfaces are associated with spatial perception, with slightly rough surfaces being perceived as more spacious than smooth surfaces, an aspect that is especially relevant for the design of environments intended for older adults [32,33]. In the visual domain, color selection and lighting quality are widely recognized as important factors, as age-related visual deficits alter color perception and may be linked to feelings of insecurity if appropriate criteria of legibility and contrast are not considered [34,35]. Taken together, these findings reinforce the need to address architectural design from an integrated sensory perspective, oriented toward supporting spatial experience and the quality of life of older adults.

In line with the understanding of the built environment as an active mediator of quality of life, the literature has emphasized that outdoor spaces designed under multisensory criteria may constitute a fundamental extension of architecture oriented toward healthy aging. Several studies show that therapeutic gardens integrate visual, auditory, tactile, and olfactory stimuli that have been associated with significant reported benefits for the physical, mental, emotional, and social health of older adults, and have been associated with improvements in quality of life, as well as improved sleep quality and reduced stress levels [36]. These spaces not only promote contact with nature but also facilitate opportunities for socialization and strengthen feelings of identity and personal continuity, which are key aspects of quality of life in old age [37]. Likewise, studies focused on the sensory design of outdoor spaces indicate that the intentional incorporation of natural elements, accessible pathways, and controlled stimuli has been associated with cognitive engagement among older adults, supporting meaningful sensory experiences [38,39,40]. Complementarily, structured nature-based programs, such as therapeutic horticulture developed in sensory gardens, have been associated with improvements in cognitive functioning and lower anxiety, in addition to sustained benefits for overall psychological health [41]. Taken together, these findings support the view that multisensory outdoor spaces may not be understood as ancillary areas, but rather as strategic architectural components that may be relevant to the quality of life of older adults [42].

Despite the solid empirical evidence supporting the benefits of sensory stimulation and multisensory interventions on the quality of life (QoL) of older adults, the literature reveals a significant gap in the absence of translational frameworks that link quantitative sensory–QoL evidence to actionable architectural design criteria. While numerous studies have demonstrated the positive effects of auditory, visual, tactile, and olfactory stimuli on physical, emotional, and cognitive dimensions of quality of life, most of this research has been conducted from clinical, therapeutic, or partial environmental perspectives, without systematically translating quantitative sensory–QoL data into architectural design criteria that integrate these dimensions into spaces intended for the care and quality of life of older adults [25,27,43]. This fragmentation of knowledge limits its direct application in the design of comprehensive centers, where architecture could play an active role in supporting autonomy, social interaction, and quality of life.

This gap becomes even more evident in Latin American urban contexts, which are characterized by limited specialized infrastructure and by the absence of architectural models that incorporate, in an evidence-based manner, sensory architecture principles adapted to the real needs of this population [7]. As a result, a disconnect persists between the available scientific knowledge and its materialization in built environments, particularly due to the lack of explicit procedures to translate quantitative sensory–QoL evidence into actionable design decisions capable of responding comprehensively to the aging process.

In response to this gap, there is a clear need to generate local empirical evidence that makes it possible to identify which dimensions of sensory architecture are most significantly associated with the quality of life of older adults so that these findings can be used as evidence-informed input for the architectural design of a comprehensive center. In this regard, the present study aims to contribute an applied approach that operationalizes a translational link between quantitative sensory–QoL evidence and actionable architectural criteria articulating the quantitative measurement of sensory perceptions and experiences with spatial design decisions, allowing architectural decisions to be informed by objective and contextualized data.

Within this framework, the scientific problem guiding the research focuses on understanding how sensory architecture is linked to the quality of life of older adults in a specific urban context. Accordingly, the following general research question is posed: How is sensory architecture associated with the quality of life of older adults in San Juan de Lurigancho in the year 2025? This question is further broken down into specific questions aimed at analyzing the dimensions of therapeutic environments, tactile stimuli, visual stimuli, and social relationships, with the purpose of identifying which of these present the most significant associations with quality of life from the perspective of family members and caregivers linked to the care center.

In line with the above, the general objective of the study was to determine the association between sensory architecture and the quality of life of older adults in San Juan de Lurigancho, 2025, with the aim of generating empirical evidence to be used as evidence-informed input for the architectural design of a comprehensive center for the quality of life of older adults. This objective is aligned with a quantitative, non-experimental methodological approach and responds to the need to translate scientific findings into applicable, contextualized, and evidence-based spatial design criteria.

Consistent with the stated problem and the formulated objective, the relevance of the present study lies in its capacity to translate empirical evidence into context-specific architectural design criteria. By identifying the dimensions of sensory architecture that show the most significant associations with the quality of life of older adults, the research provides an objective basis to guide design decisions in urban contexts characterized by high vulnerability and limited specialized infrastructure.

From a methodological perspective, the study contributes by integrating the quantitative analysis of sensory perceptions with their direct application in spatial design, thereby reducing the existing gap between academic research and architectural practice. This approach allows architecture to move beyond functioning solely as a functional container and to be configured as an active agent in supporting quality of life, autonomy, and social interaction among older adults.

Likewise, the expected results hold practical value by constituting a replicable input for the design of comprehensive wellness centers, useful for architects as well as public managers and decision-makers involved in the development of social infrastructure. In this regard, the research aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 3 by supporting physical and mental dimensions of quality of life in old age, and with SDG 11 by advancing inclusive, accessible urban environments oriented toward aging populations, thereby reinforcing its social relevance and its contribution to sustainable urban development.

2. Methodology

The methodology of the present study is structured around two complementary and interconnected components. First, the research methodology is developed, aimed at obtaining empirical evidence through a quantitative approach that allows for the analysis of the association between sensory architecture and the quality of life of older adults within the selected institutional context. Second, a methodological sequence is proposed for the development of the architectural design, through which the statistical results obtained are translated into sensory criteria and spatial strategies applied to the design of a comprehensive center aimed at supporting the quality of life of older adults. This methodological organization makes it possible to systematically link scientific analysis with the design process, so that the architectural proposal is grounded in empirical data and ina an evidence-based design approach.

2.1. Research Methodology

The study was conducted using a quantitative approach, with a non-experimental, correlational, and cross-sectional design, aimed at analyzing the association between sensory architecture and the quality of life of older adults in a specific urban context. This approach made it possible to examine the relationship between the study variables without manipulating them, observing their behavior at a single point in time, with the purpose of generating empirical evidence to serve as evidence-informed input for the architectural design of a comprehensive center focused on supporting the quality of life of older adults in the analyzed context. In line with this objective, the study adopted a basic research character with an applied projection, insofar as it produces empirical knowledge on sensory perceptions and quality of life and uses these findings to inform evidence-based architectural design decisions.

The reference population consisted of geriatric centers located in the northern area of Metropolitan Lima. Through non-probabilistic convenience sampling, one geriatric center serving an approximate population of between 125 to 135 older adults was selected and considered as the unit of study for data collection, providing an analytical basis for examining associations within this specific institutional context, rather than aiming at statistical representativeness beyond it. Although the focus of the study lies on the quality of life of older adults, the target population of the survey was composed of their immediate family members and caregivers, who, due to their daily contact and knowledge of the environment, were in a position to provide informed assessments of the spatial characteristics, sensory experiences and their association with the quality of life of this population. In this context, the decision to collect information from family members and caregivers was methodologically grounded in the conditions of the study population. Previous research has documented that the use of proxy respondents is an appropriate strategy in studies involving older adults when self-report may be affected by cognitive or functional limitations [44]. These informants are commonly incorporated in quality-of-life assessments in vulnerable populations due to their close and continuous interaction with older adults, which enables them to provide consistent contextual observations [45]. Furthermore, evidence suggests that proxy reports tend to show greater agreement with self-reports in observable domains, particularly those related to physical functioning and everyday interaction with the environment [46], including aspects such as mobility, autonomy, and self-care [47]. From this target population, a sample of 100 participants was selected using non-probabilistic convenience sampling. To justify the adequacy of the sample size, statistical criteria commonly applied in correlational studies were considered, assuming a significance level of $\mathit{\alpha }=0.05$, a statistical power of 0.80, and a medium expected effect size (r = 0.30), following Cohen’s conventional benchmark for a medium correlation [48]. Under these parameters, a minimum estimated sample size of 85 participants was obtained; thus, the final sample of 100 respondents exceeded this threshold, ensuring adequate statistical power for the performance of inferential analyses within the selected center as the unit of analysis.

Given the non-probabilistic nature of the sampling strategy, the study prioritizes analytical depth and internal consistency within the selected setting, focusing on identifying associative patterns rather than pursuing statistical generalization to broader populations.

Data collection was carried out using a structured questionnaire composed of 25 items, formulated on a five-point Likert-type scale, where 1 corresponded to “strongly disagree” and 5 to “strongly agree.” All items were phrased positively, which avoided the need for reverse coding procedures. The instrument was structured around two main variables, sensory architecture and quality of life, each comprising 12 items. The sensory architecture variable was operationalized through dimensions related to (i) therapeutic environments, (ii) tactile stimuli, and (iii) visual stimuli, while the quality of life variable was addressed through dimensions associated with (i) emotional dimension of quality of life, (ii) perceived environmental conditions, and (iii) social relationships. In this study, quality of life is understood as a multidimensional construct that integrates subjective and objective components of older adults’ lived experience, encompassing psychological state, social relationships, and environmental context [49]. This definition guided the operationalization of the variable across the emotional, environmental, and social dimensions measured in the questionnaire. Each dimension was defined based on specific indicators, which gave rise to the questionnaire items, ensuring coherence between the theoretical constructs and their empirical measurement. In line with this operational structure, the questionnaire emerged as the final stage of the construct operationalization process, translating the defined dimensions and indicators into perceptual Likert-type items. For example, within the sensory architecture variable, items included statements such as “The materials used in the spaces create a welcoming and comfortable environment for older adults,” while for the quality of life variable, items included statements such as “The spaces allow older adults to move safely and independently within the center.”

Regarding the content validity of the data collection instrument, it was assessed through an expert judgment process, in which specialists evaluated the items according to criteria of clarity, coherence, relevance, and sufficiency. With respect to reliability, the instrument was evaluated using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient calculated at a global level, yielding a value of 0.947, indicates a high level of internal consistency. This methodological decision responds to the correlational and non-experimental design of the study, in which the questionnaire is treated as an integrated measure of perceptions, in line with recent methodological approaches that support the use of aggregated Likert scales in perception-based correlational studies, particularly when the analytical interest focuses on examining associations between constructs [50,51].

Regarding data processing, the responses obtained were summed for each variable and dimension, generating composite scores that were used in inferential analyses. This aggregation strategy allows each dimension to be treated as a composite measure derived from multiple perceptual indicators, strengthening the stability and interpretability of the constructs assessed through Likert-type items. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS software version 31.0.0.0 (117). Data normality was assessed beforehand, which led to the use of non-parametric statistics. Accordingly, inferential analysis was performed using Spearman’s rho coefficient, which is appropriate for ordinal variables and non-normal distributions, allowing for the evaluation of the strength and direction of the association between sensory architecture and quality of life, as well as between their respective dimensions.

The questionnaire was administered digitally, ensuring voluntary participation, anonymity of responses, and confidentiality of the information. All participants provided informed consent prior to data collection. In accordance with institutional research guidelines, the participants involved in this study (family members and caregivers) were not classified as a vulnerable population and, therefore the study did not require formal approval from an ethics committee. The research followed ethical principles for social research, ensuring voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, and confidentiality throughout the data collection process. In order to ensure transparency, replicability, and methodological rigor, the questionnaire in Spanish (Supplementary File S1), the questionnaire in English (Supplementary File S2), and the database used for statistical analysis (Supplementary File S3) are included as Supplementary Materials, allowing for a detailed assessment of the instrument and the analytical procedures employed.

2.2. Methodological Sequence for the Development of the Architectural Proposal

The methodological sequence for the development of the architectural proposal was structured as a progressive and articulated design process, aimed at translating the empirical findings of the quantitative study into context-specific, design-oriented spatial criteria and decisions. This sequence was developed in three main stages: analysis and diagnosis, conceptual stage, and preliminary design stage. Each stage responded to specific objectives and produced graphic and technical inputs that allowed for a coherent progression from the understanding of the urban context to the spatial configuration of the comprehensive center for the quality of life of older adults.

2.2.1. Analysis and Diagnosis Stage

The first stage aimed to characterize the urban, regulatory, and physical context of the selected site, establishing the initial conditions that framed the development of the architectural project. At this stage, the location of the plot within the corresponding urban zoning was analyzed, along with the applicable regulatory parameters, such as permitted uses, maximum building heights, and setback requirements. This information is summarized in Figure 1. This analysis made it possible to identify the regulatory constraints and opportunities that condition the implementation of the project.

Complementarily, a detailed study of the physical characteristics of the site was conducted, with special emphasis on topography and its relationship with spatial organization. The topographic analysis, presented in Figure 2, made it possible to identify slopes, elevation levels, and potential intervention areas, providing foundational criteria for the subsequent definition of volumetry and circulation flows.

Likewise, the relationship between the site and the road system, as well as its immediate surroundings, was assessed through the analysis of road sections, shown in Figure 3. This analysis facilitated an understanding of access points, circulation hierarchies, and connections with the surrounding urban fabric.

This stage concluded by integrating the results of the territorial diagnosis with the findings derived from the statistical analysis of the survey, establishing an analytical basis for subsequent design decision-making. In this way, the urban and physical analysis was not addressed in isolation, but rather as an input that is interpreted in relation to the sensory, functional, and social needs identified in the target population.

2.2.2. Conceptual Stage

The conceptual stage aimed to define the guiding principles of the architectural project by articulating spatial, environmental, and sensory criteria based on the prior diagnosis and the empirical evidence obtained from the research. First, the architectural concept was established through the analysis of sensory architecture precedents and the evaluation of the site’s bioclimatic conditions. This process included the study of solar exposure and prevailing wind directions, information summarized in Figure 4, which made it possible to orient the design toward passive solutions intended to support the thermal and environmental comfort of users.

Based on this conceptual framework, the architectural program was defined and the center’s users were characterized, considering both older adults and the caregivers and family members involved in daily care. This programmatic definition, presented in Figure 5, made it possible to establish differentiated functional areas, prioritize spaces, and size the project according to the estimated capacity and the therapeutic, social, and care-related activities planned.

A central aspect of this stage was the methodological translation of the sensory architecture dimensions that showed significant associations with quality of life, as identified in the statistical analysis, into sensory design criteria and concrete spatial strategies. This process did not involve the incorporation of new results, but rather the systematization of a procedure through which the empirical findings informed design decisions, such as prioritizing specific sensory stimuli, configuring therapeutic environments, and organizing spaces that are designed to facilitate dimensions of quality of life such as social interaction and autonomy. In this way, the conceptual stage functioned as an explicit bridge between the quantitative research and the architectural proposal.

2.2.3. Preliminary Design Stage

The preliminary design stage corresponded to the spatial materialization of the criteria defined previously, through the development of volumetry, zoning, and circulation flows for the architectural complex. First, the project’s volumetric proposals were developed, as shown in Figure 6. These proposals responded both to the site’s topographic conditions and to the conceptual guidelines established in earlier stages.

Subsequently, the functional zoning of the center was developed by organizing the different programmatic packages according to levels of use, accessibility, and the relationships among public, semi-public, and private spaces. This zoning is presented in Figure 7 and made it possible to visualize, in an integrated manner, the distribution of therapeutic, administrative, recreational, and service areas.

Finally, circulation and flow diagrams were designed to make explicit the relationships among users, routes, and activities, with the aim of promoting a coherent, safe, and sensorially integrated spatial experience. These diagrams, shown in Figure 8, made it possible to consolidate the architectural proposal as an articulated functional system, in which architecture is conceptualized as a mediator potentially associated with quality of life, including autonomy, and social interaction among older adults in the analyzed context.

3. Results

This section presents the inferential results obtained from the statistical processing of the data in SPSS, focusing on the empirical examination of the relationships between sensory architecture and quality of life. The analysis begins with the assessment of data normality and is followed by correlation analyses that examine the strength and direction of the associations between variables and dimensions. These findings constitute the main empirical basis for the subsequent architectural interpretation and for the formulation of design criteria.

3.1. Inferential Results

This section presents the results of the inferential analysis conducted based on the information collected during the data-gathering stage. Its purpose was to examine the associations between the study variables from the perspective of older adults’ family members and caregivers. This stage made it possible to assess whether the patterns observed in the data had statistical support, in order to rigorously substantiate the associations identified between the dimensions of sensory architecture and quality of life within the study context. The inferential results constitute a fundamental input for the second stage of the study, focused on the design of the architectural proposal for the center, as they made it possible to identify the sensory dimensions with the most consistent and relevant associations, which were used to inform criteria for formulating the architectural intervention.

3.1.1. Normality Tests

Before applying the inferential tests, the assumption of data normality was evaluated in order to determine the most appropriate type of statistical analysis. For this purpose, the following statistical hypotheses were established: the null hypothesis ($H_0$), which states that the study variables follow a normal distribution, and the alternative hypothesis ($H_1$), which indicates that these variables do not follow a normal distribution.

Considering that the sample size was 100 observations, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test with Lilliefors correction was applied, using a significance level of $\mathit{\alpha }=0.05$. Assessing these assumptions made it possible to determine whether to use parametric or non-parametric statistical tests in the subsequent analysis.

Normality of Sensory Architecture and Quality of Life

The results of the normality tests indicated significance values below the critical threshold of 0.05 for both the sensory architecture and quality of life variables in the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk tests, as shown in

Table 2. Normality test results for sensory architecture and quality of life.

	Kolmogorov–Smirnov a			Shapiro–Wilk
	Statistic	df	Sig.	Statistic	df	Sig.
Sensory Architecture	0.142	100	<0.001	0.814	100	<0.001
Quality of life	0.124	100	<0.001	0.849	100	<0.001

^a Lilliefors significance correction.

. Consequently, the null hypothesis of normality was rejected and the alternative hypothesis was accepted, leading to the conclusion that both variables did not follow a normal distribution.

Given that the data did not meet the normality assumption, the subsequent inferential analysis was conducted using non-parametric tests, and Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient was selected for testing the study hypotheses.

3.1.2. Correlation Analysis

General Hypothesis Test

Given the magnitude and consistency of the observed associations, the interpretation of Spearman’s rho coefficients in this study is primarily supported by their effect sizes and statistical significance levels, which provide a sound basis for assessing the strength and direction of the relationships between variables. To strengthen the interpretation of effect size, the magnitude of Spearman’s rho coefficients was qualitatively discussed using conventional intensity levels (low, moderate, and high) in order to describe the relative strength of the observed associations. As shown in

Table 3. Correlation between sensory architecture and quality of life.

			Quality of Life
Spearman’s rho	Sensory Architecture	Correlation coefficient	0.863 ***
		Sig. (two-tailed)	<0.001
		N	100

Note. *** p $<0.001$ (two-tailed).

, the results of Spearman’s rho correlation test indicate a statistically significant association between sensory architecture and quality of life, given that the two-tailed significance value obtained is below the established threshold (p < 0.001). This result allows the null hypothesis to be rejected and the alternative hypothesis to be accepted, suggesting that the association observed between both variables is unlikely to be due to chance and has sufficient statistical support for analysis and interpretation within the study.

Once the existence of this association was established, Table 3 shows that the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient obtained ($\rho =0.863$) indicates a positive and strong relationship between sensory architecture and quality of life. This suggests that more favorable evaluations of the built environment from a sensory perspective are associated with more positive perceptions of overall quality of life among older adults. This finding suggests that the sensory experience of the architectural environment constitutes a component closely linked to the overall assessment of quality of life, providing relevant empirical evidence to inform the integration of sensory architecture criteria in the design of spaces oriented toward the quality of life of older adults.

Specific Hypothesis Test 1: Therapeutic Environments and Quality of Life

As shown in

Table 4. Correlation between therapeutic environments and quality of life.

			Quality of Life
Spearman’s rho	Therapeutic environments	Correlation coefficient	0.520 ***
		Sig. (two-tailed)	<0.001
		N	100

Note. *** p $<0.001$ (two-tailed).

, the results of Spearman’s Rho correlation test indicate the existence of a statistically significant association between the perception of therapeutic environments and the quality of life of older adults, given that the two-tailed significance value obtained is below the established threshold (p < 0.001). This result allows the rejection of the null hypothesis and the acceptance of the alternative hypothesis, suggesting that the observed relationship between the therapeutic environments dimension and the quality of life variable has sufficient statistical support and is not attributable to chance.

Once the significance of the association was established, Table 4 shows that the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient obtained ($\rho =0.520$) indicates that the relationship between therapeutic environments and quality of life is positive and of moderate magnitude, suggesting that more favorable evaluations of therapeutic environments are associated with more positive perceptions of the overall quality of life of older adults. This finding reinforces the relevance of therapeutic spaces as a significant environmental component within the built environment and provides empirical evidence for their consideration as an architectural design criterion aimed at supporting quality of life in wellness centers for older adults in similar settings.

Specific Hypothesis Test 2: Tactile Stimuli and Quality of Life

As shown in

Table 5. Correlation between tactile stimuli and quality of life.

			Quality of Life
Spearman’s rho	Tactile stimuli	Correlation coefficient	0.781 ***
		Sig. (two-tailed)	<0.001
		N	100

Note. *** p $<0.001$ (two-tailed).

, the results of the Spearman’s Rho correlation test provide evidence of the existence of a statistically significant association between the perception of tactile stimuli and the quality of life of older adults, given that the bilateral significance value obtained is below the established threshold (p < 0.001). This result allows the null hypothesis to be rejected and the alternative hypothesis to be accepted, suggesting that the observed relationship between the tactile stimuli dimension and the quality of life variable has sufficient statistical support and is unlikely to be attributable to chance.

Once the significance of the association was established, Table 5 shows that the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient obtained ($\rho =0.781$) indicates that the relationship between tactile stimuli and quality of life is positive and of high magnitude, suggesting that more favorable evaluations of the tactile conditions of the built environment are associated with more positive perceptions of the overall quality of life of older adults. This finding highlights the relevance of the tactile dimension as a key sensory component within architecture, providing empirical evidence to inform its deliberate incorporation into the design of spaces aimed at promoting comfort, safety, and supporting quality of life in wellness centers for older adults.

Specific Hypothesis Test 3: Visual Stimuli and Quality of Life

As shown in

Table 6. Correlation between visual stimuli and quality of life.

			Quality of Life
Spearman’s rho	Visual stimuli	Correlation coefficient	0.785 ***
		Sig. (two-tailed)	<0.001
		N	100

Note. *** p $<0.001$ (two-tailed).

, the results of the Spearman’s Rho correlation test provide evidence of the existence of a statistically significant association between the perception of visual stimuli and the quality of life of older adults, given that the bilateral significance value obtained is below the established threshold (p < 0.001). This result allows the null hypothesis to be rejected and the alternative hypothesis to be accepted, suggesting that the observed relationship between both variables has sufficient statistical support and is not attributable to chance.

Once the significance of the association was established, Table 6 shows that the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient obtained ($\rho =0.785$) indicates that the relationship between visual stimuli and quality of life is positive and of high magnitude, suggesting that more favorable evaluations of the visual conditions of the built environment are associated with more positive perceptions of the overall quality of life of older adults. This finding underscores the relevance of the visual dimension as a key sensory component within the architectural experience, providing empirical evidence that informs the incorporation of visual criteria, such as lighting, contrast, color, and spatial legibility, in the design of spaces aimed at supporting quality of life in wellness centers for older adults.

Specific Hypothesis Test 4: Sensory Architecture and Social Relationships

As shown in

Table 7. Correlation between sensory architecture and social relationships.

			Social Relationships
Spearman’s rho	Sensory architecture	Correlation coefficient	0.727 ***
		Sig. (two-tailed)	<0.001
		N	100

Note. *** p $<0.001$ (two-tailed).

, the results of the Spearman’s Rho correlation test provide evidence of the existence of a statistically significant association between sensory architecture and the social relationships of older adults, given that the bilateral significance value obtained is below the established threshold (p < 0.001). This result allows the null hypothesis to be rejected and the alternative hypothesis to be accepted, suggesting that the relationship identified between both variables has sufficient statistical support and is not attributable to chance.

Once the significance of the association was established, Table 7 shows that the Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient obtained ($\rho =0.727$) indicates that the relationship between sensory architecture and social relationships is positive and of high magnitude, suggesting that more favorable perceptions of the built environment from a sensory perspective are associated with more positive evaluations of social interaction among older adults. This finding highlights that sensory architecture is not only linked to perceptions of quality of life but also to social relationships, providing empirical evidence that informs the design of spaces that are intended to facilitate socialization, gathering, and social integration as fundamental components of wellness centers for older adults.

Inferential Synthesis and Hierarchization of Dimensions

Overall, the results of the inferential analysis indicate the existence of statistically significant associations between sensory architecture and older adults’ quality of life, as well as between their main sensory and relational dimensions. Comparing the magnitudes of the correlations obtained through Spearman’s Rho coefficient makes it possible to identify a clear hierarchy among the analyzed dimensions, showing the strongest association for sensory architecture as a whole, followed by visual stimuli and tactile stimuli, while therapeutic environments and social relationships present moderate, although still statistically significant, associations. This gradient of intensities suggests that not all sensory dimensions are associated with the perception of quality of life to the same extent, but rather that some show stronger associations in the overall assessment of quality of life. In this sense, the inferential synthesis not only provides statistical support for the proposed hypotheses but also provides an analytical criterion for prioritizing sensory dimensions, constituting a fundamental input to inform decision-making during the design phase. In this way, the inferential results go beyond their statistical value and serve as an empirical basis for formulating sensorially informed architectural design strategies, consistent with the experiences and needs perceived by proxy respondents in the study context.

4. Discussion of Results

4.1. General Discussion on the Association Between Sensory Architecture and Quality of Life

The inferential results indicate not only the presence of significant associations but also a clear ordering in their strength within the analyzed empirical context, allowing the discussion to begin with the most empirically salient dimensions. Visual stimuli emerge as the leading component, closely followed by tactile stimuli; the link between sensory architecture and social relationships remains meaningful yet comparatively moderate; and therapeutic environments show the smallest association while retaining statistical support. This hierarchy provides the interpretive backbone for the following subsections within the context of the analyzed dataset and prevents treating all sensory dimensions as equivalently associated with quality of life.

Taken together, the findings indicate that sensory architecture is significantly associated with older adults’ quality of life within the analyzed institutional context, and that this association follows a differentiated empirical hierarchy in which visual and tactile dimensions exhibit the strongest relationships, followed by the relational dimension and, finally, therapeutic environments. This pattern is consistent with embodied and multisensory architectural theory, insofar as it supports the view that architectural experience is constituted through the body and through multiple sensory modalities rather than through vision alone, as emphasized by Pallasmaa, and that sensory dimensions can be treated as structured components that shape environmental legibility, as proposed by Malnar and Vodvarka [9,10]. From an environmental gerontology perspective, the results are also coherent with the Person–Environment Fit model, which frames quality of life in later life as a dynamic interaction between individual competence and environmental press, suggesting that sensory qualities of space may operate as contextual regulators of autonomy and everyday functioning within the studied setting [11]. Finally, these findings align with the WHOQOL framework, which explicitly recognizes environmental context as a structural component of quality of life, thereby supporting a non-clinical reading of quality of life in which the built environment constitutes part of the lived experience assessed in this study [12].

The results of the inferential analysis showed a statistically significant and strong association between sensory architecture and older adults’ quality of life within the analyzed study context. This finding supports the conception that the built environment does not function solely as a physical support, but rather as a contextual element of everyday experience that may be associated with perceptions of safety, comfort, and autonomy among older adults [27]. In this sense, architecture may play a relevant role in how quality of life is experienced and perceived within the studied context of aging, particularly as functional and sensory capacities are progressively reduced.

From a conceptual perspective, the identified association reinforces the idea that quality of life in old age in the analyzed context cannot be understood exclusively through clinical or biomedical indicators, but must also incorporate the environmental and spatial conditions that are associated with daily experience and interaction with the surroundings [16]. The literature has pointed out that sensory deterioration associated with aging is associated with reduced functional independence and greater reliance on the immediate environment, granting everyday space a central role in the perception of quality of life [13]. Likewise, it has been documented that loss of autonomy and functional limitations are associated with higher levels of social isolation and deterioration of emotional aspects of quality of life, factors that are associated with lower levels of older adults’ quality of life [14,15].

The observed relationship in the present study is also consistent with studies suggesting that sensory stimulation is associated with physical and emotional dimensions of quality of life in old age, especially when stimuli are part of experiences sustained over time [18]. Along these lines, it has been noted that the integration of multiple sensory stimuli is linked to more consistent associations with overall quality of life than the application of isolated stimuli, reinforcing the importance of understanding sensory architecture as an integrated experience of the built environment [19,20].

This finding acquires particular relevance in urban contexts characterized by high levels of social vulnerability, such as the Peruvian context, where a significant proportion of older adults age under conditions of economic precariousness and limited institutional response [7]. In these scenarios, the absence of physical environments that respond to older adults’ sensory and emotional needs has been reported to be associated with higher levels of loneliness and mental health deterioration, while the everyday environment becomes one of the primary supports of quality of life [8]. Taken together, the identified association provides contextualized empirical evidence derived from the analyzed study context that contributes to reducing the existing gap between evidence on sensory stimulation and its translation into the architectural environment, particularly in vulnerable urban contexts [27,43].

4.2. Discussion on Therapeutic Environments and Quality of Life

The results obtained show that therapeutic environments present a significant association with quality of life; however, this dimension does not lead the hierarchy of sensory architecture. This finding allows for a mature reading of the role these spaces play within the built environment, insofar as their contribution to quality of life may be interpreted as not being expressed as a constant experience, but rather as a complementary resource [27]. In this regard, the literature recognizes that environments with targeted sensory stimuli can be associated with older adults’ emotional and psychological quality of life, especially when they are oriented toward specific stimulation or rehabilitation activities [18].

Within a Person–Environment Fit lens, this comparatively lower magnitude may reflect that therapeutic environments operate as localized and episodic forms of environmental support rather than as continuous sources of environmental press or regulation across daily routines [11]. This interpretation helps explain the empirical position of therapeutic environments within the hierarchy observed in this study.

The structured stimulation characteristic of therapeutic environments has been linked to processes of emotional regulation and stress reduction, which may support its relevance in terms of subjective quality of life [19]. Nevertheless, much of the available evidence on these benefits comes from specific therapeutic contexts, rather than from daily-use environments integrated into everyday life, which suggests a substantive difference between an episodic experience and a continuous environmental experience [43]. This distinction may help explain why, despite its statistical significance, this dimension does not reach the levels of association observed in other components of sensory architecture with a stronger presence in daily routines.

Likewise, the literature indicates that the incorporation of sensory stimuli for therapeutic purposes within architecture tends to occur in a partial and complementary manner, without constituting an integrated system that continuously accompanies the user’s spatial experience [52]. In addition, a relevant methodological consideration should be noted: the assessment of therapeutic environments may be influenced by the type of respondent, particularly when perceptions of quality of life are reported by caregivers or family members, who tend to identify more clearly the benefits associated with specific spaces than those derived from continuous everyday experience. Taken together, these elements suggest that, although therapeutic environments were significantly associated with quality of life [18], their role may be interpreted as complementary, indicating that not everything “therapeutic” is automatically the most strongly associated dimension within the architectural environment [43].

In this sense, the comparatively lower magnitude observed for therapeutic environments should not be interpreted as a lack of relevance, but rather as a reflection of their specific mode of integration within everyday spatial experience. Unlike visual and tactile stimuli, which are continuously present and directly embedded in daily routines, therapeutic environments tend to operate in more localized, programmatic, or episodic contexts. Their contribution to quality of life may therefore be interpreted as a complementary layer that may support emotional regulation, recovery, and psychological support, rather than as a constant structuring condition of daily life. This may help explain why, despite their statistically significant association with quality of life, their relative empirical weight appears lower when compared to sensory dimensions that accompany older adults more persistently in their interaction with space.

4.3. Discussion on Tactile Stimuli and Their Association with Quality of Life

The results show that tactile stimuli are significantly associated with older adults’ quality of life within the analyzed study context, suggesting the relevance of the bodily experience of the environment in the perception of quality of life. This association is consistent with the idea that aging involves sensory and functional changes that increase reliance on the immediate environment, potentially making physical contact with everyday space a central component of daily experience [13].

From a functional perspective, the observed association can be interpreted through the relationship between the physical conditions of the environment and everyday autonomy. The literature has noted that the loss of functional and sensory capacities is associated with a greater reliance on environments that provide stability, safety, and ease of use, aspects that have been linked to perceptions of control and quality of life in old age [15]. In this sense, tactile stimuli in the environment, by being constantly present during movement and bodily interaction with space, may be associated with a more favorable assessment of quality of life. This is consistent with an embodied perspective in which tactile and material contact becomes central to spatial meaning and quality of life, reinforcing Pallasmaa’s argument that architecture is experienced through the body and not through vision alone [9].

Likewise, it has been proposed that the built environment acts as a mediator of quality of life through sensory attributes that are experienced bodily in a continuous rather than episodic manner [27]. This approach may help contextualize why the tactile dimension shows a relevant association with quality of life, insofar as it continuously accompanies older adults’ spatial experience, unlike other stimuli whose presence may be more occasional or context dependent.

4.4. Discussion on Visual Stimuli and Their Association with Quality of Life

The results show that the visual dimension emerges as one of the most relevant components of sensory architecture in its association with older adults’ quality of life within the analyzed dataset. This finding can be understood in light of the high prevalence of visual deterioration in old age, which is associated with changes in how older adults orient themselves, move, and interact with their everyday environment, thereby increasing their reliance on the visual conditions of the immediate space [13].

The observed association between visual stimuli and quality of life is closely related to aspects such as spatial orientation and perceived safety. The literature has noted that visual limitations are associated with greater feelings of insecurity and the need for support from the physical environment, which is associated with the daily experience of quality of life and the perception of autonomy in old age [14]. In this sense, visual clarity in the environment is associated with a greater sense of control and comfort during everyday activities. In terms of environmental legibility, this result is coherent with Malnar and Vodvarka’s view that sensory systems can be intentionally configured as structured design components that support orientation and spatial comprehension [10].

From a broader perspective, quality of life in old age has been conceptualized as a construct that integrates not only individual factors, but also environmental and spatial conditions that influence daily experience and interaction with the built environment [16]. Under this approach, visual stimuli are interpreted as a central dimension in their association with quality of life, insofar as they constitute a permanent component of spatial experience and shape how older adults perceive and evaluate their environment.

Likewise, it has been pointed out that the built environment acts as an active mediator of quality of life through sensory attributes, among which the visual experience is particularly salient in its association with the perception of comfort, spatial legibility, and safety [27]. This coherence between the results obtained and prior literature helps explain why the visual dimension shows a salient association with quality of life, not only due to its constant presence, but also due to its association with the everyday experience of space in old age.

4.5. Discussion on Sensory Architecture and Its Association with Social Relationships

The results show that sensory architecture is significantly associated with the social dimension of quality of life, which suggests that the experience of the built environment is not limited to the individual level, but may also extend to older adults’ social interactions. This association is particularly relevant considering that loss of autonomy and the functional limitations associated with aging are often linked to higher levels of social isolation and deterioration of emotional quality of life [14].

From a conceptual perspective, quality of life in old age has been defined as a multidimensional construct that integrates, among other components, social interaction and a sense of belonging [16]. Within this framework, it has been noted that quality of life does not depend exclusively on personal conditions, but also on the possibility of maintaining meaningful social ties in everyday life [15]. The study’s results align with this approach by showing that the sensory conditions of the environment are associated with the relational dimension of quality of life.

Sensory architecture, however, does not produce social relationships directly, but rather acts as a mediator that can facilitate or inhibit gathering, staying, and interaction among people. In this sense, the built environment has been conceptualized as a spatial support that, through its sensory attributes, is associated with variations in the possibilities for social interaction and the collective experience of space [27]. This indirect mediation makes it possible to understand the observed association without implying causality.

This mediating role is also compatible with WHOQOL’s inclusion of social relationships and environmental context as interrelated components of quality of life, thereby reinforcing the interpretation that sensory conditions of space may be associated with the relational experience assessed in this study [12].

Consequently, this finding acquires particular relevance in urban contexts characterized by high levels of social vulnerability, where support networks tend to be more fragile and the risk of isolation in old age is more pronounced [8]. In these scenarios, sensory architecture emerges as a factor associated with quality of life not only due to its role in the individual experience of space, but also due to its association with spatial conditions that may facilitate or limit social interaction, reinforcing its simultaneously sensory and social character within the context studied.

4.6. Discussion Based on the Hierarchization of Dimensions: Critical Interpretation

The hierarchization of sensory architecture dimensions based on empirical evidence implies recognizing that not all components of the built environment are equally associated with older adults’ quality of life in the context studied. This approach is consistent with the understanding of quality of life as a multidimensional construct, in which different dimensions acquire differentiated weights according to individuals’ everyday experience and the context in which they operate [16].

From this perspective, the prioritization observed in the results does not respond to an abstract or normative valuation of space, but rather to the way in which the sensory attributes of the environment are effectively integrated into daily life in the context studied. The literature has pointed out that the built environment acts as an active mediator of quality of life, but that its sensory components are associated with quality of life to different extents depending on their continuous presence, accessibility, and functional relevance for the user [27]. This condition helps explain why certain dimensions emerge with greater empirical weight than others.

Likewise, the aging process is characterized by a progressive increase in reliance on the immediate environment, derived from functional and sensory deteriorations that are associated with changes in the way older adults interact with everyday space [13]. In this context, it is expected that those dimensions of sensory architecture more closely linked to daily experience and functional autonomy would tend to show stronger statistical associations in the analyzed dataset with respect to the perception of quality of life.

Therefore, the hierarchization derived from the results departs from homogeneous approaches that assume an equivalent contribution of all dimensions and aligns with perspectives that privilege the interpretation of real experiences over idealized design assumptions. In this sense, prioritization based on empirical results may contribute to closing the identified gap between conceptual frameworks and evidence derived from concrete contexts of use, supporting a critical and well-grounded reading of sensory architecture in relation to the lived experience of older adults in the context analyzed [43].

4.7. Contextual Discussion: Implications for Vulnerable Urban Environments

The study’s results acquire particular relevance when interpreted within the framework of vulnerable urban environments, such as the district of San Juan de Lurigancho, which are characterized by high levels of population density, limited access to specialized infrastructure, and restrictive socioeconomic conditions. In these contexts, the fragility of social networks and the precariousness of the built environment is associated with higher levels of isolation and deterioration of quality of life in old age, giving specific weight to everyday spatial conditions in the experience of quality of life [8].

The importance of the immediate environment is further reinforced by the fact that aging entails progressive functional and sensory deteriorations that may increase older adults’ dependence on the spaces they inhabit daily. In scenarios where access to specialized services is limited, the everyday environment can become a central component of the quality of life experience, not due to intentional design, but because of its constant presence in daily life [13].

From a conceptual perspective, quality of life in old age cannot be understood apart from the environmental and spatial conditions that are associated with everyday experience and interaction with the environment. In this sense, the results support the need to interpret sensory architecture not as an isolated element, but as part of an environmental system that is associated with older adults’ daily experience, especially in contexts of urban vulnerability [16].

Likewise, it has been noted that the built environment may assume a more intense mediating role in quality of life in contexts where institutional and specialized supports are insufficient. Under these conditions, everyday architecture is interpreted as being associated with conditions of containment, support, and facilitation of quality of life, even when it has not been explicitly conceived for therapeutic purposes [27]. This interpretation is consistent with the empirical evidence obtained and makes it possible to understand the contextual scope of the findings.

Finally, this discussion departs from idealized approaches that assume optimal conditions of infrastructure and services and aligns with an interpretation based on real contexts of use, where structural limitations form part of everyday experience. In this sense, the results help close the identified gap between conceptual approaches and situated empirical evidence, giving the study a clear social and territorial weight [43].

4.8. Theoretical and Practical Implications for Evidence-Based Architectural Design

4.8.1. Theoretical Implications

This study contributes to evidence-based design by showing that sensory and spatial perceptions of older adults in the analyzed context can be operationalized through a quantitative approach, using nonparametric associations to examine how the built environment is associated with quality of life. In doing so, the research strengthens the methodological feasibility of addressing perceptual architectural variables, which are frequently explored through qualitative or interpretive lenses, within a rigorous inferential framework.

From an epistemological standpoint, the findings support a non-causal but structural reading of the environment’s role in quality of life, where architecture is understood as a contextual mediator associated with everyday experience rather than a neutral background. This strengthens the theoretical position that environmental qualities should be incorporated as substantive components of quality of life assessments in old age, alongside individual or biomedical determinants.

Crucially, the study shows that statistically significant associations can be translated into design criteria without relying on causal assumptions. This represents a relevant methodological contribution to evidence-based design because it clarifies how empirical evidence can inform architectural decision-making while respecting the correlational nature of the analysis. In this sense, the study may help reduce the epistemological gap between quantitative research and design practice by proposing an integrative methodological logic that connects statistical analysis, spatial interpretation, and architectural application.

4.8.2. Practical Implications

In practical terms, the evidence supports a prioritized design logic: not all sensory dimensions are equally associated with quality of life and design decisions can therefore begin with the most empirically salient dimensions within the context studied. This prioritization allows projects to allocate architectural emphasis according to the relative weight of sensory components, rather than treating all dimensions as equally relevant in design programming.

Accordingly, the study provides an applied pathway to translate empirical findings into spatial, functional, and sensory design criteria. The architectural proposal is explicitly informed by the observed associations, aiming to integrate, in a coherent and prioritized manner, those sensory dimensions with stronger statistical associations. This supports an evidence-based design process in which design decisions are informed by empirical patterns and aligned with quality of life objectives such as autonomy and social interaction within the scope of the study context.

At the level of concrete architectural translation, the hierarchy of dimensions can inform design criteria in a structured way: visual conditions inform spatial organization and lighting-related decisions; tactile conditions are translated into material and surface strategies oriented toward comfort, safety, and orientation; the relational dimension informs the design of transition and gathering spaces that may facilitate encounter and permanence; and therapeutic environments can be integrated as complementary supports within the overall system rather than as the organizing axis of the project as interpreted within the study context.

5. Articulation of Results with the Architectural Proposal

The architectural proposal developed in this section does not derive deterministically from the statistical findings but instead interprets the observed associations as analytical inputs that inform spatial strategies within the specific context of the study.

After presenting and interpreting the results of the inferential analyses, this section develops the articulation between the empirical findings and the architectural proposal for the comprehensive center for older adults’ quality of life. This section adopts an applied approach, insofar as it uses the empirical findings as an analytical reference for interpret spatial, functional, and sensory design criteria. In this sense, the design decisions presented are interpreted in relation to the associations identified through Spearman’s Rho coefficient, and are organized according to the relative magnitude of the observed relationships between sensory architecture dimensions and quality of life. This hierarchical structure provides the analytical basis for the following subsections, which translate the most empirically salient dimensions into prioritized spatial, material, and relational strategies within the architectural proposal.

5.1. Hierarchization of Sensory Dimensions as a Design Criterion

In line with the inferential synthesis developed in “Inferential Synthesis and Hierarchization of Dimensions”, the hierarchization of sensory dimensions derives from the magnitude of the associations identified through Spearman’s Rho coefficient, which provide an analytical reference for interpreting design orientations within the architectural proposal.

This empirical ordering is interpreted within the conceptual framework previously established, in which sensory architecture is understood as a multidimensional construct articulated through visual, tactile, relational, and therapeutic components. In this sense, the statistical hierarchy clarifies the relative relevance of each dimension with respect to its association with quality of life, rather than redefining the conceptual structure of the construct.

As summarized in

Table 8. Hierarchization of sensory dimensions as a design criterion.

Sensory Dimension	Spearman’s Rho	Hierarchy Level	Project Role	Architectural Design Implications
Visual stimuli	0.785	Main axis	Structuring	Spatial organization, natural lighting, cross views, chromatic design, and interior–exterior relationship
Tactile stimuli	0.781	Second-priority axis	Complementary priority	Material selection, textures, warm and safe surfaces, physical comfort, and orientation
Sensory architecture–social relationships	0.727	Relational support	Social articulator	Design of meeting and transition spaces, coexistence, and collective permanence
Therapeutic environments	0.520	Complementary dimension	Functional support	Specific spaces supporting quality of life and supporting functional integration within the overall design

, visual stimuli are positioned as the main axis of the project because they present the highest magnitude of correlation with quality of life within the analyzed empirical context. Accordingly, this result suggests interpreting them as a complementary design reference for the configuration of visual relationships, and the use of natural lighting. At a second hierarchical level are tactile stimuli, whose high association suggests interpretation them as a complementary design reference, relevant to the selection of materials, textures, and surfaces intended to support physical comfort, orientation, and user safety.

Likewise, the relationship between sensory architecture and social relationships, with a high-magnitude correlation, is incorporated as a relational reference within the project in light of the associations observed in the analyzed dataset. This relationship informs the spatial interpretation of gathering, transition, and collective-permanence spaces that may facilitate social interaction within the built environment. Finally, therapeutic environments, although presenting a relatively lower magnitude of association, are integrated as a complementary dimension of functional support, articulated within the architectural ensemble without assuming a dominant role. Taken together, this hierarchization allows statistical evidence to be interpreted within a coherent design framework, in which design decisions are considered in relation to an explicitly grounded order of sensory priorities.

5.2. Translation of Visual Stimuli into Spatial Organization

The use of visual stimuli as an input for the project’s spatial organization is informed by their hierarchization as the sensory dimension with the greatest magnitude of association with quality of life, according to the results of the inferential analysis ($\rho =0.785$). In this sense, the spatial configuration of the center is structured based on criteria that prioritize visual clarity, natural orientation, and a comprehensible reading of the architectural ensemble, aspects that are explicitly materialized in the architectural floor plans presented in Figure 9 where the spatial continuity of the layout and the organization around interior courtyards are intended to support visual orientation and a legible reading of the ensemble.

Organizing the project around interior courtyards allows the spatial configuration to favor the controlled entry of natural light into the different areas, which may contribute to more homogeneous visibility conditions and may reduce abrupt visual contrasts. This layout not only is associated with users’ visual comfort, but also may facilitate the identification of consistent spatial references, which may support orientation and the perception of safety during everyday movement within the building.

Likewise, the articulation between the different blocks and central voids is intended to generate progressive visual transitions among collective-use spaces, therapeutic areas, and circulation zones, which may reduce the likelihood of fragmented or visually confusing routes. As shown in Figure 9, spatial continuity and the visual relationship among levels and functional areas are intended to enable an integrated reading of the ensemble, an aspect that is especially relevant in a project intended for an older adult population.

Taken together, spatial organization informed by visual stimuli does not respond to an isolated formal decision but rather it is interpreted in light of the study’s statistical findings as analytical inputs derived from the specific empirical context of the research. Accordingly, natural lighting, spatial clarity, and visual transitions are integrated as guiding criteria of the architectural design, thereby offering a rationale for the configuration of the project’s floor plans.

5.3. Translation of Tactile Stimuli into Materiality and Bodily Experience

In accordance with the hierarchization established in Table 8, tactile stimuli are incorporated as a second-priority design axis of the project, based on their relatively high association with quality of life ($\rho =0.781$) and are treated as an evidence-informed criterion rather than a deterministic rule. This dimension does not operate in isolation, but rather as a priority complement that deepens the experience of space through the body, framed in relation to perceptions of safety, comfort, and orientation during older adults’ everyday movement. While visual stimuli structure the overall spatial reading, tactile stimuli allow this organization to be directly and continuously experienced through contact with materials and surfaces.

This translation is clearly manifested in the architectural floor plans presented in Figure 9, where the layout of circulation paths, staying areas, and transitional spaces reveals particular attention to route continuity and to the presence of recognizable and stable surfaces. The proposed materiality in these spaces responds to the need to provide physical safety and confidence in everyday use, aiming to support legible routes and to reduce abrupt changes that could generate insecurity or disorientation.

Likewise, the architectural sections shown in Figure 10 make it possible to observe how the tactile experience is reinforced throughout the different levels of the building, as reflected in the continuity of surfaces, vertical connections, and spatial transitions that are designed to facilitate bodily interaction across floors. The relationship between floors, the arrangement of habitable balconies, and the vertical continuity of the project are intended to generate opportunities for prolonged contact with warm and safe surfaces, which may contribute to a coherent bodily experience throughout the ensemble. In this sense, materiality is not limited to an aesthetic resource, but rather is discussed as playing an active role in orientation, physical comfort, and the perception of stability during both vertical and horizontal movement.

Finally, this logic is consolidated in the architectural elevations presented in Figure 11, where the vertical composition, material continuity, and facade articulation illustrate how tactile and visual criteria are interpreted within the building’s external expression. The incorporation of recognizable materials with a warm character may strengthen the relationship between the building and the user from the very first contact, avoiding excessively neutral or cold surfaces and seeking to facilitate a sensory experience aligned with bodily aspects of quality of life. Taken together, materiality and contact surfaces are integrated as an essential component of the project, enabling architecture to be experienced not only visually, but also through the body, in coherence with the statistical findings obtained in the specific empirical context of the study.

5.4. Spatial Articulation of Social Relationships Through Architectural Sections

The spatial articulation of social relationships constitutes a transversal axis of the project and is informed by the significant association identified between sensory architecture and social relationships ($\rho =0.727$). This dimension acquires a particularly clear design expression through the architectural sections, which make it possible to understand how the spatial configuration of the building is designed to facilitate interaction, coexistence, and spontaneous encounters among older adults.

The architectural sections presented in Figure 10 reveal a vertical organization that prioritizes visual and physical connectivity among the different levels of the project, clearly illustrating how sectional relationships may be associated with interaction, proximity, and spatial continuity. The presence of balconies, voids, and double-height spaces may creates intermediate areas that function as habitable extensions, intended to support permanence and visual contact among users located on different floors. This spatial strategy is framed in relation to the need to support social relationships within a safe and controlled environment, seeking to reduce isolation and to facilitate everyday interaction dynamics.

Likewise, the spatial continuity observed in the sections makes it possible to identify how circulation and staying areas are articulated as social nodes, where architecture can be understood as a mediator of human relationships. The placement of common areas in direct relation to main circulation routes may facilitate unplanned encounters, supporting the project’s social dimension without imposing rigid uses or forced paths. This spatial logic is consistent with the statistical evidence obtained, which indicates the close relationship between the sensory experience of the built environment and the quality of social interactions.

Taken together, the architectural sections not only describe the building’s constructive structure but also reveal how the spatial design has been conceived to support coexistence and social interaction as spatial strategies informed by the associations identified in the analyzed dataset. In this way, architecture is configured as an active support for social relationships, translating inferential results into concrete spatial decisions that are intended to support the collective experience within the comprehensive center.

5.5. Design Synthesis: Coherence Between Statistical Results and Architectural Language

Overall, the architectural proposal developed (Figure 12) is configured as an evidence-informed response to the empirical evidence obtained in the study, avoiding a merely formalistic approach and prioritizing design decisions that are justified in light of statistically significant associations identified within the analyzed empirical context between the sensory environment and quality of life. As illustrated in Figure 12, the volumetric composition, facade articulation, and spatial openness express the integration of visual and tactile priorities into the overall architectural language. The design decisions adopted coherently integrate the hierarchized sensory dimensions, so that the architectural language reflects and remains consistent with the findings derived from the inferential analyses.

This coherence is clearly manifested in the project’s elevations (Figure 11), where the use of a warm color palette and materials with a strong sensory presence is intended to convey an institutional image oriented toward quality of life, calmness, and closeness. The building’s formal expression does not respond to isolated aesthetic criteria but rather intentionally expresses the prioritized visual and tactile stimuli, articulating an architecture that communicates comfort, accessibility, and care through its exterior expression.

In this sense, the design synthesis achieved shows a consistent alignment among perception, sensory experience, and quality of life within the scope of the analyzed empirical context, in which each architectural component fulfills a clear role within an integrated design logic. The project is thus presented as an evidence-based architecture, where the built space is interpreted as a spatial medium potentially associated with aspects of older adults’ quality of life within the context studied rather than as a universally generalizable design principle. This approach also supports social relationships, thereby consolidating an architectural language coherent with the statistical results that support it.

These design interpretations are presented as evidence-informed insights derived from the specific empirical context analyzed in this study, and they are intended to guide the proposed project rather than to be treated as broadly generalizable design principles.

6. Conclusions

The results of the study empirically showed that sensory architecture is significantly associated with older adults’ quality of life within the analyzed institutional context, indicating that the built environment may constitute a relevant component of older adults’ everyday experience of quality of life. This association is not interpreted through a causal logic but as a structural relationship that links the sensory conditions of space with the way older adults perceive and experience their daily lives. In this sense, the study suggests that, in the analyzed context, quality of life in old age cannot be understood solely on the basis of individual or biomedical factors but may also be related to characteristics of the immediate environment that accompany everyday experience. Thus, the central finding of the research suggests that sensory architecture may operate as a significant environmental framework in the perception of quality of life in the studied setting.

The comparative analysis of sensory architecture dimensions suggests that not all of them are associated to the same extent with older adults’ quality of life within the analyzed empirical context and dataset. Empirical evidence from the analyzed dataset suggests that the dimensions linked to visual and tactile experience emerge as priority dimensions within the study context. Likewise, therapeutic environments, although they present a significant association with quality of life, are interpreted as occupying a complementary role within the sensory system of the built environment in the analyzed study context. Their association appears mainly linked to specific and episodic experiences, without reaching the structural weight of those dimensions that continuously accompany older adults’ daily lives. Regarding the social dimension, the results allowed it to be concluded that social relationships do not depend directly on architecture but are spatially mediated through the sensory conditions of the environment. In this sense, sensory architecture does not produce social interaction but rather configures a framework that may be associated with variations in encounters, permanence, and coexistence, integrating the social dimension as a relational component of quality of life.

From a methodological and epistemological perspective, the study allowed it to be concluded that it is possible to operationalize older adults’ spatial and sensory perceptions through a quantitative approach, using nonparametric associations as an analytical tool to examine the association between sensory architecture and quality of life. The use of Spearman’s Rho coefficient was appropriate for capturing significant associations between perceptual variables, which are typically addressed through qualitative or interpretive approaches. Likewise, the results show that statistical associations can be rigorously translated into design criteria without resorting to causal assumptions, allowing empirical evidence to be articulated with well-grounded architectural design decisions. In this sense, the study contributes to reducing the epistemological gap between quantitative research and design practice by proposing a methodological framework that integrates statistical analysis, spatial interpretation, and architectural application. This approach supports the feasibility of evidence-based design models within the field of architecture, especially in research oriented toward quality of life and quality of life in complex urban contexts.

The relevance of the present study extends beyond the specific case of San Juan de Lurigancho by suggesting the potential contextual relevance of sensory architecture as a daily support for quality of life in urban contexts with similar socio-spatial characteristics, particularly those characterized by high levels of social vulnerability and limited specialized infrastructure. In scenarios where access to formal therapeutic facilities is scarce, the built environment may assume a particularly significant role by permanently accompanying older adults’ everyday experience. In this context, the study’s findings suggest that everyday architecture may constitute a relevant environmental framework for the perception of quality of life in institutional or urban contexts that present socio-spatial conditions comparable to those analyzed in this research, including aspects of autonomy and social interaction, especially in territories where urban conditions tend to deepen situations of isolation or dependence. In this way, the research offers an interpretation that may be relevant for other urban environments with similar socio-spatial characteristics, reinforcing the value of evidence-based approaches for understanding how the sensory conditions of space are associated with quality of life in old age.

7. Limitations and Future Research

Despite the contributions and empirical consistency of the findings, it is important to acknowledge certain methodological and contextual limitations that frame the interpretive scope and open avenues for future research.

The present study is framed within an associative approach aimed at identifying significant relationships between sensory architecture and older adults’ quality of life, without establishing causal links between the variables analyzed. This epistemological delimitation defines the interpretive scope of the results, insofar as it allows relevant patterns of association to be understood from the everyday experience of the built environment, maintaining coherence with the methodological design and avoiding inferences that exceed the available empirical evidence. Likewise, the findings are grounded in perceptions mediated by respondents, considering both older adults’ direct experience and the perspectives of caregivers or family members, which introduces an interpretive dimension inherent to the phenomenon under study. In this regard, the use of proxy respondents, such as family members and caregivers, implies a perceptual mediation that may introduce interpretive nuances in the assessment of older adults’ spatial and sensory experiences, which should be considered when interpreting the results. Similarly, the analysis was conducted in a specific vulnerable urban context, whose sociospatial conditions may influence both the experience of quality of life and its perceptual appraisal. In this sense, the results should be understood within the territorial and social framework in which they were produced, which limits their generalizability but reinforces their relevance for urban contexts with similar characteristics.

From a methodological standpoint, the study relies on the use of perceptual instruments to measure the variables analyzed, which implies that the results reflect the respondents’ subjective experience and appraisal of the built environment, without incorporating physiological or objective measurements of sensory performance. This methodological decision is consistent with the quality-of-life-centered approach, but it restricts the analysis to the perceptual dimension of quality of life, leaving out biometric or clinical indicators that could complement the understanding of the phenomenon. Likewise, the study’s cross-sectional design made it possible to capture existing associations at a specific point in time, without considering the evolution of perceptions or spatial conditions over older adults’ life course. In addition, the use of nonparametric analyses was appropriate for the treatment of ordinal variables and non-normal distributions; however, this analytical approach is oriented toward identifying associative relationships rather than generating predictive models. Taken together, these methodological decisions delimit the temporal and explanatory scope of the results while maintaining coherence with the stated objectives and the study design.

Based on the results obtained, future research could deepen the analysis of the relationship between sensory architecture and quality of life through longitudinal designs that allow the evolution of spatial perceptions and quality of life to be observed over time. This approach would contribute to a more precise understanding of how the identified associations are maintained, transformed, or intensified as a function of changes in older adults’ personal, environmental, or urban conditions. Likewise, there is an opportunity to incorporate methodological triangulation strategies by combining perceptual instruments with objective environmental variables (lighting, acoustics, thermal conditions, or spatial configuration), as well as to conduct comparisons across different urban contexts with diverse sociospatial characteristics. Finally, validating the analytical model in other age groups or territories would make it possible to assess the transferability of the approach and expand its applicability, strengthening the development of evidence-based research oriented toward quality of life from the perspective of the built environment.