From Spatial Configuration to Visitor Experience: Linking Space Syntax, Physical Activity Intensity, Satisfaction, and Place Attachment in Urban Parks

3.1 Overview of selected studies

The final corpus comprised 81 studies published between 2016 and 2025. Publication volume increased after 2019, reflecting a broader shift toward data-rich methods (e.g., GPS traces, mobile sensing, street-view analytics) and renewed policy attention to urban parks as public health assets and resilient tourism infrastructures [1-4]. Geographically, studies were concentrated in East and Southeast Asia (especially China, Hong Kong, and South Korea), Western Europe, and North America, with emerging contributions from the Middle East and Latin America. Several factors likely drive this distribution: rapid urban densification and park planning initiatives in Asian megacities, established space syntax research communities in Europe, and strong public health-built environment traditions in North America [17, 20, 22]. Methodologically, four dominant clusters were identified: (1) configurational modelling of accessibility and movement (space syntax axial/segment analysis, visibility graph analysis), (2) observational or sensor-based measurement of park-based physical activity intensity (SOPARC, accelerometer/GPS integration), (3) survey-based evaluation of satisfaction, restorative experience, and place attachment, and (4) integrated multi-method designs combining at least two of the above.

Only a subset of studies explicitly treated urban parks as tourism destinations or distinguished tourists from residents. For this reason, the synthesis uses visitor as the broader empirical category, while discussing tourist experience only where the evidence concerns first-time visitors, destination parks, loyalty, willingness to pay, or urban parks embedded in wider tourism systems. Many papers nevertheless remain tourism relevant because they examine visitor motivations, park branding, willingness to pay, satisfaction, revisit intention and behavioural loyalty [10-13]. Across contexts, studies converge on the idea that spatial configuration shapes the sequence and effort of park experiences, while satisfaction and attachment are shaped by both the physical setting and the social conditions that configuration helps to produce, including co-presence, crowding and perceived safety [14, 15, 26].

Overall, Table 3 illustrates that rigorous links between configuration and movement are common, and links between park zones/facilities and activity intensity are increasingly evidence-based, but only a small number of studies measure configuration, intensity, and experience outcomes in the same design.

Table 3. Summary of key studies linking configuration, activity, satisfaction, and attachment in urban parks (2016-2025)

3.2 Thematic findings

3.2.1 Space syntax in urban park research: from access to legibility

The first theme concerns how researchers conceptualise and operationalise “spatial configuration” in urban parks. Across the corpus, space syntax is used in two main ways. One focuses on configurational accessibility: parks are evaluated as destinations within broader street networks, often using segment-based integration, choice, and angular metrics at multiple radii to represent how easily different neighbourhoods can reach park entrances [7, 20, 22]. The other focuses on internal configuration: the park’s own path network is modelled to identify integrated spines, segregated pockets, and the likely distribution of movement within the park itself [21, 26]. Both approaches align with a broader planning shift toward network-based accessibility analysis that recognises that “distance to a park” is not purely Euclidean but mediated by path structure, barriers, and route attractiveness.

A recurring methodological advance is the move from purely topological accessibility to user-centred legibility and intelligibility. Studies increasingly recognise that visitor experience depends not only on objective access but also on whether routes are cognitively navigable and whether destinations are visually and semantically discoverable [21]. For tourists and first-time visitors, legibility may be especially influential because they lack routine familiarity and may be more sensitive to wayfinding friction, uncertainty, and perceived risk. Configurational indicators such as intelligibility (correlation between local connectivity and global integration) are therefore framed as not just movement predictors but experience predictors: they potentially shape feelings of control, exploration enjoyment, and perceived safety, which are common antecedents of satisfaction in tourism settings.

Several studies emphasise scale effects: configurational accessibility at a 500-800 m radius may capture walk-in catchments and everyday use, while larger radii (2-5 km or beyond) may better represent cycling, transit connections, or tourist itineraries that integrate parks with other attractions [20, 22]. This multi-scale reasoning is important because the same park can be simultaneously a neighbourhood open space and a city-level tourism node. Evidence suggests that different design interventions target different scales: entrance placement and external street connectivity matter for citywide access, while internal path continuity and node distribution matter for on-site experience.

A methodological gap remains in how internal and external configurations are jointly analysed. While some studies compute accessibility to park entrances from the street network and then separately analyse internal circulation, few explicitly model the coupling between the two networks—for example, how a highly integrated street segment aligns (or fails to align) with an intuitive internal park spine, potentially creating bottlenecks, uneven distribution of use, or wayfinding confusion. Emerging network toolchains, including open-source workflows for graph construction and analysis, are increasingly used to bridge these scales [22, 23], but their application to integrative experience research is still limited.

3.2.2 Spatial configuration and visitor movement patterns

The second theme concerns the evidence base linking configuration to movement patterns in urban parks. Across studies, configurationally integrated paths tend to concentrate pedestrian movement, functioning as “main spines” that channel both through-movement and exploratory strolling [17, 22, 26]. This pattern appears robust across settings because integrated segments reduce route complexity and connect multiple destinations with relatively low cognitive load. In tourism terms, these paths can act as default itineraries that structure the sequence of encounters with scenery, amenities, and social activity.

Empirical movement evidence is increasingly derived from GPS trajectories, mobile phone location datasets, and systematic observations. GPS-based studies enable fine-grained analysis of route choice, dwell times, and repeated circuits, offering a behavioural window into how visitors actually use networks rather than how planners assume they will [22-24]. When combined with space syntax, such data can be used to test whether integrated segments predict higher track density and whether choice metrics predict cross-park traversal. While the review found relatively few fully integrated designs, the available evidence supports the intuition that configuration is a first-order driver of movement distribution, with environmental quality and programming acting as secondary attractors.

Movement studies also highlight heterogeneity across visitor types and motives. For example, recreational walkers may prefer looped circuits that enable rhythmic movement and easy self-monitoring of distance, while tourists seeking iconic views may tolerate more complex routes if wayfinding support is available and the payoff is high [10, 15]. Families and older adults may select routes with rest points and minimal conflict with faster users, which implies that configuration should not only be integrated but also diversified: multiple parallel routes may be needed to reduce conflict and support inclusive experiences [24, 33].

Recent work on social interaction adds another layer: configuration shapes co-presence, which can be positive (vibrancy, social connection) or negative (crowding, conflict). Sheng et al. [26] found that more integrated spaces were associated with more social interactions in urban parks, suggesting that configuration can indirectly influence experience quality through social density. In tourism contexts, this implies that managers may need to deliberately balance “lively” integrated areas with quieter, restorative zones by adjusting path structure, landscape buffers, and access points, rather than relying solely on programming or signage.

3.2.3 Spatial configuration and physical activity intensity

The third theme addresses the emerging literature connecting configuration to physical activity intensity. Compared with movement-volume studies, intensity studies are fewer, but they provide crucial insight because health and wellbeing benefits depend on intensity, duration, and regularity. A consistent message is that pathways and connected trail systems are among the most reliable correlates of both park use and higher intensity activity, especially walking-based MVPA [24, 30, 33]. Configurationally, pathways often coincide with high integration/choice lines, suggesting a plausible mechanism: integrated networks support continuous locomotion by minimising dead-ends, facilitating loops, and providing multiple route options that maintain interest and reduce perceived effort.

The strongest direct evidence comes from studies that combine accelerometers and GPS to assign intensity to specific park facilities or zones. Zhai et al. [24], for instance, reported that seniors spent a substantial share of park-visit time in MVPA and that pathway use was positively related to MET and MVPA, while lawns and open paved areas were less likely to be associated with higher intensity. Although this study did not explicitly compute space syntax metrics for internal routes, its results align with configurational reasoning: continuous, well-connected path networks provide the structural precondition for sustained walking. Similar conclusions appear in youth studies where amenities and supportive facilities predict observed MVPA, indicating that activity-friendly environments depend on both network structure and facility programming [30, 32].

A second strand of evidence concerns how park environment quality moderates intensity. High-quality supporting amenities (e.g., benches, toilets, lighting) and perceived safety can enable longer and more intense activity by reducing stressors and increasing comfort, especially for vulnerable groups such as adolescents in low-income neighbourhoods or older adults [32, 33]. From a configurational perspective, these moderators are not independent of configuration: amenities and safety features are typically distributed along main routes and nodes, which can create a reinforcing loop where integrated paths become both easier and more rewarding to use, further concentrating activity.

Few studies directly test whether specific space syntax metrics predict intensity, but the reviewed evidence supports several hypotheses that future research can test more rigorously. First, higher integration and intelligibility are likely to support higher intensity for tourists and first-time visitors by reducing wayfinding friction and enabling confident continuous movement [21]. Second, higher choice may support longer walking distances by facilitating cross-park traversal and linking multiple attractions, potentially increasing total energy expenditure. Third, a network with multiple loops and alternative routes may support both intensity (for runners) and comfort (for strollers) by reducing congestion and enabling self-selected pace. These hypotheses align with broader evidence that network structure and street layout influence walking behaviour in cities, including health-relevant walking outcomes [2, 17].

Methodologically, intensity research depends on clear data processing protocols for wearable devices and consistent definitions of intensity thresholds [30, 31]. In the park literature, variability in epoch length, cut-points, and non-wear algorithms makes it difficult to directly compare intensity distributions across studies. This review therefore treats intensity findings as pattern evidence rather than as directly comparable effect sizes.

3.2.4 Satisfaction, experience quality, and the role of movement

The fourth theme synthesises research on satisfaction and experience quality in urban parks, with attention to how movement and configuration may underpin these outcomes. Satisfaction in park settings is generally multi-dimensional, reflecting both functional evaluations (access, amenities, cleanliness) and affective responses (enjoyment, relaxation, perceived restoration). Empirical studies repeatedly identify aesthetics, maintenance, and perceived safety as strong predictors of satisfaction and preference [8, 9, 33]. In high-density cities, satisfaction is also sensitive to crowding and the availability of comfortable micro-spaces for pause, viewing, and socialising, which are partly produced by spatial layout.

Movement is relevant to satisfaction through at least three pathways. First, movement determines exposure: the routes visitors take shape what they see, how quickly they reach desired settings, and how often they encounter stressors such as congestion or conflicts between user groups. Second, movement is itself part of the experience: many visitors come to parks specifically for walking or jogging, and the ease of maintaining a desired pace influences enjoyment and perceived benefits [15, 24]. Third, movement shapes social encounters: integrated routes and nodes can facilitate social interaction and perceived vibrancy, which may increase satisfaction for some visitors while reducing it for others seeking tranquillity [3, 26].

Several studies provide indirect evidence that satisfaction is linked to the quality of movement environments. For example, in adolescents’ park-based MVPA, amenities quality was associated with higher intensity activity [32], which suggests that better movement support can simultaneously enable activity and improve experience. In place attachment studies among walkers, satisfaction emerged as a key predictor of attachment [15]. Together, these findings support a plausible mediated chain in which configuration and design support desirable movement (including intensity) that contributes to satisfaction, which in turn supports attachment and loyalty.

However, the review also found evidence of trade-offs. Highly integrated spaces may attract high volumes of use, increasing congestion and reducing satisfaction for visitors motivated by stress relief or nature immersion [3, 8]. This indicates that park planning cannot equate “more integration” with “better experience” without considering crowding management and the need for diverse experiential zones. A key implication is that configuration should be designed not only to maximise access but also to distribute use in ways that preserve restorative experiences and avoid over-concentration.

3.2.5 Place attachment as an outcome of repeated, satisfying activity experiences

The fifth theme focuses on place attachment and how it emerges in urban parks. Across studies, attachment is consistently associated with frequency of use, past experience, and satisfaction. Bazrafshan et al. [15] found that satisfaction and past experience were strong predictors of attachment among urban walkers, suggesting that attachment is built through repeated confirmation that a place supports desired activities and provides positive outcomes. In an urban park setting, Plunkett et al. [12] reported that attachment predicted behavioural loyalty, highlighting attachment’s relevance for tourism management and destination sustainability. Liu et al. [14] similarly documented attachment variation across parks and linked it to perceived benefits and stewardship tendencies.

From the perspective of spatial configuration, attachment can be interpreted as partially “produced” by a park’s capacity to support stable, meaningful routines. A park with a legible network, coherent loops, and accessible nodes may more readily become a repeated walking/jogging setting, enabling visitors to develop personal meanings and identity-related ties. Conversely, a poorly connected or confusing network may raise the “activation energy” required to form routines, potentially weakening the likelihood of attachment among first-time visitors. Although this mechanism is not frequently tested directly, it is compatible with findings that satisfaction and perceived benefits mediate the relationship between place characteristics and attachment [14, 15].

The reviewed studies also suggest that attachment is multi-pathway. For some visitors, attachment is primarily functional (dependence) and linked to facility fit, accessibility, and convenience; for others it is affective/identity-driven and linked to symbolism, memory, and social connection. Tourism-oriented park studies that assess perceived benefits, aesthetics, and willingness to pay indicate that parks can become valued not only for exercise but also for cultural and emotional experiences [10, 11]. Configurational analysis may help explain why certain symbolic or scenic nodes become central to identity: nodes on highly traversed routes are more likely to be encountered, photographed, and incorporated into personal narratives, especially for tourists with limited time.

A practical implication is that attachment may be fostered not only through marketing or programming but also through configuration-sensitive design that supports repeatable positive experiences. In this sense, space syntax is relevant to “place-making” outcomes because it informs how spatial structure shapes everyday encounters and embodied practices that gradually build emotional bonds.

3.2.6 Toward integrated models: Linking configuration → intensity → satisfaction → attachment

The final theme concerns the limited but growing set of studies that attempt to integrate spatial analytics with behavioural and experiential outcomes. Multi-method designs combining configurational modelling, wearable sensing, and surveys remain uncommon, but they are methodologically important because they can test mediated pathways and reduce reliance on self-report. Zhai et al. [24] demonstrated how GPS and accelerometer integration can assign intensity to specific park settings, while Bazrafshan et al. [15] demonstrated how satisfaction and experience history predict attachment. Bridging these strands requires study designs that also quantify configuration and legibility of the movement environment.

Conceptually, an integrative model can be framed as follows. Spatial configuration shapes (a) movement opportunities (connectivity, loops, route alternatives), (b) cognitive effort (legibility, intelligibility), and (c) exposure to environmental and social stimuli (views, amenities, crowding). These factors influence physical activity intensity (pace, continuity, MVPA share) and perceived benefits (health, restoration), which contribute to satisfaction. Satisfaction then supports place attachment through repeated confirmation and meaning-making, which in turn predicts loyalty and stewardship outcomes [12, 14, 15]. This chain also includes feedback loops: attached visitors may increase frequency of use, further reinforcing intensity and satisfaction.

Analytically, integrated modelling can leverage multilevel structures (moments nested within routes nested within individuals nested within parks) and combine network measures with time-stamped activity signals. Methodological toolkits from urban analytics and health geography provide foundations for such integration, including open-source network construction and the coupling of spatial and temporal data streams [22, 23]. However, the review identified few studies that implement this full integration in urban parks, indicating a clear research opportunity.

3.2.7 Tourism dynamics, crowding, and smart wayfinding in urban parks

Although relatively few studies in the corpus explicitly adopt a tourism framing, many findings become more consequential when parks are treated as destinations within urban tourism systems. Tourism often concentrates visitation temporally (weekends, event days, holiday seasons) and spatially (iconic viewpoints, waterfront edges, heritage features). Under these conditions, configurational “hot spots” can become experience bottlenecks: integrated spines and landmark nodes accumulate queues, conflicts between fast and slow movers, and perceived crowding. The pandemic-era literature underscores how sensitive park experiences are to crowding and perceived risk; even when parks are valued more, visitors may avoid integrated areas if density undermines comfort [3]. From a management perspective, this suggests that spatial configuration analysis can inform not only design but also adaptive operations, such as dynamic routing, timed entry, or event layout planning that reduces pressure on a single corridor.

Crowding effects are likely to interact with satisfaction and attachment in complex ways. For some tourists, lively and socially dense areas increase perceived atmosphere and destination “buzz”; for others, crowding reduces restorative benefits and discourages repeat visitation. Studies of place attachment and restorative experience emphasise psychological benefits including relaxation and comfort-security, benefits that can be compromised in overcrowded settings [14, 15, 41]. A practical challenge is therefore to maintain both vibrant and tranquil experiences within the same park by using configuration-sensitive zoning: leveraging integrated networks for access while creating alternative routes and buffered micro-spaces for quiet experiences [8, 26].