Architects predict lay evaluations of large contemporary buildings: Whose conceptual properties?

Journal of Environmental Psychology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 93-99

  Brown, Graham ^b   Gifford, Robert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0345856516     PISSN: 02724944     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jevp.2000.0176     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
2. Devlin, K. (1990). An examination of architectural interpretation: architects versus non-architects. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 7, 235-244.
3. Devlin, K. & Nasar, J. L. (1989). The beauty and the beast: some preliminary comparisons of 'high versus 'popular' residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 9, 333-334.
4. Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Muller-Clem, W., Reynolds, Jr., D. J. & Shaw, K. (2000). Decoding modern architecture: A lens model approach for understanding the aesthetic differences of architects and laypersons. Environment and Behavior, 32, 163-187.
5. Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Muller-Clemm, W. & Shaw, K. T. (in press). Why architects and laypersons judge buildings differently: cognitive and physical bases. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research.
6. Groat, L. (1982). Meaning in post-modern architecture: an examination using the multiple sorting task. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2, 3-22.
7. Groat, L. (1995). Introduction: place, aesthetic evaluation, and home. In L. Groat, (Ed.), Giving Places Meaning. New York: Academic Press, pp. 1-26.
8. Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9. Hershberger, R. G. (1969). A study of meaning and architecture. In J. L. Nasar, (Ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research, and Application. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 175-194.
10. Hershberger, R. G. & Cass, R. (1974). Predicting user responses to buildings. In J. L. Nasar, (Ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195-211.
11. Herzog, T. R. (1992). A cognitive analysis of preference for urban spaces. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 237-248.
12. Hubbard, P. (1994). Professional vs lay tastes in design control - an empirical investigation. Planning Practice and Research, 9, 271-287.
13. Hubbard, P. (1996). Conflicting interpretation of architecture: an empirical investigation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 75-92.
14. Izumi, K. (1965). Psycho social phenomena and building design. Building Research, 2, 9-11.
15. Kaplan, R. & Kaplan, S. (1989). The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Kuller, R. (1980). Architecture and emotions. In B. Mikellides, (Ed.), Architecture and People. London: Studio Vista.
17. Nasar, J. L. (1989). Symbolic meaning of house styles. Environment and Behavior, 21, 235-257.
18. Nasar, J. L. (1994). Urban design aesthetics: the evaluative qualities of building exteriors. Environment and Behavior, 26, 377-401.
19. Nasar, J. L. & Purcell, T. (1990). Beauty and the beast extended: knowledge structure and evaluations of house by Australian architects and nonarchitects. In H. Pamir, V. Imamoglu & N. Teymur, (Eds), Culture, Space, History. Ankara, Turkey: Sevki Vanh Foundation.
20. Osmond, H. (1957). Function as the basis of psychiatric ward design, Mental Hospitals, 8, 23-30.
21. Purcell, T. (1995). Experiencing American and Australian high- and popular-style houses. Environment and Behavior, 27, 771-800.
22. Purcell, T. & Nasar, J. L. (1992). Experiencing other people's houses: a model of similarities and differences in environmental experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 199-211.
23. Shrout, P. E. & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
24. Stamps, A. E. (1991a). Comparing preferences of neighbors and a neighborhood design review board. Environment and Behavior, 23, 618-629.
25. Stamps, A. E. (1991b). Public preferences for high rise buildings, stylistic and demographic effects. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72, 839-844.
26. Stamps, A. E. & Nasar, J. L. (1997). Design review and public preferences: effects of geographical location, public consensus, sensation seeking, and architectural styles. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 11-32.
27. Wilson, M. A. (1996). The socialization of architectural preference. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 33-44.
28. Wilson, M. A. & Canter, D. V. (1990). The development of central concepts during professional training. An example of a multivariate model of the concept of architectural style. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 39, 431-455.
29. Wohlwill, J. (1974). The Place of Aesthetics in the Study of the Environment. Paper presented at the Symposium on Experimental Aesthetics and Psychology of the Environment at the International Congress of Applied Psychology, Montreal.