This research examined visual environmental preferences of a sample of 46 subjects (Ss): 29 in Japan and 17 in the United States. The Ss (who were all students) were asked to evaluate videotapes and slides of urban street scenes in each country. An examination of preference scores revealed that both Japanese and U.S. Ss preferred foreign scenes to native ones. Physical properties of each scene were judged by four professionals in the United States. An examination of correlations between preferences for scenes and physical properties of those scenes revealed that for both Japanese and U.S. Ss, preference was associated independently with ratings of upkeep, prominence of nature, and absence of vehicles. Stepwise regressions revealed preference to be a function of two factors: order (order, naturalness, and upkeep) and diversity (high contrast, diversity, and few vehicles).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Appleyard, D. (1976). Livable urban streets: Managing auto traffic in neighborhoods. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.
2.
Appleyard, D. , & Lintel, M. (1972). The environmental quality of city streets: The residents' viewpoint. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 38(2),84-101.
3.
Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
4.
Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps towards an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. New York: Halsted.
5.
Canter, D. & Canter, S. (1971). Close together in Tokyo. Design & Environment, 2, 60-62.
6.
Canter, D. , & Throne, R. (1972). Attitudes to housing: A cross-cultural comparison. Environment & Behavior, 4.
7.
Cooper, C. (1972). Resident dissatisfaction in multifamily housing. In W. M. Smith (Ed.), Behavior, design and policy aspects of human habitats (pp. 119-146). Green Bay: University of Wisconsin.
8.
Ertel, S. (1973). Exploratory choice and verbal judgment. In D. E. Berlyne & K. B. Madsen (Eds.), Pleasure, reward, and preference (pp. 115-132). New York: Academic.
9.
Europa Publications, Ltd. (1980). Europa yearbook: A world survey (Vol.5). London: Author.
10.
Garling, T. (1976). Multidimensional scaling and semantic differential technique study of the perception of environmental settings. Scandanavian Journal of Psychology, 17, 323-332.
11.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Miflin.
12.
Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
13.
Helwig, J. , & Council, K. (1979). S.A.S. users guides, 1979 edition. Raleigh, NC: S.A.S. Institute.
14.
Hesselgren, S. (1975). Man's perception of the man-made environment. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
15.
Horayangkura, V. (1978). Semantic differential structures: A methodological approach. Environment & Behavior, 10, 555-584.
16.
Kaplan, S. (1975). An informal model for the prediction of preference. In E. H. Zube, G. G. Fabos, & R. O. Brush (Eds.), Landscape assessment: Values perceptions and resources. New York: Halsted.
17.
Kaplan, S. , Kaplan, R., & Wendt, J. (1972). Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material. Perception & Psychophysics, 12, 354-356.
18.
Lowenthal, D. , & Riel, M. (1972). The nature of perceived and imagined environments. Environment and Behavior, 4, 189-207.
19.
Marans, R. W. , & Rogers, W. (1973). Evaluating resident satisfaction in established and new communities. In R. W. Burchell (Ed.) Frontiers of planned unit development: Synthesis of expert opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
20.
Nasar, J. (1981). Visual preferences of elderly public housing residents: Residential street-scenes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1, 303-313.
21.
Oostendorp, A. , & Berlyne, D. E. (1978a). Dimensions in the perception of architecture: A measure of exploratory behavior. Scandanavian Journal of Psychology, 19, 83-89.
22.
Oostendorp, A. , & Berlyne, D. E. (1978b). Dimensions in the perception of architecture: A multidimensional preferences scaling. Scandanavian Journal of Psychology, 19, 145-150.
23.
Peterson, G. (1967). A model of preference: Quantitative analysis of the perception of the visual appearance of residential neighborhoods. Journal of Regional Science, 7, 19-31.
24.
Rapoport, A. (1977). Human aspects of urban form: Towards a man-environment approach to urban form and design. New York: Pergamon.
25.
Sonnenfeld, J. (1966). Variable values in space landscape: An inquiry into the nature of environmental necessity. Journal of Social Issues, 22, 71-82.
26.
Sonnenfeld, J. (1969). Equivalence and distortion of the perceptual environment. Environment & Behavior, 1, 83-100.
27.
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1980). Census of population and housing: Preliminary population counts. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
28.
Wohlwill, J. F. (1976). Environmental aesthetics: The environment as a source of affect. In I. Altman & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Human behavior and environment: Advances in theory and research (Vol. 1). New York: Plenum.
29.
Wohlwill, J. F. (1978). What belongs where: Research on the fittingness of man-made structures in natural settings. Landscape Research, 3, 3-5.
