Time is a central issue in discussions about art and in Berlyne's aesthetic theory. This article reports on the temporal stabilities of preferences for a novel and controversial building at three times after construction (2 years, 18 years, 23 years), and public preferences for 20 ordinary and noncontroversial buildings at three times over nine years. In all there were 5543 respondents. Analyses suggested that the initial response to the novel building was stable over the next 23 years, and the public responses for the 20 nonnovel buildings were stable over nine years. Implications for research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerlyneD. E. (1960) Conflict, arousal and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
2.
BockR. D., & JonesL. V. (1968) The measurement and prediction of judgment and choice. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.
3.
CochranW. G., & CoxG. M. (1957) Experimental designs. New York-Wiley.
4.
CohenJ. (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciencesHillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
CraikK. H. (1973) Environmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 24, 403–422.
6.
DeleonR. E. (1992) Left coast city: progressive politics in San Francisco: 1975–1991. Lawrence, KS: Univer. of Kansas Press.
7.
DunlopI. (1972) The shock of the new: seven historic exhibitions of modern art. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
8.
EvensonN. (1979) Paris, a century of change, 1987–1978. New Haven, CT: Yale Univer. Press.
9.
GrovesP. M., & ThompsonR. F. (1970) Habituation: a dual process theory. Psychological Review, 77, 419–450.
HolahanC. J. (1986) Environmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 37, 381–407.
12.
HughesR. (1995) The shock of the new. New York: Knopf.
13.
JacobsA. B. (1978) Making city planning work. Chicago, IL: American Society of Planning Officials.
14.
JacobsJ., & AdamsG. D. (1986) Inner circles: how money and politics shape San Francisco's skyline. San Francisco Examiner, 19 June 1986, reprint pp. 1–12.
15.
MandelB. (1986) The beauties and the beasts. San Francisco Examiner, 6 April 1986, pp. B1–B3.
16.
MandelB. (1992) A question of taste—or the lack of it. San Francisco Examiner, 8 November 1992, pp. Bl, B4.
17.
NasarJ. L. (1996) Evaluating competition architecture through time. Paper presented at the 27th annual meeting of the Environmental Design Research Association, EDRA 27, Public and private places, Salt Lake City, 12–16 June 1996.
18.
NasarJ. L.PawleyJ., & ZollerL. (1993) Preference for citation and noncitation architecture over time. In FeldmanR. & SaileD. (Eds.), Power by design, EDRA 24. Edmond, OK: Environmental Design Research Association. Pp. 46–50.
19.
RosenthalR., & RosnowR. L. (1991) Essentials of behavioral research: methods and data analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.
20.
SaegertS., & WinkelG. H. (1990) Environmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 441–477.
21.
StampsA. E.III. (1991) Use of comparative choice paradigm in governmental design review, a case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 33, 351–364.
22.
StampsA. E.III. (1996) Effect sizes as a lingua frana of environmental aesthetics. In NasarJ. L. & BrownB. B. (Eds.), Public and private places: EDRA 27. Edmond, OK: Environmental Design Research Association. Pp. 151–162.
23.
StampsA. E.III, & MillerS. D. (1993) Advocacy membership, design guidelines and predicting preferences for residential infill designs. Environment and Behavior, 25, 367–409.
24.
StokolsD. (1978) Environmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 253–295.
WalkerE. L. (1973) Complexity and preference theory. In BerlyneD. E. & MadsenK. B. (Eds.), Pleasure, reward, preference. New York: Academic Press. Pp. 65–97.
27.
WinerB. J.BrownD. R., & MichelsK. M. (1991) Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
28.
WongC. Y.SommerR., & CookE. J. (1992) The soft classroom 17 years later. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 337–343.
29.
ZajoncR. B. (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monograph Supplement, 9(2), Part 2.
