Individual differences in preference for architectural interiors

被引:11
|
作者
Vartanian, Oshin [1 ]
Navarrete, Gorka [2 ]
Palumbo, Letizia [3 ]
Chatterjee, Anjan [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Psychol, 4th Floor,Sidney Smith Hall 100 St,George St, Toronto, ON M5S 3G3, Canada
[2] Univ Adolfo Ibanez, Sch Psychol, Ctr Social & Cognit Neurosci CSCN, Santiago, Chile
[3] Liverpool Hope Univ, Dept Psychol, Liverpool, Merseyside, England
[4] Univ Penn, Penn Ctr Neuroaesthet, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
Architecture; Design; Expertise; Autism spectrum disorder; Proxemics; PERCEIVED ENCLOSURE; DESIGN; BRAIN; NEUROSCIENCE; EXPERTISE; JUDGMENTS; RESPONSES; PERMEABILITY; EXPOSURE; RECOVERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101668
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Preference for architectural interiors can be explained using three psychological dimensions: Coherence (ease for organizing and comprehending a scene), Fascination (a scene's informational richness and generated interest), and Hominess (how much a space feels personal). We tested the hypothesis that their contributions to preference might vary based on individual differences by analyzing data from design students, participants with autism spectrum disorder, and neurotypical controls who rated images of interiors on liking and approach-avoidance decisions. For design students, only Coherence drove choices, whereas in participants with autism spectrum disorder and neurotypical controls Hominess and Fascination also contributed, respectively. Coherence is paramount for design students because it references the structural organization of spaces, and is informed by formal training. For autism spectrum disorder, Hominess matters because preference for familiarity, physical proximity, and difficulty in mental simulation are relevant to that population, whereas interest in visual exploration can explain Fascination's role in neurotypical controls.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN PREFERENCE FOR SOLITUDE
    BURGER, JM
    JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN PERSONALITY, 1995, 29 (01) : 85 - 108
  • [2] INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN DRUG PREFERENCE
    DEWIT, H
    UHLENHUTH, EH
    JOHANSON, CE
    PHARMACOLOGY BIOCHEMISTRY AND BEHAVIOR, 1984, 20 (06) : 988 - 988
  • [3] INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND PREFERENCE FOR INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS
    PASCAL, CE
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCE-REVUE CANADIENNE DES SCIENCES DU COMPORTEMENT, 1973, 5 (03): : 272 - 279
  • [4] Ecological influences on individual differences in color preference
    Karen B. Schloss
    Daniel Hawthorne-Madell
    Stephen E. Palmer
    Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 2015, 77 : 2803 - 2816
  • [5] Individual Differences in Substance Preference and Substance Use
    Feldman, Marc
    Kumar, V. K.
    Angelini, Frank
    Pekala, Ronald J.
    Porter, Jack
    JOURNAL OF ADDICTIONS & OFFENDER COUNSELING, 2007, 27 (02) : 82 - 101
  • [6] DIFFERENCES IN INDIVIDUAL RAT PREFERENCE FOR LIGHT LEVELS
    SCHMIDEK, M
    SCHMIDEK, WR
    BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL AND BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 1988, 21 (03) : 663 - 665
  • [7] Accounting for taste: Individual differences in preference for harmony
    Stephen E. Palmer
    William S. Griscom
    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2013, 20 : 453 - 461
  • [8] Stability of individual differences in sucralose taste preference
    Bacharach, Sam Z.
    Calu, Donna J.
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (05):
  • [9] Ecological influences on individual differences in color preference
    Schloss, Karen B.
    Hawthorne-Madell, Daniel
    Palmer, Stephen E.
    ATTENTION PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 2015, 77 (08) : 2803 - 2816
  • [10] INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN PREFERENCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SOUNDS
    KAGEYAMA, T
    PERCEPTUAL AND MOTOR SKILLS, 1993, 76 (01) : 279 - 284