Advocacy Membership, Design Guidelines, and Predicting Preferences for Residential Infill Designs

Because advocacy planning and use of design guidelines are so prevalent, it is becoming important to ascertain how well each method can predict environmental quality. This article describes two experiments, covering 59 respondents and 76 environmental scenes, in which preferences of neighborhood groups and an architect's group were compared to each other, to responses of a random sample of a city's population, and to predictions based on design attributes of entourage, building interest, and building dominance. Results from both studies indicated that the attributes of building interest predicted the most preference variation. These findings suggest that the design guidelines' approach to visual amenity might be more efficacious than the advocacy approach.

[1]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  Environmental aesthetics : theory, research, and applications , 1988 .

[2]  R. Rosenthal Meta-analytic procedures for social research , 1984 .

[3]  Richard F. Beltramini,et al.  Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis , 1987 .

[4]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[5]  A. Stamps Use of Photographs to Simulate Environments: A Meta-Analysis , 1990 .

[6]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  A survey of aesthetic controls in English speaking countries , 1988 .

[7]  Robert G. Hershberger Environmental aesthetics: A study of meaning and architecture , 1988 .

[8]  H. Schroeder,et al.  Environmental Perception Rating Scales , 1984 .

[9]  Environmental aesthetics: Contextual compatibility in architecture: an issue of personal taste? , 1988 .

[10]  W. Edwards Deming Sample design in business research , 1960 .

[11]  J. Nasar,et al.  The beauty and the beast: Some preliminary comparisons of ‘high’ versus ‘popular’ residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same , 1989 .

[12]  J. Nasar Environmental aesthetics: Perception and evaluation of residential street scenes , 1988 .

[13]  J. Finn A General Model for Multivariate Analysis , 1978 .

[14]  C. Osgood,et al.  The Measurement of Meaning , 1958 .

[15]  B. Green,et al.  Growth, Zoning, And Neighborhood Organizations: Land Use Conflict in Wilmington, Delaware , 1991 .

[16]  L. Zusne Visual perception of form , 1970 .

[17]  L. Hedges,et al.  Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis , 1987 .

[18]  D. Berlyne Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps Toward an Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation, , 1974 .

[19]  J. D. Wellman,et al.  Landscape architects' interpretations of people's landscape preferences. , 1978 .

[20]  G. Glass,et al.  Meta-analysis in social research , 1981 .

[21]  Arthur E. Stamps,et al.  Bootstrap Investigation of Respondent Sample Size for Environmental Preference , 1992 .

[22]  J. Overall,et al.  Applied multivariate analysis , 1983 .

[23]  B. J. Winer Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 1992 .

[24]  Nickolaus R. Feimer Environmental perception: The effects of media, evaluative context, and observer sample , 1984 .

[25]  J. Valadez Diverging meanings of development among architects and three other professional groups , 1984 .

[26]  R. Kaplan Predictors of environmental preference: Designers and "Clients" , 1973 .

[27]  M. Elsinga,et al.  Adults, Adolescents, And Architects , 1990 .

[28]  R. A. Fisher,et al.  Design of Experiments , 1936 .

[29]  Arthur E. Stamps Comparing Preferences of Neighbors and a Neighborhood Design Review Board , 1991 .

[30]  A. Stamps Simulation Effects on Environmental Preference , 1993 .

[31]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  Symbolic Meanings of House Styles , 1989 .

[32]  Hamid Shirvani,et al.  The Urban Design Process , 1985 .

[33]  Joanne Vining,et al.  Environmental Emotions and Decisions , 1992 .

[34]  Arthur E. Stamps,et al.  Public Preferences for High Rise Buildings: Stylistic and Demographic Effects , 1991 .

[35]  J. Russell,et al.  An approach to environmental psychology , 1974 .