The beauty and the beast: Some preliminary comparisons of 'high' versus 'popular' residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same Export

@article{citeulike:576447, abstract = {This research examined differences between the features of 'high' and 'popular' style residential architecture and between responses to those styles by architects and non-architects. Forty slides (20 of each style) were scored in terms of physical properties. They were also rated by 20 architects and 20 non-architects. The research identified distinct physical features of each style. 'High' style residential architecture had fewer materials, more concrete, simpler forms, more white, and off-center entrances. They were judged as more complex, novel, and exciting. 'Popular' style residential architecture was characterized by use of more building materials, horizontal orientation, hip roofs, framed windows, centered entrances, and warm colors. Architects and non-architects differed in how they characterized and evaluated the two kinds of buildings, Architects rated the 'high' buildings as more clear, coherent pleasant, relaxing, and meaningful. Models of preference revealed that both groups favored novelty and coherence (or clarity), but the non-architects favored simplicity and 'popular' attributes, while the architects favored complexity and 'high' attributes.}, author = {Devlin, Kimberly and Nasar, Jack L.}, citeulike-article-id = {576447}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(89)80013-1}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6WJ8-4GK8NPH-5/2/8ebca96783a56f16eace85db014b5a61}, doi = {10.1016/S0272-4944(89)80013-1}, journal = {Journal of Environmental Psychology}, keywords = {cross-culture, landscape, preference}, month = {December}, number = {4}, pages = {333--344}, posted-at = {2006-04-05 03:38:17}, priority = {2}, title = {The beauty and the beast: Some preliminary comparisons of 'high' versus 'popular' residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(89)80013-1}, volume = {9}, year = {1989} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:576447 L3 - citeulike-article-id:576447 N2 - This research examined differences between the features of 'high' and 'popular' style residential architecture and between responses to those styles by architects and non-architects. Forty slides (20 of each style) were scored in terms of physical properties. They were also rated by 20 architects and 20 non-architects. The research identified distinct physical features of each style. 'High' style residential architecture had fewer materials, more concrete, simpler forms, more white, and off-center entrances. They were judged as more complex, novel, and exciting. 'Popular' style residential architecture was characterized by use of more building materials, horizontal orientation, hip roofs, framed windows, centered entrances, and warm colors. Architects and non-architects differed in how they characterized and evaluated the two kinds of buildings, Architects rated the 'high' buildings as more clear, coherent pleasant, relaxing, and meaningful. Models of preference revealed that both groups favored novelty and coherence (or clarity), but the non-architects favored simplicity and 'popular' attributes, while the architects favored complexity and 'high' attributes. IS - 4 JF - Journal of Environmental Psychology EP - 344 TI - The beauty and the beast: Some preliminary comparisons of 'high' versus 'popular' residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same VL - 9 SP - 333 KW - cross-culture KW - landscape KW - preference AU - Devlin, Kimberly AU - Nasar, Jack PY - 1989/12// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(89)80013-1 ER -