A Psychological Protocol for Design Review

  • Arthur E. StampsIII


In Chapters 2 and 3 we have suggested the following points:
  1. 1.

    It is very useful to think and discuss aesthetics in clear concepts rather than in vague notions.

  2. 2.

    For physical objects, “clear concepts” means expression only in terms of materials and spatial relationships.

  3. 3.

    For feelings, “clear concepts” means expression in terms of intensity of pleasure, intensity of arousal, and intensity and polarity of dominance.

  4. 4.

    For design review, the only required information is how intensity of pleasure is related to physical features of projects.

  5. 5.

    A simple, testable model of environmental aesthetics is that semantic differential ratings of pleasant/unpleasant are predicted by physical design features.

  6. 6.

    Possible weaknesses due to scaling methods, simulation media, demographic distinctions, or temporal stability turned out to have minor effects, so the proposed model is quite reliable.

  7. 7.

    For the available data over a wide range of people and places, the public interest in environmental aesthetics has been very well defined as a single preference ordering.



Design Option Visual Impact Preference Experiment Street Tree Design Review 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arthur E. StampsIII
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Environmental QualitySan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations