• Arthur E. StampsIII


Motor Skill Simulated Building Experimental Aesthetics Citizen Participation Urban Design 
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.


  1. Adler, P. (Ed.). (1992). Fire in the hills: a collective remembrance. Oakland, California: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, T. W., Zube, E. H., & MacConnell, W. P. (1976). Predicting scenic resource values. In E. H. Zube (Ed.), Studies in landscape perception, Publication No. R-76–1 (pp. 669 ).Google Scholar
  4. Amherst, MA: Institute of Man-Environment Relations, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  5. Appleton, J. (1996). The experience of landscape. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Aristotle. (1941). Physica. In R. McKeon (Ed.), The basic works of Aristotle. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  7. Arthur, L. M., & Boster, R. S. (1976). Measuring scenic beauty: a selected annotated bibliography (RM-25). Fort Collins, Colorado: Rocky Mountains Forest and Range Experiment Station.Google Scholar
  8. Attneave, F. (1957). Physical determinants of the judged complexity of shapes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53 (4), 221–227.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Averill, J. R. (1975). A semantic atlas of emotional concepts. Catalog of selected documents in psychology, 5, 330.Google Scholar
  10. Bacon, F. (1605). Advancement of learning. (1952 ed.). New York: Collier.Google Scholar
  11. Balling, J. D., & Faulk, J. H. (1982). Development of visual preference for natural environments. Environment and Behavior, 14 (1), 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barton, S. E. (1985). A history of the neighborhood movement in San Francisco. Berkeley Planning Journal, 2 (1–2), 85–105.Google Scholar
  13. Beer, A. R. (1983). Development control and design quality: Part 2: attitudes to design. Town Planning Review, 54 (4), 383–404.Google Scholar
  14. Bentley, I., Alcock, A., Murrain, P., McGlynn, S., & Smith, G. (1985). Responsive Environments: a manual for designers. London: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  15. Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, Arousal and Curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  17. Berlyne, D. E. (1973). Interrelations of verbal and nonverbal measures used in experimental aesthetics. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 14, 177–184.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Berlyne, D. E. (Ed.). (1974a). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps towards an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Berlyne, D. E. (1974b). Verbal and exploratory responses to visual patterns varying in uncertainty and in redundancy. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation (pp. 121–158 ). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Berlyne, D. E., & Madsen, K. B. (Eds.). (1973). Pleasure, reward, preference. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Besterfield, D. H. (1990). Quality control. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Biederman, I., & Ju, G. (1988). Surface versus edged-based determinants of visual recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 38–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bishop, I. D., & Leahy, R. N. (1989). Assessing the visual impact of development proposals: the validity of computer simulations. Landscape Journal, 8 (2), 92–100.Google Scholar
  24. Black, H. C. (1979). Black’s law dictionary. St. Paul, Mn.: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  25. Blaesser, B. W. (1994). The abuse. of discretionary power. In B. C. Scheer & W. F. Preiser (Eds.), Design review: challenging aesthetic control (pp. 42–50 ). New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Bock, R. D. (1985). Multivariate statistical methods in behavioral research. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  27. Bock, R. D., & Jones, L. V. (1968). The Measurement and Prediction of Judgment and Choice. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
  28. Booth, P. (1983). Development control and design quality: Part 1: conditions: a useful way of controlling design? Town Planning Review, 54 (3), 265–284.Google Scholar
  29. Bosselmann, P. (1998). Representation of places: reality and realism in city design. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Bovill, C. (1996). Fractal geometry in architecture and design. Boston: Birkhauser.Google Scholar
  31. Brolin, B. C. (1980). Architecture in Context: fitting new buildings with old. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  32. Brush, R. O. (1979). The attractiveness of woodlands: perceptions of forest landowners in Massachusetts. Forest Science, 25 (3), 495–506.Google Scholar
  33. Buhyoff, G. J., & Leuschner, W. A. (1978). Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands. Forest Science, 24 (3), 424–432.Google Scholar
  34. Buhyoff, G. J., & Wellman, D. (1983). Landscape preference metrics: an international comparison. Journal of Environmental Management, 16, 181–190.Google Scholar
  35. Buhyoff, G. J., Wellman, J. D., Harvey, H., & Fraser, R. A. (1978). Landscape architect’s interpretations of people’s landscape preferences. Journal of Environmental Management, 6, 255–262.Google Scholar
  36. Burden, E. (1995). Elements of Architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  37. Burdick, R. K., & Graybill, F. A. (1992). Confidence intervals on variance components. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  38. Bush, L. (1973). Individual differences multidimensional scaling of adjectives denoting feelings. Journal of personality and social psychology, 25 (1), 50–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Calderon, E. (1994). Design control in the Spanish planning system. Built Environment, 20 (2), 157–168.Google Scholar
  40. Canter, D. (1977). The psychology of place. London: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  41. Canter, L. W., & Canty, G. A. (1993). Impact significance determination–basic considerations and a sequenced approach. Environmental impact assessment review, 13, 275–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Cardozo, B. N. (1921). The nature of the judicial process. (1949 ed.). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Cardozo, B. N. (1924). The growth of the law. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Carnegie Commission on science, t. a. g. (1992). Amicus curiae brief for Daubert v. Merril Dow. Washington: Carnegie Commission on science, technology and government.Google Scholar
  45. Carr, S., & Schissler, D. (1969). The city as a trip: perceptual selection and memory in the view from the road. Environment and behavior, 1, 7–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ching, F. D. (1996). Form, Space and Order. (2 ed.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Chipman, S. F. (1977). Complexity and structure in visual patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 106, 269–301.Google Scholar
  47. Clark, R. H., & Pause, M. (1985). Precedents in architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  48. Claydon, J. (1998). Discretion in development control: a study of how discretion is exercised in the conduct of development control in England and Wales. Planning practice & research, 13 (1), 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Cochran, W. G., & Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental designs. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  50. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  51. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1993). Applied regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  52. Collingwood, R. (1940). An essay on metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Collingwood, R. G. (1938). The principles of art. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Cooksey, R. W. (1996). Judgment studies: theory, methods, and applications. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  55. Cooper, H. M. (1989). Integrating research: a guide for literature reviews. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Corbett, M. R. (1979). Splendid survivors: San Francisco’s downtown architectural heritage. San Francisco: California Living Books.Google Scholar
  57. Costonis, J. (1982). Law and aesthetics: a critique and a reformation of the dilemmas. Michigan Law Review, 80, 355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Cover, T. M., & Thomas, J. A. (1991). Elements of information theory. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Crozier, J. B. (1974). Verbal and exploratory responses to sound sequences varying in uncertainty level. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation (pp. 27–90 ). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  60. Cullingworth, B. (1997). Planning in the USA: policies, issues and processes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Cullingworth, J. B. (1964). Town & country planning in the UK. (1997 ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Cullingworth, J. B. (1993). The political culture of planning: American land use planning in comparative perspective. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Daniel, T. C., & Boster, R. S. (1976). Measuring landscape aesthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method (RM 167 ). Fort Collins, Co.: USDA Forest Service.Google Scholar
  64. Darwin, C. (1839). Voyage of the Beagle: Charles Darwin’s Journal of researches. (1989 ed.). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  65. Darwin, C. (1859). The origin of species. (1991 ed.). Amherst, New York: Prometheus.Google Scholar
  66. Darwin, C. (1887). The autobiography of Charles Darwin. (1993 ed.). New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  67. Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 31, 331–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Davis, K. C. (1971). Discretionary justice: a preliminary inquiry. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  69. Day, H. Y. (1967). Evaluations of subjective complexity, pleasingness, and interestingness for a series of random polygons varying in complexity. Perception and Psychophysics, 2 (4), 281–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. deLeon, R. E. (1992). Left coast city: progressive politics in San Francisco, 1975–1991. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  71. Delephons, J. (1990). Aesthetic control: a report on methods used in the USA to control the design of buildings. Berkeley, California: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  72. Deming, E. W. (1960). Sample design in business research. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  73. Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  74. Deming, W. E. (1994). The new economics for industry, government, education. Cambridge, MA: Center for Advanced Engineering Study, MIT.Google Scholar
  75. deTocqueville, A. (1848). Democracy in America (Reeve, Henry, Trans.). (1945 ed.). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  76. Devlin, A. S. (1994). Children’s housing style preferences: regional, socioeconomic, sex and adult comparisons. Environment and Behavior, 26 (4), 527–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Devlin, K., & Nasar, J. L. (1989). The beauty and the beast: some preliminary comparisons of ‘high’ versus ’popular’ residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same. Journal of environmental psychology, 9, 333–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Duerksen, C. J. (1986). Aesthetics and land-use controls: beyond ecology and economics (Planning Advisory Service 399 ). Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association.Google Scholar
  79. Duerksen, C. J., & Goebel, R. M. (1999). Aesthetics, community character, and the law (Planning Advisory Service Report 489/490). Chicago, Il.: American Planning Association.Google Scholar
  80. Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  81. Elsheshtawy, Y. (1997). Urban complexity: toward the measurement of the physical complexity of street-scapes. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 14 (4), 301–316.Google Scholar
  82. Evans, D. R., & Day, H. I. (1971). The factorial structure of responses to perceptual complexity. Psychonomic science, 22 (6), 357–359.Google Scholar
  83. Farber, D. A. (1998). The first amendment. New York: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
  84. Fisher, R. A. (1932). Statistical methods for research workers. (4th ed. ed.). London: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
  85. Fisher, R. A. (1935). The design of experiments. (1971 ed.). New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
  86. Fletcher, B. (1963). A History of Architecture on the Comparative Method. (17 ed.). New York: Charles Scribners’ Sons.Google Scholar
  87. Frege, G. (1884). The foundations of arithmetic (Austin, J. L., Trans.). (1996 ed.). Evanston, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  88. Gans, H. (1974). Popular culture and high culture. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  89. Gimblett, R. H. ( 1990, ). Identifying the experimental qualities of landscapes: an exploration of artificial intelligence techniques. Paper presented at the Coming of age, EDRA 21. 1990.Google Scholar
  90. Gore, A. (1993). Creating a government that works better & costs less. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  91. Governmental Accounting Standards Board. (1999). Basic financial statements - and management’s discussion and analysis - for state and local governments (Governmental accounting standards series No. 171-A). Norwalk, CT: Governmental accounting standards board.Google Scholar
  92. Groat, L. N. (1989). Contextual compatibility in architecture: an issue of personal taste? In J. L. Nasar (Ed.), Environmental aesthetics: theory, research, and applications (pp. 228–253 ). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Groves, M., & Thorne, R. (1988). Aspects of housing preferences: revisiting a cross-cultural study with the hindsight of improved data analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 8, 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometic Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  95. Guthrie, W. K. (1965). A history of Greek philosophy: the Presocratic tradition from Parmenides to Democritus. (Vol. II ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Habe, R. (1989). Public design control in American communities. Town Planning Review, 60 (2), 195–219.Google Scholar
  97. Hammond, K. R. (1996). Human judgment and social policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hansen, G. ( 1995 ). San Francisco Almanac. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.Google Scholar
  98. Hartig, T., Anders, B., Garvill, J., Olsson, T., & Garling, T. (1996). Environmental influences on psychological restoration. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 37, 378–393.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Hartig, T., Korpela, K., Evans, G. W., & Garling, T. (1997). A measure of restorative quality in environments. Scandinavian Housing & Planning Research, 14, 175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Hartig, T., Staats, H., & Maris, E. (1998, 14–17 July, 1998 ). On relations between environmental preference and well-being. Paper presented at the 15 th. conference of the International Association for People-Environment Studies, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  101. Hayward, S. C., & Franklin, S. S. (1974). Perceived openness-enclosure of architectural space. Environment and Behavior, 6 (1), 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Hedges, L. V., & O1kin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  103. Hedman, R., & Jaszewski. (1984). Fundamentals of urban design. Washington, D. C.: American Planning Association.Google Scholar
  104. Heise, D. R. (1965). Semantic differential profiles for 1,000 most frequent English words. Psychological monographs: general and applied, 79 (8), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Herzog, T. R. (1992). Tranquillity and preference as affective qualities of natural environments. Journal of environmental psychology, 12, 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Hillman, J. (1990). Planning for beauty. London: HMSO Publications centre.Google Scholar
  107. Hinshaw, M. L. (1995). Design review. Planning Advisory Service Report, 454.Google Scholar
  108. Hohn, U. (1997). Townscape preservation in Japanese urban planning. Town Planning Review, 68 (2), 213–255.Google Scholar
  109. Howard, R. B., Mlynarski, F. G., & Sauer, G. C. (1972). A comparative analysis of affective responses to real and represented environments. In W. Mitchell (Ed.), Environment and Cognition (pp. 6–6–6). New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
  110. Hubbard, P. (1994). Professional vs lay tastes in design control–an empirical investigation. Planning practice and research, 9 (3), 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Hughes, R. (1995). The shock of the new. New York: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
  112. Hutchenson, J. D. (1984). Citizen participation in neighborhood planning. American Planning Association Journal, 50 (2), 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Imamoglu, C. (1998). Evaluations of house facade drawings in relation to their level of complexity. St. Louis, Missouri: 29th Annual Meeting of the Environmental Design Research Association, People, places, and public policy.Google Scholar
  114. Institute of environmental assessment. (1995). Guidelines for landscape and visual impact assessment. London: E & FN Spon.Google Scholar
  115. Jackson, J. S., & Shade, W. L. (1973). Citizen participation, demographic representation, and survey research. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 9, 57–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Jacobs, A. (1978). Making city planning work. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials.Google Scholar
  117. Jacobs, J., & Adams, G. D. (1986, June 19, 1986 ). Inner Circles: how money and politics shape San Francisco’s skyline. San Francisco Examiner, pp. Reprint pages 1–12.Google Scholar
  118. Juergensmeyer, J. C., & Roberts, T. E. (1998). Land use planning and control law. St. Paul, MN: West.Google Scholar
  119. Juran, J. M. (1992). Juran on quality by design: the new steps for planning quality into goods and services. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  120. Juran, J. M. (1995). A history of managing for quality in the United States of America. In J. M. Juran (Ed.), A history of managing for quality: the evolution, trends, and future directions of managing for quality (pp. 553–601 ). Milwaukee, Wisconsin: ASQC Quality Press.Google Scholar
  121. Kahn, J. (1979). Politics and planning in an American city, 1897–1906. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  122. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  123. Kant, I. (1781). Critique of pure reason. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  124. Kant, I. (1787). Critique of Practical Reason (Abbott, T. K., Trans.). (1996 ed.). Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  125. Kant, I. (1790). Critique of Judgement (Meredith, J. C., Trans.). (1978 ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  126. Kant, I. (1800). Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view (Dowdell, Victor Lyle, Trans.). (1978 ed.). Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  127. Kaplan, R., & Herbert, E. J. (1987). Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings. Landscape and Urban Planning, 14, 281–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Kaplan, R., & Herbert, E. J. (1989). Familiarity and preference: a cross-cultural analysis. In J. L. Nasar (Ed.), Environmental aesthetics: theory, research and applications (pp. 379–389 ). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  129. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  130. Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., & Brown, T. (1989). Environmental preference: a comparison of four domains of predictors. Environment and behavior, 21 (5), 509–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Kaplan, S. (1987). Aesthetics, affect, and cognition: environmental preference from an evolutionary perspective. Environment and behavior, 19 (1), 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Keefe, R., & Smith, P. (Eds.). (1996). Vagueness: a reader. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  133. Kellomaki, S., & Savolainen, R. (1984). The scenic value of the forest-landscape as assessed in the field and the laboratory. Landscape Planning, 11, 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Killeen, K., & Buhyoff, G. (1983). The relation of landscape preference to abstract topography. Journal of environmental management, 17, 381–392.Google Scholar
  135. Knowles, R. (1981). Sun, rhythm, form. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  136. Kocher, S. (1988). Reliability and validity of assessment scales for scenic highways. In D. Lawrence, R. Habe, A. Hacker, & D. Sherrod (Eds.), EDRA 19 Peoples’ needs/planet management/paths to co-existence (pp. 35–40 ). Norman, Oklahoma: Environmental Design Research Association.Google Scholar
  137. Kostoff, S. (1991). The city shaped: urban patterns and meanings through history. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  138. Krampen, M. (1979). Meaning in the urban environment. London: Pion.Google Scholar
  139. Krier, R. (1988). Architectural composition. New York: Rizzoli.Google Scholar
  140. Lai, R. T. (1994). Can the process of architectural design review withstand legal scrutiny? In B. C. Scheer & W. F. Preiser (Eds.), Design review: challenging urban aesthetic control (pp. 31–41 ). New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  141. Lathrup, W. H. (1971). San Francisco freeway revolt. Transportation engineering journal: proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 97 (TE1), 133–144.Google Scholar
  142. Lau, J. J. (1970, ). Differences between full-size and scale-model rooms in assessment of lighting quality. Paper presented at the Architectural psychology: proceedings of the conference at Dalandjui, University of Strathclyde, 1969.Google Scholar
  143. Law, C. S., & Zube, E. H. (1983). Effects of photographic composition on landscape perception. Landscape research, 8 (1), 22–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Levi, J. M. (1997). Contemporary urban planning. Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Prentice-Hall. Light, R., & Pillemer, D. B. (1984). Summing up: the science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  145. Lightner, B. C. (1993a). Survey of design review practices (Planning Advisory Service Memo ). Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association.Google Scholar
  146. Lightner, B. C. (1993b). A survey of design review practices in local government. Loew, S. (1994). Design control in France. Built Environment, 20 (2), 88–103.Google Scholar
  147. Loftus, E. F. (1979). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  148. Lyons, E. (1983). Demographic correlates of landscape preference. Environment and Behavior, 15 (4), 487–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Mackworth, N., & Morandi, A. (1967). The gaze selects informative details within pictures. Perception and psychophysics, 2 (11), 547–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Madanipour, A. (1996). Design of urban space: an inquiry into a socio-spatial process. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  151. Mandel, B. ( 1986, April 6, 1986). The beauties and the beasts. San Francisco Examiner, pp. B1 - B3.Google Scholar
  152. Mandel, B. (1992, November 8, 1992 ). A question of taste - or the lack of it. San Francisco Examiner, pp. B1, B4.Google Scholar
  153. Marans, R. W., & Stokols, D. (Eds.). (1993). Environmental simulation: research and policy issues. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  154. McAlester, V., & McAlester, L. (1995). A field guide to American houses. New York: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
  155. Means, R. (1997a). Building construction cost data. (55 ed.). Kingston, MA: RS Means. Means, R. S. (1997b). Residential cost data. (16 ed.). Kingston, MA: RS Means.Google Scholar
  156. Medina, A., Q. (1983). A visual assessment of children’s and environmental educator’s urban residential preference patterns. In R. Kaplan & S. Kaplan (Eds.), The experience of nature: a psychological perspective (1989 ed., pp. 272–276 ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  157. Mehrabian, A. (1978). Measures of individual differences in temperament. Educational and psychological measurement, 38, 1105–11117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Mehrabian, A. (1995). Framework for a comprehensive description and measurement of emotional states. Genetic, social, and general psychology monographs, 121(3), 339361.Google Scholar
  159. Mehrabian, A. (1996). Pleasure-arousal-dominance: a general framework for describing and measuring individual differences in temperament. Current psychology: developmental, learning, personality, social, 14 (4), 261–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Mehrabian, A., & O’Reilly, E. (1980). Relating the three-factor theory of temperament to other personality constructs. In A. Mehrabian (Ed.), Basic dimensions for a general psychological theory: implications for personality, social, environmental, and developmental studies (pp. 95–114 ). Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.Google Scholar
  161. Mehrabian, A., & Ross, M. (1979). Illnesses, accidents, and alcohol use as functions of the arousing quality and pleasantness of life changes. Psychological reports, 45, 31–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  163. Milbrath, L. W. (1981). Citizen surveys as citizen participation mechanisms. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 17 (4), 478–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Morgan, R. L., & Heise, D. (1988). Structure of emotions. Social psychology quarterly, 51 (1), 19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Mouton, A. V. (1986). Built for change: neighborhood architecture in San Francisco. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  166. Nasar, J. L. (1984). Visual preferences in urban street scenes. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 15 (1), 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Nasar, J. L. (1989a). The effect of sign complexity and coherence on the perceived quality of retail scenes. In J. L. Nasar (Ed.), Environmental aesthetics: theory, research, and applications (pp. 300–320 ). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  168. Nasar, J. L. (1989b). Symbolic meaning of house styles. Environment and Behavior, 21 (3), 235–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Nasar, J. L. (1999). Design by competition: making design competition work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  170. Nasar, J. L., & Kang, J. (1989). A post jury evaluation: the Ohio State University design competition for a center for the visual arts. Environment and Behavior, 21 (4), 464–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Nassauer, J. I. (1983). Framing the landscape in photographic simulation. Journal of environmental management, 17, 1–16.Google Scholar
  172. Nelissen, N., & de Vocht, C. L. (1994). Design control in the Netherlands. Built Environment, 20 (2), 142–156.Google Scholar
  173. Nonaka, I. (1995). The recent history of managing for quality in Japan. In j. M. Juran (Ed.), A history of managing for quality: the evolution, trends, and future directions of managing for quality (pp. 517–552 ). Milwaukee, Wisconsin: ASQC Quality Press.Google Scholar
  174. Nystrom, L. (1994). Design control in planning: the Swedish case. Built Environment, 20 (2), 113–126.Google Scholar
  175. O’ Neill, M. J. (1992). Effects of familiarity and plan complexity on wayfinding in simulated buildings. Journal of environmental psychology, 12, 319–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Oakland. (1992). Expedited design review checklist - Oakland hills fire damaged area. City of Oakland: Community restoration development center.Google Scholar
  177. OED. (1971). The compact edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. Glasgow: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  178. Orland, B., Vining, J., & Ebreo, A. (1992). The effect of street trees on perceived values of residential property. Environment and Behavior, 24 (3), 298–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. O’Rourke, J. (1993). Computational Geometry in C. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  180. Osgood, C. E., May, W. H., & Miron, M. S. (1975). Cross-cultural universals of affective meaning. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  181. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  182. Overall, J. E., & Klett, C. J. (1972). Applied multivariate analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  183. Palmer, J. F., & Smardon, R. C. (1989). Measuring human values associated with wetlands. InGoogle Scholar
  184. L. Kriesberg, T. A. Northrup, & S. J. Thorson (Eds.), Intractable conflicts and their transformation (pp. 156–179). Ithaca, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  185. Pantel, G. (1994). Design control in German Planning. Built Environment, 20 (2), 104–112.Google Scholar
  186. Parfect, M., & Power, G. (1997). Planning for urban quality: urban design in towns and cities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  187. Pennartz, P. J., & Elsinga, M. (1990). Adults, adolescents, and architects: differences in perception of the urban environment. Environment and Behavior, 22 (5).Google Scholar
  188. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1993). The story model for juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Insider the juror: the psychology of juror decision making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  189. Peron, E., Purcell, A. T., Staats, H., Falchero, S., & Lamb, R. J. (1998). Models of preference for outdoor scenes: some experimental evidence. Environment and Behavior, 30 (3), 282–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. Plato. (1980a). The Republic. In E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (Eds.), The collected dialogues of Plato (Vol. LXXI, ). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  191. Plato. (1980b). Statesman. In E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (Eds.), The collected dialogs (pp. 1018–1085 ). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  192. Poole, S. E. (1987). Architectural appearance review regulations and the First Amendment: the good, the bad, and the consensus ugly. The urban lawyer, 19 (2), 287–344.Google Scholar
  193. Porter, D. R. (1997). Managing growth in America’s communities. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
  194. Pound, R. (1922). An introduction to the philosophy of law. (1954 ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  195. Pountney, M. T., & Kingsbury, P. W. (1983). Aspects of development control: Part 2: the applicant’s view. Town Planning Review, 54 (3), 285–303.Google Scholar
  196. Preiser, W. F., & Rohane, K. P. (1988). A survey of aesthetic controls in English-speaking countries. In J. L. Nasar (Ed.), Environmental Aesthetics: theory, research, & Applications (pp. 422–433 ). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  197. Punter, J. (1999). Design guidelines in American cities. Liverpool: University of Liverpool Press.Google Scholar
  198. Punter, J., & Carmona, M. (1997). The design dimension of planning: theory, content, and best practice for design policies. London: E & F Spon.Google Scholar
  199. Purcell, A. T. (1992). Abstract and specific physical attributes and the experience of landscape. Journal of environmental management, 34, 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. Purcell, A. T., Lamb, R. J., Peron, E. M., & Falchero, S. (1994). Preference or preferences for landscape? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. Pyron, B. (1972). Form and diversity in human habitats: judgmental and attitude responses. Environment and Behavior, 4 (1), 87–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. Qiupeng, J., Meidong, C., & Wenzhao, L. (1995). Ancient China’s history of managing for quality. In J. M. Juran (Ed.), A history of managing for quality (pp. 1–31 ). Milwaukee, Wisconsin: ASQC Quality Press.Google Scholar
  203. Quinlan, P. T. (1991). Differing approaches to two-dimensional shape recognition. Psychological Bulletin, 109 (2), 224–241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  204. Redburn, S., Buss, T. F., Koster, S. K., & Binning, W. C. (1980). How representative are mandated citizen participation processes? Urban Affairs Quarterly, 15, 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. Richards, J. M. (1977). Who’s who in architecture from 1400 to the present. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  206. Richards, R. (1997). Historic San Francisco: a concise history and guide. San Francisco: Heritage House.Google Scholar
  207. Rodriguez, G. ( 1995, March 1–5, 1995). Architects, non-architects and the image of the detached single-family house: evaluation and preferences. Paper presented at the EDRA26 Twenty-sixth annual conference of the Environmental Design Research Association, Boston.Google Scholar
  208. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1985). Contrast analysis: focused comparisons in the analysis of variance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  209. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: methods and data analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  210. Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1986). Meta-analytic procedures for combining studies with multiple effect sizes. Psychological Bulletin, 99 (3), 400–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. Rousseau, J.-J. (1762). The social contract (Cranston, Maurice, Trans.). (1977 ed.). New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  212. Russell, B., & Whitehead, A. N. (1910). Principia Mathematica. (1973 ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  213. Russell, J. A., Lewicka, M., & Niit, T. (1989). A cross-cultural study of a circumplex model of affect. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57 (5), 848–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. Russell, J. A., & Mehrabian, A. (1977). Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions. Journal of research in personality, 11, 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. Russell, J. A., & Pratt, G. (1980). A description of the affective quality attributed to environments. Journal ofpersonality,and social psychology, 38 (2), 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Russell, J. A., Ward, L. M., & Pratt, G. (1981). Affective quality attributed to environments: a factor analytic study. Environment and Behavior, 13 (3), 259–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. San Francisco. (1939). San Francisco Municipal Code. San Francisco: City of San Francisco.Google Scholar
  218. San Francisco. (1985). Downtown Plan, and ordinance of the City and County of San Francisco (Ordinance 414–85 ). San Francisco: Board of Supervisors.Google Scholar
  219. San Francisco. (1986a). San Francisco office development limitation program: first review period. San Francisco: Department of City Planning.Google Scholar
  220. San Francisco. (1986b). Voter Information pamphlet. San Francisco: Registrar of Voters.Google Scholar
  221. San Francisco. (1998). San Francisco Planning Code. Seattle, Washington: Book Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  222. Sanders, W., & Getzels, J. (1987). The planning commission: its composition and function, 1987 (Planning Advisory Service 400 ). Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association.Google Scholar
  223. Scheer, B. C., & Preiser, W. F. E. (1994). Design review: challenging urban aesthetic control. New York, New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  224. Schiffman, I. (1989). Alternate techniques for managing growth. Berkeley, California: Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  225. Schomaker, J. H. (1978). Measurements of preferences for proposed landscape modifications. Landscape Research, 3 (3), 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  226. Schuster, J. M. (1997). The role of design review in affecting the quality of urban design: the architect’s point of view. Journal of architectural and planning research, 14 (3), 209–225.Google Scholar
  227. Searle, S. R., Casella, G., & McCulloch, C. E. (1992). Variance components. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Seaton, R. W., & Collins, J. B. (1972, ). Validity and reliability of ratings of simulated buildings. Paper presented at the Environmental Design: research and practice, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  229. Seibert, P. S., & Anooshian, L. J. (1993). Indirect expression of preference in sketch maps. Environment and Behavior, 25 (5), 607–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  230. Sexton, R. (1995). Parallel utopias: the quest for community. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.Google Scholar
  231. Shaver, P., Swartz, J., Kirson, D., & O’Connor, C. (1987). Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 52 (6), 1061–1086.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  232. Sheppard, S. R. (1982). Predictive landscape portrayals: a selective research review. Landscape Journal, 1 (1), 9–14.Google Scholar
  233. Shewhart, W. A. (1939). Statistical method from the viewpoint of quality control. (1986 ed.). New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  234. Shirvani, H. (1985). The urban design process. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  235. Shirvani, H. (1990). Beyond public architecture: strategies for design evaluations. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  236. Silvergold, B. (1974). Richard Morris Hunt and the importation of Beaux-Arts architecture to the United States. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  237. Smardon, R. C., & Karp, J. P. (1993). The legal landscape: guidelines for regulating environmental and aesthetic quality. New York, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  238. Stamps, A. E. (1980). On the improvement of design judgment. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  239. Stamps, A. E. (1990a). Preliminary findings regarding effects of photographic and stimulus variables on preferences for environmental scenes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 231–234.Google Scholar
  240. Stamps, A. E. (1990b). Use of photographs to simulate environments: a meta-analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 907–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  241. Stamps, A. E. (1991a). Comparing preferences of neighbors and a neighborhood design review board. Environment and Behavior, 23 (5), 616–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  242. Stamps, A. E. (1991b). Public preferences for high rise buildings: stylistic and demographic effects. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72, 839–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  243. Stamps, A. E. (1991c). Use of comparative choice paradigm in governmental design review: a case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 33, 351–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  244. Stamps, A. E. (1992). Pre-and postconstruction environmental evaluations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 481–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  245. Stamps, A. E. (1993a). Postconstruction validation of photomontage simulations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 1335–1338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  246. Stamps, A. E. (1993b). Public preferences for residences: precode, code minimum, and avant-garde architectural styles. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77, 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  247. Stamps, A. E. (1993c). Simulation effects on environmental preference. Journal of Environmental Management, 38, 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  248. Stamps, A. E. (1993d). Validating contextual urban design photoprotocols: replication and generalization from single residences to block faces. Environment and Planning B: planning and design, 20, 693–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  249. Stamps, A. E. (1994). Formal and nonformal stimulus factors in environmental preference. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  250. Stamps, A. E. (1995). Stimulus and respondent factors in environmental preference. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 80, 668–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  251. Stamps, A. E. (1996). People and places: variance components of environmental preferences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  252. Stamps, A. E. (1997a). Of time and preference: temporal stability of environmental preferences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85, 883–896.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  253. Stamps, A. E. (1997b). A paradigm for distinguishing significant from non-significant visual impacts: theory, implementation, case histories. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 17, 249–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  254. Stamps, A. E. (1997c). Some streets of San Francisco: preference effects of trees, cars, wires, and buildings. Environment and Planning B: planning and design, 24, 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  255. Stamps, A. E. (1998a). Architectural mass: from vague impressions to definite design features. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25, 825–836.Google Scholar
  256. Stamps, A. E. (1998b). Complexity of architectural facades: from vague impressions to definite design features. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 1407–1417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  257. Stamps, A. E. (1998c). Effect sizes of mountains and molehills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 913–914.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  258. Stamps, A. E. (1999a). Architectural detail, van der Laan Septaves, and pixel counts. Design Studies, 20, 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  259. Stamps, A. E. (1999b). Defining block character. Environment and Planning: Planning and Design, 26, 685–710.Google Scholar
  260. Stamps, A. E. (1999c). Demographic effects in environmental preferences: a meta-analysis. Journal of Planning Literature, 14 (2), 155–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  261. Stamps, A. E. (1999d). Physical determinants of preferences for residential facades. Environment and Behavior, 31 (6), 725–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  262. Stamps, A. E. (1999e). Sex, complexity, and preferences for residential facades. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 1301–1312.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  263. Stamps, A. E., & Miller, S. D. (1993). Advocacy membership, design guidelines, and predicting preferences for residential infill designs. Environment and Behavior, 25 (3), 367–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  264. Stamps, A. E., & Nasar, J. L. (1997). Design review and public preferences: effects of geographical location, public consensus, sensation seeking, and architectural styles. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  265. Strumse, E. (1996). Demographic differences in the visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in Western Norway. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  266. Sullivan, L. H. (1918). Kindergarten chats and other writings. (1979 ed.). New York: Dover. Suppes, P. ( 1999 ). Introduction to logic. Mineola, New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  267. Temko, A. (1987, June 10, 1987 ). S.F. Building contest falls short of high hopes. San Francisco Chronicle, pp. 4.Google Scholar
  268. Tips, W. E., & Savasdisara, T. (1986). Landscape preference evaluation and sociocultural background: a comparison among Asian countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 22, 113–124.Google Scholar
  269. Tugnutt, A., & Robertson, M. (1987). Making Townscape: a contextual approach to building in an urban setting. London: Mitchell.Google Scholar
  270. Twedwr-Jones, M. (1995). Development control and the legitimacy of planning decisions. Town Planning Review, 66 (2), 163–181.Google Scholar
  271. Ulrich, R. (1977). Visual landscape preferences: a model and application. Man-environment systems, 7 (5), 279–293.Google Scholar
  272. Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1995). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. In A. Sinha (Ed.), Readings in environmental psychology: landscape perception (pp. 149–178 ). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  273. US Department of Commerce. (1996). Tables C 1 - C5. Construction Review, 41 (4).Google Scholar
  274. Uzzell, D. L., & Jones, E. M. (1996). Incorporating the visual impact of buildings into BREEAM: a study for the Building Research Establishment. Guilford: University of Surrey.Google Scholar
  275. Van der Laan, H. (1983). Architectonic space: fifteen lessons on the disposition of the human habitat (Padovan, R., Trans.). Leiden, The Netherlands: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
  276. Venturi, R. (1977). Complexity and contradiction in architecture. New York: Museum of Modern Art.Google Scholar
  277. Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1972). Participation in America. New York: Harper and Row. Vignozzi, A. (1994). Design control in Italian planning. Built Environment, 20 (2), 127–141.Google Scholar
  278. Vining, J., & Orland, B. (1989). The video advantage: a comparison of two environmental representation techniques. Journal of Environmental Management, 29, 275–283.Google Scholar
  279. Walker, E. L. (1973). Psychological complexity and preference: a hedgehog theory of behavior. In D. E. Berlyne & K. B. Madsen (Eds.), Pleasure, reward, preference (pp. 65–98 ). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  280. Williams, N. (1974). American planning law: land use and the police power. Chicago: Callaghan & Company.Google Scholar
  281. Williams, S. (1985). How the familiarity of landscape affects appreciation of it. Journal of Environmental Management, 21, 63–67.Google Scholar
  282. Williamson, T. (1994). Vagueness. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  283. Wilson, M. A. (1996). The socialization of architectural preference. Journal of Environmental Management, 16, 33–44.Google Scholar
  284. Winer, B. J., Brown, D. R., & Michels, K. M. (1991). Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.Google Scholar
  285. Wirth, F. M. (1974). Power in the city: decision making in San Francisco. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  286. Wohlwill, J. F. (1976). Environmental aesthetics: the environment as a source of affect. In I. Altman & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Human behavior and environment (Vol. 1, pp. 3786 ). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  287. Wright, B., & Rainwater, L. (1962). The meanings of color. Journal of general psychology, 67, 89–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  288. Yang, B. E., & Brown, T. J. (1992). A cross-cultural comparison of preferences for landscape styles and landscape elements. Environment and Behavior, 24 (4), 471–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  289. Zacharias, J. (1999). Preferences for view corridors through the urban environment. Landscape and urban planning, 43, 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  290. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. American psychologist, 35 (2), 151–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  291. Ziegler, E. H. (1986). Aesthetic controls and derivative human values: the emerging basis for regulation. In J. B. Gailey (Ed.), 1986 zoning and planning law handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 239–253 ). New York: Clark Boardman.Google Scholar
  292. Zimmerman, D. W., & Zumbo, B. D. (1993). The relative power of parametric and nonparametric statistical methods. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: methodological issues (pp. 481–517 ). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  293. Zube, E., H., Pitt, D. G., & Evans, G. W. (1983). A lifespan developmental study of landscape assessment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1983 (3), 115–128.Google Scholar
  294. Zube, E. H. (1973). Rating everyday rural landscapes of the Northeastern U.S. Landscape Architecture, 63 (4), 371–375.Google Scholar
  295. Zube, E. H. (1974). Cross-disciplinary and intermode agreement on the description and evaluation of landscape resources. Environment and Behavior, 6 (1), 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  296. Zube, E. H., & Mills, L. V. (1976). Cross-cultural explorations in landscape perception. In E. H. Zube (Ed.), Studies in Landscape Perception (pp. 167–174 ). Amherst, MA: Institute for Man and Environment, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  297. Zube, E. H., & Pitt, D. G. (1981). Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes. Landscape Planning, 8, 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  298. Zube, E. H., Sell, J. L., & Taylor, J. G. (1982). Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landscape Planning, 9, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  299. Zube, E. H., Simcox, D. E., & Law, C. S. (1987). Perceptual landscape simulations: history and prospect. Landscape Journal, 6 (1), 62–79.Google Scholar
  300. Zusne, L. (1970). Visual perception ofform. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

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