Investigating Different Aesthetic Preferences Between Architects and Non-architects in Residential Façade Designs

Abstract

Different aesthetic preferences between designers and laypersons can be a problem in designing a building. User satisfaction is one of the main problems for the architect, which can be caused by differences in the cognitive and physical bases of opinions between architects and laypersons. An important factor for architects is to understand how laypersons would judge different physical cues that are aesthetically used in building façades. This study aims to identify the different cognitive properties between architects and laypersons. Previous studies have concentrated on conceptual properties, instead of cognitive properties of buildings. Although few studies have been concentrating on what might be called formal aesthetics, none of them focused on residential apartment façades. This study attempts to identify the differences between architects and laypersons in terms of aesthetic evaluation of building façade using quantitative survey. As a result, it can be concluded that although there are differences between architects and non-architects in aesthetics evaluation, both groups have scored certain similar physical cues. Findings of this research could help architects to form a better understanding of what laypersons would prefer in their ideal design.

Keywords

Aesthetic preferences Cognitive properties Environmental perception Façade design User perception

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Rapoport

: Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a Man–Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design. New York, NY, Pergamon Press, 1977.

Kaplan

: Cognition and Environment. New York, NY, Praeger, 1982.

Carlson

: Aesthetics and the Environment: The Appreciation of Nature. Art and Architecture. London, New York, NY, Routledge, 2000.

Lang

: Creating Architectural Theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design. New York, NY, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987.

Kaplan

: Environmental Preference in a Knowledge-Seeking, Knowledge-Using Organism. Oxford, University Press, 1992.

Ulrich

: Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment: Human Behav Environ: Adv Theory Res 1983;6(1):85–125.

Hershberger

Cass

: Predicting user response to buildings: in Nasar

(ed): Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research and Application, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1992: 195–211.

10.

Nasar

: Symbolic meanings of house styles: Environ Behav 1989;21(3):235–257.

11.

Gifford

: Judgments of the built environment as a function of individual differences and context: J Man–Environ Relat 1980;1(1):22–31.

12.

Groat

: Meaning in post-modern architecture: An examination using the multiple sorting task: J Environ Psychol 1982;2(1):3–22.

13.

Devlin

Nasar

: The beauty and the beast: Some preliminary comparisons of ‘high’ versus ‘popular’ residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same: J Environ Psychol 1989;9(4):333–344.

14.

Blake

: Form Follows Fiasco. Toronto, Little, Brown and Company, 1974.

15.

Da Luz Reis

Dias Lay

: Internal and external aesthetics of housing estates: Environ Behav 2010;42(2):271–294.

16.

Moore

Golledge

: Environmental Knowing: Theories, Research and Methods. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1976.

17.

Nasar

: New developments in aesthetics for urban design: Adv Environ Behav Design 1997;4:149–193.

18.

Connor

: Bridging the gap: façade colour, aesthetic response and planning policy: J Urban Design 2006;11(3):335–345.

19.

Gifford

Hine

Muller-Clemm

Reynolds

Shaw

: Decoding modern architecture: a lens model approach for understanding the aesthetic differences of architects and laypersons: Environ Behav 2000;32(2):163–187.

20.

21.

Brown

Gifford

: Architects predict lay evaluations of large contemporary buildings: whose conceptual properties? J Environ Psychol 2001;21(1):93–100.

22.

Gifford

Hine

Muller-Clemm

Shaw

: Why architects and laypersons judge buildings differently: cognitive properties and physical bases: J Architect Plan Res 2002;19(2):131–148.

23.

Akalin

Yildirim

Wilson

Kilicoglu

: Architecture and engineering students’ evaluations of house façades: preference, complexity and impressiveness: J Environ Psychol 2009;29(1):124–132.

24.

Imamoglu

: Complexity, liking and familiarity: architecture and non-architecture Turkish students’ assessments of traditional and modern house facades: J Environ Psychol 2000;20(1):5–16.

25.

Ghomeshi

Nikpour

Jusan

: Identifying the different aesthetic quality of building attributes from architects perspective: Int J Modern Eng Res (IJMER) 2012;2(3):917–919.

26.

Jusan

: Renovation for Personalization: A Sustainable Housing Development Arm. Skudai, Penerbit UTM, 2010.

27.

Jusan

: Means end chain, person environment congruence and mass housing design: Open House Int 2010;35(3):2590–2601.

28.

Zinas

Jusan

: Motivational factors influencing housing interior finish choice and preference: Elsevier: Procedia-Social Behav Sci 2012;36(1):177–186.

29.

Ghomeshi

Nikpour

Jusan

: Evaluation of conceptual properties by layperson in residential façade designs: J Arts Design Studies, Int Instit Sci, Technol Educat 2012;3(1):13–17.

30.

George

Mallery

: Using SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2003.