Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Planning Literature
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stamps, A. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Demographic Effects in Environmental Aesthetics: A Meta-Analysis

Arthur E. Stamps, III

As design review and multicultural constituencies become more and more prevalent, planners will have increasing needs to make aesthetic decisions that may be contingent on social or cultural factors. Accordingly, it would be useful for planners to have access to the body of empirical literature that has been published on the demographic effects in environmental aesthetics. A literature review found 107 relevant references. These references covered more than 19,000 respondents and 3,281 environmental scenes. Overall, the correlation of preferences between different demographic groups was r = .82. Correlations are also reported for the following factors: multiculturalism, designers and other people, students and other people, children and adults, gender, and special interest groups. Correlations were very high except for children, designers and others for avant-garde architecture, and special interest groups.

Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 14, No. 2, 155-175 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/08854129922092630
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
A. E. Stamps
On Shape and Spaciousness
Environment and Behavior, July 1, 2009; 41(4): 526 - 548.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
T. R. Herzog and A. E. Rector
Perceived Danger and Judged Likelihood of Restoration
Environment and Behavior, May 1, 2009; 41(3): 387 - 401.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
W. Fawcett, I. Ellingham, and S. Platt
Reconciling the Architectural Preferences of Architects and the Public: The Ordered Preference Model
Environment and Behavior, September 1, 2008; 40(5): 599 - 618.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
A. E. Stamps III and V. V. Krishnan
Spaciousness and Boundary Roughness
Environment and Behavior, November 1, 2006; 38(6): 841 - 872.
[Abstract] [PDF]