1. Do people really like “ natural ” scenes? An empirical examination of preference, naturalness and tidiness 9 July 2004 Takemi Sugiyama, PhD Postdoctoral Research Associate OPENspace Research Centre Edinburgh College of Art

2. Naturalness in Preference Studies Studies on Environmental Preference have repeatedly demonstrated that people prefer “ natural ” scenes over “ built ” scenes. Potential reasons for the preference: - Evolutionary perspective - Restorative effect 01/13 B A C K G R O U N D

3. Nassauer ’ s Study Comparing conventional lawn and indigenous plant gardens in a residential area, Nassauer found that the perception of tidiness plays a certain role in people ’ s preference judgement. It can be argued from the results of her study that the perception of naturalness may not always have positive influence on preference. 02/13 B A C K G R O U N D

4. Research Questions 1. In what way naturalness and tidiness are related to preference and related to each other? 2. Are naturalness and tidiness separate underlying dimensions in the perception of the environment? 03/13 O B J E C T I V E S

5. Data Collection Participants: 178 university students in Japan and Australia Stimuli: Eleven outdoor scenes Measured variables (semantic differential items) : liking, naturalness, unclutteredness, attractiveness, beauty, interestingness, simpleness, conspicuousness, maintenance, efficiency 04/13 M E T H O D S

6. Correlation (liking-naturalness) 05/13 naturalness r =.54 (ns) liking R E S U L T S

7. Correlation (liking-naturalness) 05/13 naturalness r =.54 (ns) liking R E S U L T S

8. Correlation (liking-unclutterdness) 06/13 unclutteredness liking r =.78 (p <.01) R E S U L T S

9. Correlation (liking-unclutterdness) 06/13 unclutteredness liking r =.78 (p <.01) R E S U L T S

10. Regression Analysis Dependent Variable: liking (L) Independent Variable : unclutteredness (U) naturalness (N) 07/13 L = 0.44 U + 0.16 N + Constant R 2 = 0.87 R E S U L T S

11. Correlation (naturalness-unclutterdness) 08/13 naturalness r =. 04 (ns) unclutteredness R E S U L T S

12. Factor Analysis 09/13 1234 beauty.855 liking.803 attractiveness.760 interestingness.565 naturalness.343-.650 conspicuousness.616 simpleness -.606.362 maintenance.393.386 unclutteredness.633 efficiency.430 Factorbeautydistinctnesstidinessefficiency R E S U L T S

13. Factor Analysis Factor Correlation Matrix 10/13 beauty distinctness tidinessefficiency beauty 1. -.05.19.44 distinctness 1. -.03.25 tidiness 1..26 efficiency1. R E S U L T S

14. Summary 1. Association between the three constructs 2. Tidiness emerged as an underlying dimension in the perception of the stimuli. However, naturalness did not. It was loaded on two factors: beauty and distinctness (negatively). 11/13 Preference Naturalness Tidiness Preference -- + + Naturalness -- 0 Tidiness -- C O N C L U S I O N

15. Conclusions — Implications 1. Naturalness does not guarantee high preference. What people prefer is likey to be tidy (and natural) scenes. 2. The relation between naturalness and preference seems complex: positive influence from natural elements and negative influence from untidy appearance. 3. The study replicated the significance of tidiness, which Nassauer advocated in her studies. 12/13 C O N C L U S I O N

16. Limitations — Future Directions 1. Generalisability — More stimuli 2.Confounding factors (eg, familiarity) 3.Validation (confirmatory) study 4.Relationship with Kaplan ’ s matrix (coherence, complexity, legibility, mystery) 13/13 C O N C L U S I O N

17. Stimuli Apartment Sod-covered House Drainage M E T H O D S

18. Stimuli Wetland Solar House Research Centre M E T H O D S

19. Stimuli PondWindmills Commercial Complex M E T H O D S

20. Stimuli Park Suburban House M E T H O D S

21. end of presentation