See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/376686135

Cognitive-emotional feasibility of the effect of visual quality of building form

on promoting the sense of place attachment (Case study: Cultural iconic
buildings of Iran's contemp...

Article in Frontiers of Architectural Research · December 2023

CITATIONS READS

0 84

3 authors:

Narmin Ariannia Negar Naseri

Tarbiat Modares University Tarbiat Modares University
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mansour Yeganeh
Tarbiat Modares University
82 PUBLICATIONS 272 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mansour Yeganeh on 21 December 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: www.keaipublishing.com/foar

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Cognitive-emotional feasibility of the effect

of visual quality of building form on
promoting the sense of place attachment
(Case study: Cultural iconic buildings of
Iran’s contemporary architecture)
Narmin Ariannia a,b, Negar Naseri a,b, Mansour Yeganeh a,b,*

a
Digital Architecture and Artificial Intelligence Lab, Department of Architecture,
Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
b
Architectural Design, Modeling and Fabrication Lab, Department of Architecture,
Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Received 24 July 2023; received in revised form 2 October 2023; accepted 21 October 2023

KEYWORDS Abstract The present research studies the relationship between place attachment and the
Visual preferences; perception of form’s visual quality in fifteen outstanding contemporary Iranian architectural
Environmental cultural buildings. This study puts forward the hypothesis that there is a correlation between
quality; the quality of building form and the sense of place attachment, in the sense that creating high
Environmental visual quality through enhancing the quality of building form increases citizens’ initial satisfac-
psychology; tion with and subsequent attachment to the building. High visual quality influences people’s
Mental schemas; experience of the environment and improves the quality of life. Place attachment highlights
Contemporary how people, on a personal level, recreate a sense of place for themselves. The present study
architecture adopts the descriptive-analytical method as its theoretical framework and the survey as the
empirical methodology. Questionnaires were developed using the Likert scale and distributed
among experts and ordinary citizens. Data analysis using SPSS and the adoption of descriptive-
analytical statistics, correlation analysis, and regression showed the relationship among the
characteristics of indicators. The results show a positive correlation between form and place
attachment mediated through visual quality, and they are causal conditions for one another. In
addition, only some of the buildings under study evoke the same level of place attachment.
ª 2023 Higher Education Press Limited Company. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf
of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yeganeh@modares.ac.ir (M. Yeganeh).
Peer review under responsibility of Southeast University.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2023.10.002
2095-2635/ª 2023 Higher Education Press Limited Company. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh, Cognitive-emotional feasibility of the effect of visual quality of building
form on promoting the sense of place attachment (Case study: Cultural iconic buildings of Iran’s contemporary architecture), Frontiers of
Architectural Research, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2023.10.002
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh
1. Introduction
What do observers see when they first look at a specific
view? That is one of the central questions architects have to
tackle. To attract viewers’ attention to the created struc-
ture, the architect has to study the elements and factors
contributing to capturing attention. The urban visual envi-
ronment is part of public life, decreasing negative emotions
such as tension and anxiety (de Vries et al., 2021; Kondo
et al., 2020). Consequently, the high visual quality in-
fluences people’s experience of the environment and im-
proves the quality of life (Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Nasar,
1990). Good architecture must provide the user with a
novel experience, serve as the project’s best outcome, and
shape the individual’s decision to remain in that specific
space, leave it, or return later. Architects’ need for more
understanding of users’ needs, mental schemas, and tastes
leads to problems in today’s architecture. Architects design
buildings, merely relying on their mentality, without taking
native people, culture, and architecture into account
(Mouratidis and Hassan, 2020). Hence, any architect must
be familiar with the designed environment’s effects on the
users (Hu and Roberts, 2020).
The superior formal quality of buildings and a unique
design can make indelible impressions on people (Aminah,
2018). High urban visual quality can, directly and indi-
rectly, lead to urban development. Increasing the visual
quality can improve urban dynamics and result in cultural,
social, political, and economic development (Bunce, 2013;
Rose-Redwood, 2008), which are neglected today. Raising
architects’ awareness of citizens’ preferences will lead to
designing and constructing high-quality public buildings.
Sound, target-oriented planning in building design can lead
to the construction of outstanding, memorable buildings
(Vogt and Donnell, 1983).
Hence, it is necessary to identify the most critical formal
components of visual quality and study the influence of
each component on the sense of place attachment to
improve them and increase the sense of place attachment.
To reach solutions, the present study identifies formal in-
dicators in architecture in order of their importance; de-
fines visual quality and identifies its components in
buildings; detects the most critical components influential
upon the sense of place attachment; establishes the cor-
relation between the components found in the previous
step; discovers the relationship among the variables and
modeling their interactive relations and defines their roles
in enhancing the spatial quality and creating a sense of
place in the audience; and analyses the quality and quan-
tity of the variables in order to offer design methods and
criteria for increasing the quality of the buildings (Brian and
Eisenhauer, 2000).
This research focuses on the evolution and trans-
formation of individuals’ formal features and evaluation
criteria over time. Taking a societal approach, we have
carefully gathered and critically analyzed indicators that
impact visual quality in the present era. Similarly, we have
chosen case samples to track the historical progression of
formal patterns that influence visual quality spanning 80
years. The aim is to conduct a trend analysis and under-
stand how these patterns have changed.
2
The following questions are posed to attain research
objectives: (1) How are formal components related to vi-
sual quality in architecture? (2) What are the design criteria
for increasing the sense of place attachment in buildings?
A significant portion of the studies on environmental
preferences deals with identifying public preferences. The
results show that there is a difference between the visual
preferences of ordinary citizens and architects (Gifford
et al., 2000; Ilbeigi et al., 2019; Rapoport, 1982).
Although in several studies, the sample consisted mainly of
university and high school students, most of the studies
dealt with the preferences of ordinary people (Herzog,
1992; Herzog et al., 1982; Ikemi, 2005; Korpela et al.,
2002; Sevenant and Antrop, 2010). The studies often
focus on residential facades (Azemati et al., 2020; Hussein,
2020; Ruta et al., 2019) and urban green spaces (Harris
et al., 2018; Polat and Akay, 2015; Zhang et al., 2019).
The factors that shape people’s preferences have not been
discussed as much. In studying the sense of place attach-
ment, attachment to home has sometimes been the focus
of research, but there needs to be a significant gap in
attachment to other spaces. How people can develop at-
tachments to other, larger, and more public spaces still
needs to be discovered. It should be noted that most
studies regard the place as a social phenomenon while they
neglect its basic physical features.
Table 1 analyzes the literature on the three research
variables. No study has been carried out to analyze the
relationship between formal components, visual quality,
and the sense of place attachment in cultural buildings.
The present study’s findings put forward and examine new
approaches, pose questions concerning modern architec-
ture, and highlight the relations among variables influential
upon the understanding of form, visual quality, and the
sense of place attachment (Table 2).
In order to set the theoretical framework and formulate
the research hypotheses, the theoretical analysis of the
relationship between form, visual quality, and the sense of
place attachment is performed in the following (Table 3).
2. Theoretical framework
The physical environment exerts an unconscious influence
on psychological processes (Hochberg and Brunswik, 1954).
People answer according to their mental schema about
their favorite place or the place they miss the most
(Velarde et al., 2007). Environmental perception can
effectively improve health, establish identity, and elicit
emotions. Being in a beautiful environment can help alle-
viate the tension provoked by challenging situations (Tveit
et al., 2018).
Also, an appealing urban facade will result in a clear
mental image, legible environment, durability, memora-
bility, identity, visual attraction, and better quality of life
(Firouzmakan and Daneshpour, 2015; Mirza and Byrd, 2023).
Perception refers mainly to visual perception since most
sensory input is visual. In architecture, visual perception is
more important than other kinds of perception. Perception
is studied to define human beings’ understanding of their
environment. Adopting the most appropriate intervention
can improve the quality of the living environment. The
 Table 1 Review of subject records.
Authors Indicator Discussion Methodology Results
Stedman (2003) Environmental The significant role of the physical Survey research An appropriate model merges a sense of
quality & Place environment in place meanings and place with environmental factors.
attachment attachment. Attributes of the landscape have a
significant role in constructed meanings.
Ng et al. (2005) Environmental Effects of housing-related Survey research The close relevance of housing with two
quality & Place environmental features on the quality subjects: quality of life and place
attachment of life and place belonging. belonging, is an essential topic in
environmental social psychology, linking to
urban renewal.
Stedman et al. Environmental Understanding place attachment and Social science survey The results show various similarities and
(2007) quality & Place environmental quality in North differences in behaviors, environmental

Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

attachment American and European temperate perceptions, and place attachment over
lake districts. sites.
Brehm et al. Environmental How attachments and meanings The self-administered Understanding the dynamics between place
(2013) quality & Place related to place can influence the questionnaire mail meaning, place attachment, and different
attachment environmental quality and social survey aspects of environmental concerns.
well-being.
Banaei et al. Form & Walking on two different paths; Park Electroencephalogram Low level of excitement and concern during

+
(2015) Environmental compared to commercial. (EEG) the first 3 min on the park path, more

MODEL
quality thrilled on the commercial path, but this
3

state disappeared after 3 min.

Ram et al. (2016) Place attachment Discovering the connection between Survey research There is a positive connection between
place attachment and perceived place attachment and authenticity. Tourists
authenticity of significant tourist attractions found in places with significant
attractions. heritage experience value can be known
more authentic. That authenticity is
affected by place attachment fitted by
iconicity and heritage value of the goal
region.
Jennath and Form Understanding both intentionally and Experimental study The noticeable built form features are
Nidhish (2016) intuitively used factors for the chosen by the current community. The
aesthetic determination of a library attractive appeal of buildings and
building’s external form. anticipated functionality demonstrates a
robust positive connection.
Shemesh et al. Form The effect of various geometries of EEG Contributors demonstrated various
(2017) architectural space. VR feedbacks and inclinations towards spaces.
Questionnaires Results illustrate a contrast in our mental
response to different geometries of space.
Pourdehghan et al. Form Visual preferences of both people and Multidimensional scaling People’s visual and subjective perceptions
(2017) Visual Preferences architects toward Housing Facades. analysis (MDS) and architects have significant and
recognizable correspondence and
distinctions with each other.
(continued on next page)
 Table 1 (continued)
Authors Indicator Discussion Methodology Results
Ahola and Mugge Form Estimating the influence of different Experimental study The corridors with a curved ceiling, the
(2017) environmental design factors. walls without a split-level design, and a
view of the outside make people feel safe.
Bertamini and Form Checking shape preference. Experimental study There is a connection between goodness,
Sinico (2019) smoothness, and other associations.
Ilbeigi et al. (2019) Form Explain aesthetic differences Experimental study By considering the cognitive features of
between architects’ and non- analyzed by SPSS habitable buildings’ facades, architects and
architects’ points of view. non-architects believe that “uniqueness”
has a strong impact; on the other hand,
architects think that “pleasantness” is the
most critical factor.
Tahmasebi et al. Environmental Distinguish semantic- perceptual Experimental study A composition of semantic- conceptual
(2019) quality features that can affect the quality of analyzed by SPSS & Lisrel factors illustrates environmental quality.
urban environments.

N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh

Naghibi Rad et al. Form The effects of windows shape or form Psychophysics There is a distinct classification of
(2019) in facades of building on perceivers’ experiments and EEG unpleasant and pleasant shapes of windows
affective state and emotions. and more critical ERP modulations in the
right than the left hemisphere for
unpleasant windows relative to pleasant

+
ones.

MODEL
Coburn et al. Form & Visual An important role of naturalistic Multidimensional scaling Lower visual features levels show
4

(2019) quality visual patterns in aesthetic appraisals analysis (MDS) naturalness ratings of architectural scenes.
of architectural scenes. Buildings with higher degrees of Scaling and
Contrast are considered more natural.
Evaluating the similarity of architecture
connects with naturalistic beauties.
Naturalistic aesthetics mediate the impacts
of Scaling and Contrast on users’
preferences.
Sarabi and Place attachment Various factors affect place Survey research Effecting factors of place attachment are
Bakhtiar (2019) attachment in the architecture of physical form, climate, activities,
schools’ gathering places. landscapes and views, privacy, furniture
and elements, and neighborhood.
Saadati (2019) Place attachment Do the features of outdoor house Causal process method Beneficial outdoor properties in satisfaction
environment features also affect and home attachment are related to the
developing home attachment? exterior view of the house and close
buildings, neighboring satisfaction, and
good fame and quality of the neighborhood.
Banaei et al. Form The influence of interior architectural Virtual reality A relationship between forms and emotional
(2019) form characters on residents’ situations for various personality features.
emotions. The impact of architecture on emotion by
considering form classifications and
combinations, personality differences, as
well as a virtual reality setup.
(continued on next page)
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

quality of the environment is a central aspect of life (van

somewhat unsafe” are probably linked with

community belonging; however, the quality
Kamp et al., 2003).
In The Architecture of the City, Aldo Rossi deals with the
significant effect on the sense of place
attachment in public spaces of chosen
originality of forms and their defining role in creating high-
Physical components have the most

Paying rent and feeling “unsafe or

quality environments regardless of their practical aspect
residential complexes in Tehran. (Dix, 1984). According to Jack Nasar, the quality of urban
planning, as a concept, increases through the creation of
tangible features in the physical environment on the one
hand and their perception and appraisal by the viewers on
of the house is not. the other hand (Nasar, 1994).
To evaluate the quality of the living environment, one
can use complementary objective and subjective criteria.
Objective criteria are set using technical instruments or
expert appraisal of the environmental features (Diener
Results

et al., 2009). In contrast, subjective criteria are defined

through the extent to which individuals have their expec-
tations met and need to be fulfilled (Steg et al., 2018).
Individuals’ aesthetic appraisal of the designed environ-
ment depends on the appeal of the building structure
(Herzog and Stark, 2004). According to Nasar, there are
three types of appraisal: formal, which includes abstract
Experimental study

concepts; symbolic, conveyed through the design style; and

analyzed by SPSS

Survey research

schematic, which refers to the optimal building function

Methodology

(Nasar, 1994).
There are different viewpoints on the quality of visual
environments (Daniel, 2001). Lothian (1999) highlights the
distinction between the subjective and the objective
approach. According to the objective approach, the visual
quality results from what exists out there, while the sub-
jective approach considers the visual quality dependent
welfare, and hardship paying the rent
making a sense of place attachment.

upon the viewer. Hence, the visual quality predates peo-

The impact of physical elements in

The connection of housing quality,

ple’s perceptions and preferences. Daniel and Vining (1983)

with a sense of social belonging.

categorize the approaches to visual quality into ecological,

aesthetic form, psychophysical, psychological, and
phenomenological. Their categorization consists of a
spectrum of subjective to objective approaches. Having
analyzed the pros and cons of every approach, they
conclude that a combination of psychophysical and psy-
chological approaches provides a more practical basis for
appraising visual quality. According to evolutionary the-
Discussion

ories, people’s preferences of the environment result from

human evolution, and such preferences are among the
innate characteristics of the quality of the environment
(Steg et al., 2018). According to Rachel and Stephen
(Kaplan, 1989), visual information leads to perception and
exploration, which play critical roles in fashioning people’s
preferences. According to cultural theories, which differ
quality & Place
Environmental

from evolutionary theories, preferences are learned and

Form & Place
attachment

attachment

inherited through society, culture, and personality (Bell,

Indicator

2012). Topophilia, one of the most common notions in this

study, refers to each person’s strong ties with what he or
she knows well (Giuliani, 2004). Familiarity and experience
are essential factors in shaping preferences (Cuba and
Hummon, 1993). According to Giuliani (2017), functional
aspects refer to the environment’s fulfillment of individual
Table 1 (continued)

Leviten-Reid et al.
Bakhtiar (2019)

and group needs. Support of individual or group identity

refers to the confirmation, by the environment, of the in-
dividual need for distinction and to be part of the local
Sarabi and

(2020)

groups. Feeling good as the result of being in a specific

Authors

place equals peace and health while being away from that
place leads to feeling like you miss something. These are
the different aspects of the sense of place attachment,

5
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh

Table 2 Practical indicators of Form resulting from expert opinions and the analysis of documentary content.
Indicators Dimensions Practical indicators Studies
Form Geometrical Dimensions Rogers, 1989; Tibbalds, 2020; Shamai, 1991
Structure Shape Rogers, 1989; Tibbalds, 2020
Peripheral lines Pontis and van der Waarde, 2020; Stamps,
(Figure-Ground) 1994; Vecera et al., 2002
Protrusion-depression
Layering Kaplan et al., 1972
Contextual Good Continuation Koffka, 2013; Kosslyn, 1994; Liu et al., 1999;
Structure Gavrin and Ellis, 1939
Rhythm Norman, 2002; Rowland et al., 2014; Smith,
1976; Terian and Lang, 1988; Krier et al., 1992
Skyline Wells, 2000; Zhang et al., 2019; Kellert and
Wilson, 1993
Visual Materials & Textures Norman, 2002; Rowland et al., 2014; Rogers,
Texture 1989; Tibbalds, 2020; Shamai, 1991; Sakhaei
et al., 2022; Herzog, 1992; Dion et al., 1972;
Kellert and Wilson, 1993
Ornamentation Norman, 2002; Sakhaei et al., 2022; Herzog,
1992; Dion et al., 1972; Zhang et al., 2019;
Kellert and Wilson, 1993
Color Ghanbari et al., 2022; Rogers, 1989; Tibbalds,
2020; Shamai, 1991; Gifford et al., 2002
Transparency Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Xu, 1995; Shahinrad
et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2019; Kellert and
Wilson, 1993
Landmarking Landmark Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Violich, 1983;
Rogers, 1989; Tibbalds, 2020; Shamai, 1991
Moving or Stationary

which comprises one level of the relations between people
and places (Giuliani, 2017).
Ralph regards significant experience, spatial attach-
ment, human proportions, conformity to the cultural and
physical local background, and local concepts and meanings
among the essential qualities of place (Graus, 2017; Larice
and Macdonald, 2013). According to Xu (1995), the mean-
ingful structures of the space and the designed environ-
ment play a crucial role in creating a series of specific
qualities and developing the sense of place attachment.
Place attachment highlights how people, on a personal
level, recreate a sense of place for themselves (Scannell
and Gifford, 2017). Place attachment consists of several
layers as the nucleus of forming a sense of place. As time
passes and people interact more and more with a place, the
people-place interaction exceeds mere attachment and
reaches a more general sense of place. The sense of place
moves beyond a place’s physical and sensory properties
toward capturing that specific place’s spirit (Eisenhauer,
2000). A sense of place is crucial to the continual presence
of people in a place and their interaction with it.
Therefore, the artificial environment can provide
optimal satisfaction for people when it fulfills physical, vi-
sual, ecological, semantic, social, and economic expecta-
tions. Suppose any component of the place lacks the
desired quality. In that case, it influences people’s per-
ceptions, emotions, understanding of the building, their
ties with the place, and, consequently, their level of
satisfaction with it. Formal components are the most crit-
ical factors in creating visual quality in any building.
The theoretical framework and model were developed
based on Figs. 1 and 2 to narrow down the research area
and address the questions raised in the article. That is
crucial because the evaluation criteria for visual quality,
which is based on architectural form, is influenced by
various parameters.
Physical characteristics can create a sense of place by
developing significance and facilitating activities. Visual
values can be regarded as the most critical aspect of
environmental quality, reinforcing or weakening people’s
sense of attachment to their environment and, conse-
quently, their sense of place attachment (Fig. 1).
2.1. Theoretical model
According to the theoretical bases and the research back-
ground, the theoretical model for the present study is
developed, as seen in Fig. 2 (Shoemaker et al., 2012). Ac-
cording to this model, the citizens’ sense of place attach-
ment to significant cultural buildings is a function of their
formal and visual quality, which differs from one building to
another. Physical, environmental, and semantic factors are
the three key components that fashion the urban facade.
The cognitive aspects of the issue are dealt with in terms of
perceived quality. At the same time, the affective aspects
of the sense of place attachment are studied. This study

6
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3 Practical indicators of Visual quality resulting from expert opinions and the analysis of documentary content.
Indicators Dimensions Practical indicators Studies
Visual quality Perceptual Understandability Violich, 1983; Greene, 1992; Salgado de la Rosa et al., 2020
Real Salgado de la Rosa et al., 2020
Naturalness Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Holahan, 1984; Koren, 2008; Kellert
and Wilson, 1993; Nasar, 1990; Wells, 2000
Beauty/Aesthetic Nauts et al., 2014; Dion et al., 1972; Kurosu and Kashimura,
1995; Norman, 2002
Expressive Salgado de la Rosa et al., 2020
Communicative- Inspirational &Educational Salgado de la Rosa et al., 2020
Emotional Emotional &Exciting Salgado de la Rosa et al., 2020
Communicative (vs. Mute) Salgado de la Rosa et al., 2020
Visual Integration Coordination of forms Rowland et al., 2014; Smith, 1976; Terian and Lang, 1988; Xu,
1995
Visual proportions Krier et al., 1992; Terian and Lang, 1988; Ghanbari et al., 2022;
Smith, 1976; Greene, 1992; Gifford et al., 2002
Spatial Enclosure Gavrin and Ellis, 1939; Kaplan et al., 1972; Trancik, 1986;
Tibbalds, 2020; Herzog, 1992; Gosling, 1996; Ghanbari et al.,
2022
Regularity Rowland et al., 2014; Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Jacobs, 2016;
Smith, 1976; Terian and Lang, 1988; Nasar, 1990; Greene, 1992
Coherence Kaplan et al., 1972; Greene, 1992
legibility & clarity Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Appleyard and Lintell, 1972; Kaplan
et al., 1972; Evans et al., 1982; Southworth, 1989; Herzog,
1992; Xu, 1995; Azizibabani et al., 2021; Gifford et al., 2000;
Tibbalds, 2012
Dynamic-Attraction Dynamics
Visual continuity Jacobs, 2016; Bentley, 2013; Azizibabani et al., 2021
Complexity Gosling, 1996; Kaplan et al., 1972; Terian and Lang, 1988;
Nasar, 1990; Herzog, 1992; Gifford et al., 2000; Salgado de la
Rosa et al., 2020
Variety Jacobs, 2016; Ghanbari et al., 2022; Bentley, 2013; Colman,
1987; Greene, 1992; Haughton and Hunter, 1994; Tibbalds,
2012
Visual attraction Dion et al., 1972; Greene, 1992; Langlois et al., 2000; Wolfe,
2001; Azizibabani et al., 2021
Permeability& Accessibility Mace et al., 2015; Foster, 1983; Bentley, 2013; Greene, 1992;
Haughton and Hunter, 1994; Azizibabani et al., 2021

focuses mainly on the visual aspects of the quality of the
environment and does not study olfactory, auditory, and
other aspects (Zhao et al., 2020). The method of appraisal
and the operationalization of the concepts must be deter-
mined to render this model testable, which will be carried
out in the methodology section.
2.2. Research hypothesis
Based on the theoretical foundation, the research hypoth-
esis follows: “There is a relationship between the building
form quality and the sense of place attachment. Enhancing
visual quality through enhancing the quality of form in-
creases people’s initial interest in and subsequent attach-
ment to the building."
According to this proposition, creating optimal visual
quality is necessary for developing a sense of place
attachment in critical architectural structures. This asser-
tion is verified through empirical evidence.
3. Materials and methods
The present study is a descriptive-exploratory, applied, and
qualitative-quantitative research regarding its objectives,
results, and process (Bemanian et al., 2012; Yeganeh et al.,
2018). The research consists of two significant steps. The
first step is the theoretical part, where the descriptive-
explanatory method is used to explicate the theoretical
bases and offer the theoretical framework for the study.
The second step consists of a survey to examine the theo-
retical propositions. The theoretical data were collected
through scientific articles and papers, and the empirical
data (trial) were collected through a survey using

7
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh
Fig. 1 Conceptual model. Source: The Authors.
questionnaires. The questionnaires were designed accord-
ing to the indicators with closed-ended answers. The study
sample consists of significant cultural buildings in contem-
porary Iran.
As for the form components, a questionnaire with a
seven-point Likert scale (Ikemi, 2005) served as one of the
measurement tools. The questions concerning the form
standards are asked concerning 15 buildings. Experts eval-
uate the form components. Factors such as being the owner
and involvement in cultural, professional, and academic
activities were considered in selecting the experts. The
selection process is to create a comprehensive database of
individuals with overlapping views and diverse intellectual
tastes within their professional and academic fields. Fac-
tors such as work history, gender, and level of research
collaboration were also accounted for in sample selection.
Notably, 15 professionals and scientists were chosen as
expert panel members. Based on the experiences and
mentality from concrete examples, each expert makes his
view and evaluation of each subjective item. The matching
of objective case studies with the mental framework of the
person, the criterion of evaluation, and the subjective
judgment of experts is one of the components related to
the visual quality of each case study.
8
As for the sense of place attachment and visual quality
components, a questionnaire with the Likert scale was
distributed among 90 citizens holding at least a high school
diploma. The statistical population was determined based
on the total number of individuals. Both the number of
participants and the number of choices they made were
considered. Incomplete answers were excluded, resulting
in the analysis of responses from 90 individuals. The sam-
ples were randomly selected from people present at the
location on different days and times, including opposite
periods.
The questions were divided into three parts: the first
part collects the statistical data of the participants; the
second part consists of questions dealing with any of the
visual quality indicators; the third part includes questions
about the sense of place attachment. The questions are
repeated for 15 essential buildings. The samples have been
selected through systematic random sampling. Face validity
has been used to evaluate the measurement methods in
this study. Experts initially analyzed the extracted in-
dicators and then used them to determine the face and
content validity of this questionnaire. The data were
analyzed using IBM SPSS statistics, and the results were
presented using descriptive statistical analysis and logical
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 2 Theoretical mode 1. Source: The Authors.
reasoning. In this research, percentile distribution, the
percentage of frequency, mean, correlation, and regression
were utilized (Fig. 3).
3.1. Conceptual and operational definition of
variables
In order to appraise the concepts and variables used in the
research, they had to be theoretically conceptualized and
defined operationally (Motevalian and Yeganeh, 2020;
Yeganeh, 2020; Yeganeh and Kamalizadeh, 2018).
The conceptual definition of the variables: According
to the discussions in the theoretical part of the article, the
conceptual definitions are as follows:
The visual environment quality refers to the ability to
evoke positive feelings (calm, satisfaction, partiality for
the environment .) as well as negative ones (restlessness,
tension, stagnation .) in the citizens. Such feelings take
shape based on the experience and the perception derived
from the mental image of the city and contextual features,
which reflect the identity and appeal of any place
(Shahinrad et al., 2015).
9
The indicators used in this research were derived from
theories and principles of form design and aesthetics in
architecture. The conceptual and theoretical saturation
regarding all the factors influencing visual quality evalua-
tion was obtained from various texts and sources, including
international indexes and aesthetic books from the history
of world architecture. It should be noted that these in-
dicators are not specific to any particular culture.
The main objective of this research is to establish a
framework for assessing the visual quality of all types and
examples of architecture. However, the effectiveness of each
indicator may vary depending on the specific building or type
of architecture being evaluated. The authors acknowledge
that factors such as culture and the intended use of cultural
buildings can also influence the evaluation process. There-
fore, the research approach involved selecting examples
representing common architectural forms and contexts
worldwide.
The multicultural diversity among the participants in
the study and the respondents showed no significant dif-
ferences in evaluating visual quality, indicating that the
results can be generalized with a small margin of error.
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh

Fig. 3 Research plan diagram. Source: The Authors.

Furthermore, other research conducted with different
architectural examples worldwide has also demonstrated
that common criteria can be used to evaluate the quality
of space. To ensure methodological rigor, this research
aimed to control for cultural and contextual variables
while analyzing their impact on the research findings
(Table 4).
3.2. Identification of the research samples
Cultural buildings are structures, city centers, and urban
spaces allocated to organizing and performing cultural
events. Putting up significant buildings is done with visual
attraction rather than practical use (Held, 1992). Fifteen
significant cultural buildings have been studied in this
research. The cultural indicator of these trail-blazing
buildings in contemporary Iranian architecture is free
from aesthetic considerations. The chosen case studies can
be found in Fig. 4 and Table 5.
As a result of the case studies related to the early period
under study, the most significant indicators of visual quality
are the forms combined with native and traditional archi-
tecture and the most important elements of past archi-
tectural indicators in the cultural buildings of that period.

Table 4 Practical indicators of Place attachment resulting from expert opinions and the analysis of documentary content.
Indicators Dimensions Practical indicators Studies
Place Activities Interactions with yourself Harris et al., 1996; Morgan, 2010
attachment Interactions with place Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Ghanbari et al., 2022; Hummon,
1992; Morgan, 2010
Interactions with others Jacobs and Appleyard, 1987; Tibbalds, 2020; Morgan, 2010
Community participation Jacobs and Appleyard, 1987; Tibbalds, 2020; Haughton and
Hunter, 1994
Perception- Memorability Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Rapoport, 1982; Riley, 1992
Mental image Emotion & Desire Southworth, 1989; Williams and Roggenbuck, 1989; Kyle et al.,
2004
Authenticity - Place identity Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Ghanbari et al., 2022; Jacobs and
Meaning Appleyard, 1987; Southworth, 1989; Greene, 1992
Meaningfulness Chapman and Lynch, 1962; Jacobs and Appleyard, 1987;
Rapoport, 1982; Shamai, 1991; Hummon, 1992; Azizibabani
et al., 2021; Kyle et al., 2004
Sense of security Ghanbari et al., 2022; Greene, 1992; Haughton and Hunter,
1994

10
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 4 Case studies location in Tehran. Source: The Authors.
4. Analysis of the survey results
In order to test the hypotheses and offer practical solutions
and criteria for the optimal designing of buildings, spatial-
structural characteristics, and textual and semantic-
perceptual quality were identified. The opinion of experts
on urban architecture was sought, as was that of ordinary
citizens. The empirical data were analyzed on two
descriptive and explanatory levels. Descriptive analysis was
also conducted on two contextual and independent vari-
ables, intermediate and dependent variables. Contextual
variables include formal gender, education, age, and sig-
nificance. The descriptive analysis of independent variables
includes formal indicators, dependent variables, the sense
of place attachment indicators, and the intermediate var-
iable of the visual quality indicators. In the following, we
study data on contextual and research variables.
4.1. Descriptive analysis of contextual variables
Statistical data show that 76.7% of the participants are
women, and 23.3% are men. The population was 20e55
years old, the mode statistic was 22, the range was 35, the
median was 26.5, the average age was 31.13, and the
scattering of standard deviation was 11.178. According to
the statistical distribution of this variable, 13.3% held a high
school diploma and less, 46.7% held a BA degree, 30% held
an MA degree, and 10% were Ph.D. graduates.
11
4.2. Descriptive analysis of the hypothetical
concepts
In this study, the independent variable (form), the inter-
mediate variable (visual quality), and the dependent vari-
able (the sense of place attachment) were descriptively
analyzed in all the fifteen cultural buildings of contempo-
rary Iran. The descriptive analysis of each variable has been
done based on the indicators of any component. The mean
of all the formal indicators is between 5 and 6 (on a scale
from 1 to 7), which means that the buildings under study
have superior formal quality. Data analysis shows that the
indicator of color is the most effective in the formal quality
of buildings, with the indicators of landmarks, peripheral
lines, skyline, and materials and texture coming next in line
consecutively. The transparency indicator has the lowest
means compared to other indicators. Paying greater
attention to this indicator and bringing it to the fore will
increase building appeal and formal quality.
According to the respondents, the mean for all the visual
quality indicators is between 4 and 5, which means that the
buildings under study have an acceptable level of visual
quality. Data analysis shows that the regularity indicator is
the most effective in building visual quality, with coherence,
legibility and clarity, understandability, expressiveness,
permeability and accessibility, visual proportions, and the
coordination of form coming next in line. The variety indi-
cator has the lowest mean among all the other indicators.
 Table 5 Status of studied buildings.
Buildings Established Type Architectural style Location Dominant building Symbolical quality Number of floors Dominant
material (Historical events color
and memories in
spaces)
Museum of 1977 Museum Modern Next to the main Stone & Concrete Windcatcher 3 Grey
Contemporary architecture bypass, Located in
Art the park
Mellat Park 2008 Cinema& Gallery Modern Next to the main Glass & Concrete e 2 Blue & Grey
Cineplex architecture bypass, Located in
the park
Carpet Museum 1977 Museum Modern Next to the main Concrete Persian carpet 2 Grey
architecture bypass, Located in hanger
the park
City Theater 1972 Performing arts Modern Next to the main Tile & Brick Iranian theaters & 4 Brown

N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh

complex architecture bypass, Located in Past Iranian
the park architecture
Niavaran Cultural 1995 Cultural center Postmodern In front of the park Stone & Concrete e 2 Grey
Center architecture
Shafagh Cultural 1994 Cultural center Iranian-Islamic Located in the Brick 2 Brown

+
e

MODEL
Center Change of use park
12

Azadi Cinema 2008 Cinema High-Tech Next to the street Cement& Glass e 10 Grey
Reconstruction
National Museum 1938 Museum The Iranian Near the main Brick Vault &Traditional 2 Brown
of Iran National Style bypass structures
Iranian Academy 2010 Gallery Iranian-Islamic Next to the main Brick Traditional 8 Grey
of Arts bypass structures
Khavaran Cultural 1993 Cultural center Modern Next to the main Iranian geometric 5 Grey &
Center architecture bypass designs Yellow
Vahdat Hall 1967 Opera house Modern Near City Theater Granite marble e 7 Black
architecture
Iranian Artists 1999 Multifunctional Iranian-Islamic Located in the Brick e 2 Brown
Forum Reconstruction park
Islamic Revolution 2012 Museum Deconstruction Located in the Aluminum e 2 Grey
& Holy Defense park composite
Museum
Tehran Theater 2016 Performing arts Modern Next to the main e 2 Grey &
Complex complex architecture bypass Orange
Museum of the 2012 Museum Iranian-Islamic Located in the Brick e 3 Brown
Qasr Prison Reconstruction park
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
Putting greater emphasis on this indicator will increase the
visual quality and appeal of the building.
The mean for all the sense of place attachment in-
dicators is between 4 and 5, which means that the buildings
under study have an acceptable level of place attachment.
Data analysis shows that the place identity indicator is the
most effective upon the sense of place attachment, while
interactions with others, community participation, sense of
security, and meaningfulness are next in line. The memo-
rability indicator has the lowest mean among all the in-
dicators. Putting greater emphasis on this indicator will
increase the building’s sense of place attachment and ap-
peal. The general comparison of buildings shows that the
quality of form (5.35) comes before the visual quality
(4.92), which, in turn, is ranked higher than the sense of
place attachment (4.56).
The correlation analysis of the research variables shows
that the correlation coefficient for the variables is between
0.586 and 0.92. All the dimensions have a positive corre-
lation. The interpretation of the relations among variables
shows that the relationship between visual quality and the
sense of attachment is strong with a correlation coefficient
of 0.929; the relationship between form and visual quality
is medium with a correlation coefficient of 0.6; and the
relationship between form and the sense of attachment is
medium with a correlation coefficient of 0.586 (Table 6).
It is useful to calculate the Bivariate Correlation To un-
derstand the relationship between two variables. However,
one has to use the Correlation Matrix to show the simulta-
neous relationship between pairs of variables. There are
numerous ways to draw the Correlation Matrix. The Heat
Map has to be used to offer a graphic depiction of corre-
lation coefficients. The present research does this using
Python (Fig. 5).
The correlation analysis among the indicators shows that
the correlation coefficients are between 0.2 and 0.97. All the
dimensions are positively correlated with one another.
Analysis of the relationships among the indicators shows a
strong relationship between meaning and originality in-
dicators, mental image and interpretation, attractive and
dynamic activities, and visual solid, affective-relational, and
perceptual coherence. On the one hand, the correlation be-
tween attraction and dynamics and texture is very weak.
4.3. Analysis of the linear relationship between
dependent and independent variables
Before launching any regression analysis, one must use the
Scatter Plot and the correlation coefficient to study
whether there is a linear relationship between any depen-
dent and independent variables. To do so, a Scatter Plot is
an appropriate tool. As can be seen in the charts, the
relationship between independent variable indicators
Table 6 Pearson coefficient.
Pearson correlation coefficient Form
Form 1 0.60
Visual quality
Place attachment
13
(geometrical structure, contextual structure, texture,
making landmarks) and the visual quality (dependent vari-
able) is relatively linear, and the linear relationship be-
tween independent variables is medium (Fig. 6(a)). The
relationship between independent variable indicators
(perceptual, affective-relational, visual coherence,
attraction-dynamics) and place attachment (dependent
variable) is linear, and the linear relationship between in-
dependent variables is strong (Fig. 6(b)). The relationship
between independent variable indicators (geometrical
structure, contextual structure, texture, and making land-
marks) and place attachment (dependent variable) is
relatively linear, and the relationship between dependent
variables is medium (Fig. 6(c)).
4.4. Explanatory regression analysis
The explanatory claim of the research is that there is a
relationship between form and the sense of place attach-
ment in cultural buildings through visual quality. This
explanatory claim is studied by defining the relationship
between the causal condition of the form variable and the
place attachment effect variable.
The regression among research variables is offered in
Table 7. The relationship is 0.60 between form and visual
quality, 0.929 between visual quality and the sense of
attachment and 0.586 between form and the sense of
attachment. The covariance (R2) is 0.36 between form and
visual quality, 0.863 between visual quality and the sense of
attachment and 0.344 between form and the sense of
attachment.
According to the table of regression, the function of the
relationship between values is as defined:
ðVisual qualityÞYZ2:745 þ 0:407ðFormÞ;
ðPlace attachmentÞYZ  0:912 þ 1:112ðVisual qualityÞ;
ðPlace attachmentÞYZ2:015 þ 0:476ðFormÞ:
The regression coefficient shows to what extent the
dependent variable changes when the independent variable
increases by one unit. A positive coefficient shows that the
dependent variable changes by a predetermined level when
the independent variable increases. According to these
functions, if the visual quality is not the causal condition,
which is to say, if the influence of the causal condition of
form is controlled, the Y-intercept will be 2.745. If the
attachment is not the causal condition, which is to say if
the influence of the causal condition of visual quality is
controlled, the Y-intercept will be 0.912. In the case of
place, attachment is not the causal condition. That is to
say, if the influence of the causal condition is controlled,
Visual quality Place attachment
0.586
1 0.929
1
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh

Fig. 5 Correlation matrix. Source: The authors.

the Y-intercept will be 2.015. This means that before
inserting the causal condition, the effect size is as above.
If in the buildings under study, the causal condition is
inserted into the analysis and appraisal of the respective
functions, the following can be concluded:
There is a 0.407 positive change in effect (visual quality)
when causal condition (form) changes positively by one unit.
There is a 1.112 positive change in the effect (place
attachment) when causal condition (visual quality) changes
positively by one unit.
There is a 0.476 positive change in the effect (place
attachment) when causal condition (form) changes posi-
tively by one unit.
These numbers show the value of the regression slope.
Thus, it can be concluded that “the more the quality of
form (the cause) in buildings, the more the visual quality
and the sense of place attachment (effect) will be.” In
other words, the theoretical proposition is confirmed with
respect to all the buildings, and the hypothesis is proven.
As shown in Fig. 7, if the two confidence interval lines
are parallel, it indicates a uniform data distribution. If the
data are situated at the upper side of the plot, between the
regression line and the confidence interval line, the cause
will influence the effect. If the points are not focused on
specific places, the buildings are similar regarding the in-
fluence of indicators (the respondents’ score or level for

Fig. 6 Scatter plot. Source: The authors.

14
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 7 Regression between research variables.

Indicator Case study R R2 Sig Constant b Beta f
Form & Visual quality All buildings 0.6 0.36 0.018 2.745 0.407 0.600 7.315
Visual quality & Place attachment All buildings 0.929 0.863 0.000 0.912 1.112 0.929 82.022
Form & Place attachment All buildings 0.586 0.344 0.022 2.015 0.476 0.586 6.810

that specific range). If the data are scattered along the
line, fluctuating is high, and buildings differ.
Data distribution on the horizontal axis shows the di-
versity of buildings, and the data distribution on the ver-
tical axis represents the intensity of the regression.
The most significant influence of the quality of form on
increasing visual quality and place attachment is for the
Iranian Academy of the Arts, National Museum of Iran,
Tehran Museum of Contemporary Arts, Azadi Cinema, Vah-
dat Hall, Niavaran Cultural Center, Tehran Theater Com-
plex, Shafagh Cultural Center and Islamic Revolution and
Holy Defense Museum. The most significant influence of
form on increasing the sense of place attachment is Azadi
Cinema, National Museum of Iran, Niavaran Cultural Center,
Vahdat Hall, Museum of Contemporary Arts, Iranian Artists
Forum, Mellat Park Cineplex, and Tehran Theater Complex
(Fig. 6).
The most important buildings are close to main streets
and parks, giving them good accessibility and permeability.
Buildings with the highest quality of form are located in
downtown areas. Being traversed by people from different
walks of life, specifically academicians, downtown areas
provide numerous functions for the buildings. The dominant
color in most such buildings is in the range of warm colors.
Also, buildings with multiple functions enjoy better prac-
tical use. Most buildings constructed during the 1960s and
1970s (the second Pahlavi dynasty) have the highest form
quality due to the application of state-of-the-art

Fig. 7 Linear regression plot (research indicators). Source: The Authors.

15
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh
technology in classical architecture. During the 1980s and
the 1990s, changes in the political structures and the up-
heavals imposed by war deteriorated the quality of form. In
this period, most buildings were constructed with a prac-
tical focus to the detriment of their form. During the 2000s,
form quality increased again, but it is still a far cry from the
last golden age. Contemporary Iranian architecture has
continuously developed, progressed, and changed (Table 5)
(Fig. 4).
5. Discussion and conclusion
Visual quality is one of the conditions for more excellent
form quality in critical cultural buildings as one of the af-
fective dimensions. The sense of place attachment con-
tributes immensely to citizens’ feelings and perceptions of
buildings. This study attempts to identify similar features in
artificial environments to better understand similar ap-
praisals among citizens. According to Nasar, the combina-
tion of features elicits different appraisals from people.
Results show that cultural differences of citizens and the
formal characteristics of different buildings led to changes
in visual quality and the sense of place attachment.
In buildings with a minor quality of form, visual quality
and spatial appeal are respectively low. In some buildings,
the quality of form is superior due to greater attention to
the landmark, protrusion-depression, and harmony be-
tween the height and the levels, skyline, and the appro-
priate dimensions. Neglecting any of these components is a
significant reason why form quality decreases in some
buildings.
Many prefer buildings that remind them of the past, with
a highly intricate form full of protrusions and depressions.
The symbolic features are realized through the style of the
design. The results of this research strongly confirm the
ideas of Frewald (Steg et al., 2018). Although the study was
conducted in 1990, the psychological effects of perception
and appraisal have probably remained the same.
Since the criteria for the appraisal of the sense of place
attachment was considerably different for each building,
one has to take note of the criteria that citizens adopt for
appraising the quality of buildings to enhance formal and
visual quality. Also, cultural diversity and differences must
be considered when designing urban spaces. Each space
must be designed according to its specific social and cul-
tural context.
Buildings with similar designs are appealing since they
indicate a normal order and complexity. There is an inverse
relationship between complexity and preferences. Build-
ings with a medium level of complexity are more appealing
than buildings with high to no complexity. This finding
confirms Imamoglu’s study (Ashtari et al., 2021; Azizibabani
et al., 2021; Imamoglu, 2000; Ma et al., 2020). Most people
prefer a medium level of complexity, but there is a limit to
how the meaning of medium complexity changes in the
region or buildings from other periods. If people prefer
buildings reminiscent of the past, how can designers keep
architecture on the path of innovation and development by
focusing on historical elements?
The present study confirms, in general, Herzog and Stark
(2004) contention that people’s aesthetic appraisal of the
16
artificial environment depends upon the building struc-
ture’s appeal.
The purpose of constructing outstanding buildings is to
create a visual attraction that can influence visitors, soci-
ety, and the area where the building has been constructed.
That can happen either through the physical features of the
building or its unique location. Symbolic buildings can be
constructed that, apart from offering advantages such as
cultural development, economic growth, and stability, can
turn into an incredible spot to increase citizens’ emotional
attachment to the city and publicize commercial brands.
In the first period, after using the architectural volume
taken from the past architecture, it is essential to evaluate
the visual quality so that the volume and pure form of the
past architecture in its contemporary expression can be
analyzed to evaluate its visual quality.
By using diverse and contrasting colors with the bed and
the background, we see the transformed forms of the past
and prominent architects in a review of their most promi-
nent elements, and the visual quality evaluation relies on a
combination of landscape findings and external structures
as well as the display of modern technology.
It is in contemporary cultural buildings. The majority of
these construction technologies are used in architecture.
Material transparency and pure geometry became the most
important components of evaluating visual quality in the
late period of fluid forms.
The findings of this research indicate differences in the
evaluation criteria of visual quality between two groups of
experts and the general public. For instance, designers
perceive the importance of details differently than non-
designers. Designers with a stronger physical perception of
space tend to prioritize details more than non-designers.
On the other hand, non-designers have more indirect and
unconscious perceptions of space, emphasizing the mean-
ings and functions of the environment. Therefore, de-
signers do not necessarily need to control every detail to
achieve visual order. For non-designers, the physical
dimension of the environment and symbolic elements take
priority. They seek to understand and communicate the
building’s characteristics to others, focusing on architec-
tural style, materials, color, lighting, and individual build-
ings. Comparing these elements with their residence makes
it easier for them to comprehend and convey their expe-
rience of seeing and understanding the building.
5.1. Limitations
1) Complexity of Preferences: The study finds a medium
level of complexity in design that most people prefer.
While this provides a general guideline, it could still be
challenging to pinpoint what “medium complexity”
means universally, as it might differ based on culture,
region, or even from one individual to another.
2) Historical & Symbolic Elements: While many people
might prefer buildings reminiscent of the past, there is a
potential for architectural stagnation if designers overly
fixate on historical elements. How does one balance
historical reverence with contemporary innovation?
3) Cultural Diversity in Appraisals: The conclusion un-
derscores the importance of cultural diversity in how
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
buildings are appraised. This indicates the potential
limitation of generalizing the study’s findings univer-
sally. Would these insights about the visual quality and
place attachment be the same if the study were con-
ducted in another country or cultural context?
5.2. Further study
1) Diving Deeper into Complexity: The insight regarding
complexity provides an intriguing avenue for further
research. What exactly constitutes low, medium, or high
complexity? Could there be a quantifiable metric or a set
of guidelines?
2) Interplay of Historical & Contemporary Elements:
Exploring how modern architects can infuse contempo-
rary designs with historical elements without sacrificing
innovation would be an interesting area.
3) Cross-Cultural Comparisons: Given the emphasis on cul-
tural diversity in architectural appraisal, it would be
valuable to replicate this study in different cultural
contexts and then compare the results. How do per-
ceptions of visual quality and place attachment vary
across different cultures?
4) Temporal Evolution of Preferences: Their preferences
and attachments to architectural forms might change as
societies evolve. A longitudinal study that observes how
these perceptions evolve could be enlightening.
5) Broader Impact of Outstanding Buildings: The conclusion
touches upon significant buildings’ broader societal,
emotional, and economic impacts. A detailed explora-
tion of these multifaceted impactsdthrough case
studies of specific buildingsdwould enrich the under-
standing of architecture’s broader role in society.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
Ahola, M., Mugge, R., 2017. Safety in passenger ships: the influence of
environmental design characteristics on people’s perception of
safety. Appl. Ergon. 59, 143e152. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apergo.2016.07.021.
Aminah, S., 2018. Construction of space identity: socio-historical
and political dialectics in the globalisation era. Masyarakat,
Kebud. dan Polit. 31, 140. https://doi.org/10.20473/mkp.
V31I22018.140-154.
Appleyard, D., Lintell, M., 1972. The environmental quality of city
streets: the residents’ viewpoint. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 38.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01944367208977410.
Ashtari, B., Yeganeh, M., Bemanian, M., Vojdani Fakhr, B., 2021. A
conceptual review of the potential of cool roofs as an effective
passive solar technique: elaboration of benefits and drawbacks.
Front. Energy Res. 9, 1e18. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fenrg.2021.738182.
Azemati, H., Jam, F., Ghorbani, M., Dehmer, M., Ebrahimpour, R.,
Ghanbaran, A., Emmert-Streib, F., 2020. The role of symmetry
in the aesthetics of residential building façades using cognitive
17
science methods. Symmetry 12, 1438. https://doi.org/10.3390/
sym12091438.
Azizibabani, M., Bemanian, M., Yeganeh, M., 2021. Investigation of
the effects of applying social sustainability components on
residential satisfaction. J. Sustain. Architect. Civ. Eng. 29,
49e61. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.29.2.29217.
Banaei, M., Ahmadi, A., Gramann, K., Hatami, J., 2019. Emotional
evaluation of architectural interior forms based on personality
differences using virtual reality. Front. Archit. Res. 9, 138e147.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.07.005.
Banaei, M., Yazdanfar, A., Nooreddin, M., Yoonessi, A., 2015.
Enhancing urban trails design quality by using electroencepha-
lography device. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 201, 386e396.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.191.
Bell, S., 2012. Landscape: Pattern, Perception and Process. Rout-
ledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203120088.
Bemanian, M., Ansari, M., Yeganeh, M., 2012. Architecture as an
organism. In: International Conference on Industrial Engineer-
ing and Operations Management. Istanbul, Turkey.
Bentley, I., 2013. Responsive Environments, Responsive Environ-
ments. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080516172.
Bertamini, M., Sinico, M., 2019. A study of objects with smooth or
sharp features created as line drawings by individuals trained in
design. Empir. Stud. Arts. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276
237419897048.
Brehm, J.M., Eisenhauer, B.W., Stedman, R.C., 2013. Environ-
mental concern: examining the role of place meaning and place
attachment. Soc. Nat. Resour. 26, 522e538. https:
//doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2012.715726.
Brian, W., Eisenhauer, R.S.K., 2000. Attachments to special places
on public lands: an analysis of activities, reason for attach-
ments, and community connections. Soc. Nat. Resour. 13,
421e441. https://doi.org/10.1080/089419200403848.
Bunce, S., 2013. Cities and design by Paul L. Knox. Can. Geo-
gr./Geogr. Can. 57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0064.2012.
00470.x e7ee7.
Chapman, E.H., Lynch, K., 1962. The image of the city. J. Aesthet.
Art Critic. 21, 91. https://doi.org/10.2307/427643.
Coburn, A., Kardan, O., Kotabe, H., Steinberg, J., Hout, M.C.,
Robbins, A., MacDonald, J., Hayn-Leichsenring, G.,
Berman, M.G., 2019. Psychological responses to natural pat-
terns in architecture. J. Environ. Psychol. 62, 133e145. https:
//doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.02.007.
Colman, J., 1987. Opportunities for innovation in urban design edu-
cation. Aust. Plan. 25, 28e31. https://doi.org/10.1080/
07293682.1987.10753357.
Cuba, L., Hummon, D.M., 1993. A place to call home: identification
with dwelling, community, and region. Socio. Q. 34, 111e131.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00133.x.
Daniel, T.C., 2001. Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality
assessment in the 21st century. Landsc. Urban Plann. 54,
267e281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00141-4.
Daniel, T.C., Vining, J., 1983. Methodological issues in the assess-
ment of landscape quality. In: Behavior and the Natural Envi-
ronment. Springer US, Boston, MA, pp. 39e84. https:
//doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3.
de Vries, S., Nieuwenhuizen, W., Farjon, H., van Hinsberg, A.,
Dirkx, J., 2021. In which natural environments are people
happiest? Large-scale experience sampling in The Netherlands.
Landsc. Urban Plann. 205, 103972. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.landurbplan.2020.103972.
Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., Helliwell, J., 2009. Well-
Being for Public Policy. Oxford University PressNew York. https:
//doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195334074.001.0001.
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., Walster, E., 1972. What is beautiful is good.
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 24, 285e290. https://doi.org/10.
1037/h0033731.
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh
Dix, G., 1984. Rossi, Aldo, “the architecture of the city” (book
review). Town Plan. Rev. 55, 512. https://doi.org/
10.3828/tpr.55.4.f5802gw112451p64.
Evans, G.W., Smith, C., Pezdek, K., 1982. Cognitive maps and
urban form. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 48, 232e244. https:
//doi.org/10.1080/01944368208976543.
Firouzmakan, S., Daneshpour, S.A., 2015. Promotion quality of
life by increasing place attachment in public places. Procedia
- Soc. Behav. Sci. 201, 418e428. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.sbspro.2015.08.197.
Foster, M.S., 1983. A Theory of Good City Form, vol. 18. Kevin
Lynch, Winterthur Portf. https://doi.org/10.1086/496125.
Gavrin, J.B., Ellis, W.D., 1939. A source book of gestalt psychology.
J. Philos. 36, 71e88. https://doi.org/10.2307/2018825.
Ghanbari, S., Yeganeh, M., Reza bemanian, M., 2022. Architecture
typology of rural plain houses based on formal features, case
study: (talesh, Iran). Front. Built Environ. 8. https:
//doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2022.856567.
Gifford, R., Hine, D.W., Muller-Clemm, W., Reynolds, D.J.,
Shaw, K.T., 2000. Decoding modern architecture. Environ.
Behav. 32, 163e187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916002
1972487.
Gifford, R., Hine, D.W., Muller-Clemm, W., Shaw, K.T., 2002. Why
architects and laypersons judge buildings differently: cognitive
properties and physical bases. J. Architect. Plann. Res. 19.
Giuliani, M.V., 2017. Theory of attachment and place attachment.
Psychol. Theor. Environ. issues 137e170.
Giuliani, M.V., 2004. Residential preferences and attachment
across the lifespan. In: Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology.
Elsevier, pp. 259e266. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-657410-
3/00826-6.
Gosling, D., 1996. Gordon Cullen: Visions of Urban Design. Academy
Editions London.
Graus, P., 2017. Place and placelessness revisited. Urban Pol. Res.
35, 369e371. https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2017.1329802.
Greene, S., 1992. Cityshape communicating and evaluating com-
munity design. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 58, 177e189.
Harris, P.B., Brown, B.B., Werner, C.M., 1996. Privacy regulation
and place attachment: predicting attachments to a student
family housing facility. J. Environ. Psychol. 16, 287e301.
Harris, V., Kendal, D., Hahs, A.K., Threlfall, C.G., 2018. Green
space context and vegetation complexity shape people’s pref-
erences for urban public parks and residential gardens. Landsc.
Res. 43, 150e162. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.
1302571.
Haughton, G., Hunter, C., 1994. Sustainable Cities. Regional Policy
and Development, Sustain. Cities.
Held, D., 1992. Democracy: from city-states to a cosmopolitan
order? Polit. Stud. 40, 10e39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9248.1992.tb01810.x.
Herzog, T.R., 1992. A cognitive analysis of preference for urban
spaces. J. Environ. Psychol. 12, 237e248. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80138-0.
Herzog, T.R., Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., 1982. The prediction of
preference for unfamiliar urban places. Popul. Environ. 5,
43e59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01359051.
Herzog, T.R., Stark, J.L., 2004. Typicality and preference for
positively and negatively valued environmental settings. J. En-
viron. Psychol. 24, 85e92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-
4944(03)00038-0.
Hochberg, J., Brunswik, E., 1954. The conceptual framework of psy-
chology. Am. J. Psychol. 67, 386. https://doi.org/10.2307/
1418656.
Holahan, C.J., 1984. Review of cognition and environment: func-
tioning in an uncertain world. Contemp. Psychol. A J. Rev. 29.
https://doi.org/10.1037/022597.
18
Hu, M., Roberts, J., 2020. Built environment evaluation in virtual
reality environmentsda cognitive neuroscience approach.
Urban Sci 4, 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci4040048.
Hummon, D.M., 1992. Community attachment - local sentiment
and sense of place. Hum. Behav. Environ. Adv. Theor. Res. 12,
253e278.
Hussein, D., 2020. A user preference modelling method for the
assessment of visual complexity in building façade. Smart Sus-
tain. Built Environ. 9, 483e501. https://doi.org/10.1108/-
SASBE-05-2019-0069.
Ikemi, M., 2005. The effects of mystery on preference for resi-
dential façades. J. Environ. Psychol. 25, 167e173. https:
//doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.04.001.
Ilbeigi, M., KohneRoudPosht, A.M., Ghomeishi, M.,
Behrouzifard, E., 2019. Cognitive differences in residential fa-
cades from the aesthetic perspectives of architects and non-
architects: a case study of Iran. Sustain. Cities Soc. 51,
101760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101760.
Imamoglu, Ç., 2000. Complexity, liking and familiarity: architec-
ture and non-architecture Turkish students’ assessments of
traditional and modern house facades. J. Environ. Psychol. 20,
5e16. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0155.
Jacobs, A., Appleyard, D., 1987. Toward an urban design mani-
festo. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 53, 112e120. https:
//doi.org/10.1080/01944368708976642.
Jacobs, J., 2016. The death and life of great American cities. In:
Readings in Planning Theory, fourth ed. https:
//doi.org/10.1002/9781119084679.ch4
Jennath, K.A., Nidhish, P.J., 2016. Aesthetic judgement and visual
impact of architectural forms: a study of library buildings.
Procedia Technol 24. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.protcy.2016.05.226.
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., 1989. The experience of nature: a psycho-
logical perspective. Exp. Nat. a Psychol. Perspect. https:
//doi.org/10.1097/00005053-199111000-00012.
Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., Wendt, J.S., 1972. Rated preference and
complexity for natural and urban visual material. Percept. Psy-
chophys. 12, 354e356. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207221.
Kellert, S.R., Wilson, E.O., 1993. The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island
Press.
Koffka, K., 2013. Principles of gestalt psychology. https:
//doi.org/10.4324/9781315009292. Principles of Gestalt
Psychology.
Kondo, M.C., Triguero-Mas, M., Donaire-Gonzalez, D., Seto, E.,
Valentı́n, A., Hurst, G., Carrasco-Turigas, G., Masterson, D.,
Ambròs, A., Ellis, N., Swart, W., Davis, N., Maas, J., Jerrett, M.,
Gidlow, C.J., Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., 2020. Momentary mood
response to natural outdoor environments in four European
cities. Environ. Int. 134, 105237. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.envint.2019.105237.
Koren, L., 2008. Wabi-sabi for Artists, Designers, Poets & Philoso-
phers. Imperfect publishing.
Korpela, K., Kyttä, M., Hartig, T., 2002. Restorative experience,
self-regulation, and children’s place preferences. J. Environ.
Psychol. 22, 387e398. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.
2002.0277.
Kosslyn, S.M., 1994. On cognitive neuroscience. J. Cognit. Neuro-
sci. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1994.6.3.297.
Krier, L., Porphyrios, D., Watkin, D., 1992. Leon Krier: Architecture
and Urban Design, 1967-1992. St Martins Press.
Kurosu, M., Kashimura, K., 1995. Apparent usability vs. inherent
usability experimental analysis on the determinants of the
apparent usability. In: Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems - Proceedings.
Kyle, G.T., Mowen, A.J., Tarrant, M., 2004. Linking place prefer-
ences with place meaning: an examination of the relationship
 + MODEL
Frontiers of Architectural Research xxx (xxxx) xxx
between place motivation and place attachment. J. Environ.
Psychol. 24, 439e454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.
2004.11.001.
Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Larson, A.,
Hallam, M., Smoot, M., 2000. Maxims or myths of beauty? A
meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol. Bull. 126,
390e423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390.
Larice, M., Macdonald, E., 2013. The Urban Design Reader, second
ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203094235.
Leviten-Reid, C., Matthew, R., Wardley, L., 2020. Sense of com-
munity belonging: exploring the impact of housing quality,
affordability, and safety among renter households. J. Commu-
nity Pract. 28, 18e35. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10705422.2020.1718050.
Liu, Z., Jacobs, D.W., Basri, R., 1999. The role of convexity in
perceptual completion: beyond good continuation. Vis. Res.
39, 4244e4257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(99)
00141-8.
Lothian, A., 1999. Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: is
landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the
beholder? Landsc. Urban Plann. 44, 177e198. https:
//doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00019-5.
Ma, L., Zhang, H., Lu, M., 2020. Building’s fractal dimension trend
and its application in visual complexity map. Build. Environ.
178, 106925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106925.
Mace, R.L., Hardie, G.J., Place, J.P., 2015. Accessible environ-
ments: toward universal design. In: Design Intervention (Rout-
ledge Revivals): toward a More Humane Architecture. Taylor &
Francis, pp. 155e176.
Mirza, L., Byrd, H., 2023. Measuring view preferences in cities: a
window onto urban landscapes. Cities Heal 7, 250e259. https:
//doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2020.1765449.
Morgan, P., 2010. Towards a developmental theory of place attach-
ment. J. Environ. Psychol. 30, 11e22. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvp.2009.07.001.
Motevalian, N., Yeganeh, M., 2020. Visually meaningful sustain-
ability in national monuments as an international heritage.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 60, 102207. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scs.2020.102207.
Mouratidis, K., Hassan, R., 2020. Contemporary versus traditional
styles in architecture and public space: a virtual reality study
with 360-degree videos. Cities 97, 102499. https:
//doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102499.
Naghibi Rad, P., Shahroudi, A.A., Shabani, H., Ajami, S., Lashgari, R.,
2019. Encoding pleasant and unpleasant expression of the archi-
tectural window shapes: an ERP study. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 13,
1e10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00186.
Nasar, J.L., 1994. Urban design aesthetics: the evaluative qualities
of building exteriors. Environ. Behav. 26, 377e401. https:
//doi.org/10.1177/001391659402600305.
Nasar, J.L., 1990. The evaluative image of the city. J. Am. Plann.
Assoc. 56, 41e53. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369008
975742.
Nauts, S., Langner, O., Huijsmans, I., Vonk, R., Wigboldus, D.H.J.,
2014. Forming impressions of personality: a replication and review
of Asch’s (1946) evidence for a primacy-of-warmth effect in
impression formation. Soc. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1027/
1864-9335/a000179.
Ng, S.H., Kam, P.K., Pong, R.W.M., 2005. People living in ageing
buildings: their quality of life and sense of belonging. J. Envi-
ron. Psychol. 25, 347e360. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvp.2005.08.005.
Norman, D., 2002. Emotion & design: attractive things work better.
interactions 9. https://doi.org/10.1145/543434.543435.
Polat, A.T., Akay, A., 2015. Relationships between the visual
preferences of urban recreation area users and various land-
scape design elements. Urban For. Urban Green. 14, 573e582.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.05.009.
19
Pontis, S., van der Waarde, K., 2020. Looking for alternatives:
challenging assumptions in design education. She Ji 6, 228e253.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2020.05.005.
Pourdehghan, H., Shahcheraghi, A., Mostafa, S., Majedi, H.,
2017. Evaluating Visual Preferences of Architects and People
toward Housing Facades , Using Multidimensional Scaling
Analysis. MDS.
Ram, Y., Björk, P., Weidenfeld, A., 2016. Authenticity and place
attachment of major visitor attractions. Tourism Manag. 52,
110e122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.06.010.
Rapoport, A., 1982. The meaning of the built environment: a
nonverbal communication approach. Mean. built Environ. a
nonverbal Commun. approach. https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-
0167(86)90078-1.
Riley, R.B., 1992. Attachment to the ordinary landscape. In: Place
Attachment. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_2.
Rogers, Y., 1989. Icons at the interface: their usefulness. Interact.
Comput. 1, 105e118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0953-5438(89)
90010-6.
Rose-Redwood, R., 2008. The new wealth of cities: city dynamics
and the fifth wave - by john montgomery. Growth Change 39,
531e534. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2257.2008.00441.x.
Rowland, I.D., Howe, T.N., Dewar, M.J., 2014. Vitruvius: ‘Ten
Books on Architecture,’ Vitruvius. Ten Books on Architecture.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840951.
Ruta, N., Mastandrea, S., Penacchio, O., Lamaddalena, S., Bove, G.,
2019. A comparison between preference judgments of curvature
and sharpness in architectural façades. Architect. Sci. Rev. 62,
171e181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2018.1558393.
Saadati, S.P., 2019. The role of house outdoor environment fea-
tures in creating home attachment. Sp. Ontol. Int. J. 8, 15e29.
Sakhaei, H., Yeganeh, M., Afhami, R., 2022. Quantifying stimulus-
affected cinematic spaces using psychophysiological assess-
ments to indicate enhanced cognition and sustainable design
criteria. Front. Environ. Sci. 10. https://doi.org/
10.3389/fenvs.2022.832537.
Salgado de la Rosa, M.A., Raposo Grau, J.F., Butragueño Dı́az-
Guerra, B., 2020. Thinking with the Hands. The Sketchbooks of
the Architects. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47983-1_34.
Sarabi, A., Bakhtiar, B., 2019. Spatial-social place attachment:
impact of spatial-social Co-existence on place attachment in
sociable places of architectural schools setting; case studies:
TABRIZ, Iran. Sp. Ontol. Int. J. 8, 1e17.
Scannell, L., Gifford, R., 2017. The experienced psychological
benefits of place attachment. J. Environ. Psychol. 51, 256e269.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.04.001.
Sevenant, M., Antrop, M., 2010. The use of latent classes to iden-
tify individual differences in the importance of landscape di-
mensions for aesthetic preference. Land Use Pol. 27, 827e842.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.11.002.
Shahinrad, M., Rafieian, M., Pourjafar, M.R., 2015. Assessing
women’s visual preferences towards tehran urban spaces. Adv.
Cogn. Sci. 17, 10e24.
Shamai, S., 1991. Sense of place: an empirical measurement.
Geoforum 22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7185(91)90017-K.
Shemesh, A., Talmon, R., Karp, O., Amir, I., Bar, M., Grobman, Y.J.,
2017. Affective response to architectureeinvestigating human
reaction to spaces with different geometry. Architect. Sci. Rev.
60, 116e125. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2016.1266597.
Shoemaker, P., Tankard, J., Lasorsa, D., 2012. How to Build Social
Science Theories. SAGE Publications, Inc. https:
//doi.org/10.4135/9781412990110.
Smith, P.F., 1976. A psychological model for aesthetic experience.
Leonardo 9. https://doi.org/10.2307/1573295.
Southworth, M., 1989. Theory and practice of contemporary urban
design: a review of urban design plans in the United States.
Town Plan. Rev. 60, 369e402. https://doi.org/10.3828/
tpr.60.4.x25357426v2h0431.
 + MODEL
N. Ariannia, N. Naseri and M. Yeganeh
Stamps, A.A., 1994. A study in scale and character: contextual
effects on environmental preferences. J. Environ. Manag. 42,
223e245. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1994.1070.
Stedman, R.C., 2003. Is it really just a social construction?: the
contribution of the physical environment to sense of place.
Soc. Nat. Resour. 16, 671e685. https://doi.org/10.1080/
08941920309189.
Stedman, R.C., Lathrop, R.C., Clark, B., Ejsmont-Karabin, J.,
Kasprzak, P., Nielsen, K., Osgood, D., Powell, M., Ventelä, A.M.,
Webster, K.E., Zhukova, A., 2007. Perceived environmental
quality and place attachment in North American and European
temperate lake districts. Lake Reserv. Manag 23, 330e344.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07438140709354022.
Steg, L., Berg, A.E. van den, Groot, J.I.M. de, 2018. Environmental
Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods 1e11.
Tahmasebi, A., Alizadeh, H., Aslani, P., 2019. The forming in-
dicators of semantic- conceptual environmental quality, case
study: sanandaj qatarchian neighborhood. Arman. Archit. Urban
Dev. 11.
Terian, S.K., Lang, J., 1988. Creating architectural theory: the role
of the behavioral sciences in environmental design. J. Archi-
tect. Educ. 41. https://doi.org/10.2307/1424898.
Tibbalds, F., 2020. A vision of britain: a review article. Town plan.
Rev. 60, 465e467.
Tibbalds, F., 2012. Making People-Friendly Towns: Improving the
Public Environment in Towns and Cities, Making People-Friendly
Towns: Improving the Public Environment in Towns and Cities.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203469521.
Trancik, R., 1986. Finding lost space: theories of urban design. John
Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-471-28956-2.
Tveit, M.S., Ode Sang, Å., Hagerhall, C.M., 2018. Scenic beauty. In:
Environmental Psychology. Wiley, pp. 45e54. https:
//doi.org/10.1002/9781119241072.ch5.
van Kamp, I., den Hollander, A.E.M., Staatsen, B.A.M., van Poll, R.,
2003. Environmental Quality and Human Well-Being. Outcomes
of a Workshop.
Vecera, S.P., Vogel, E.K., Woodman, G.F., 2002. Lower region: a
new cue for figure-ground assignment. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.
131, 194e205. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.131.2.194.
Velarde, M.D., Fry, G., Tveit, M., 2007. Health effects of viewing
landscapes e landscape types in environmental psychology.
20
View publication stats
Urban For. Urban Green. 6, 199e212. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ufug.2007.07.001.
Violich, F., 1983. “Urban reading” and the design of small urban
places: the village of sutivan. Town Plan. Rev. 54, 41. https:
//doi.org/10.3828/tpr.54.1.a32h36v52002154g.
Vogt, A.M., Donnell, R., 1983. Review: the architecture of the city
by Aldo Rossi, diane ghirardo; A scientific autobiography by Aldo
Rossi, lawrence venuti. J. Soc. Archit. Hist. 42, 86e88. https:
//doi.org/10.2307/989868.
Wells, N.M., 2000. At home with nature: effects of “greenness” on
children’s cognitive functioning. Environ. Behav. 32, 775e795.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972793.
Williams, D.R., Roggenbuck, J.W., 1989. Measuring place attach-
ment: some preliminary results. In: Abstracts: 1989 Leisure
Research Symposium.
Wolfe, S.A., 2001. Survival of the prettiest: the science of beauty.
Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 107. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-
200106000-00044.
Xu, Y., 1995. Sense of place and identity. Backgr. Res. Reports
437e465.
Yeganeh, M., 2020. Conceptual and theoretical model of integrity
between buildings and city. Sustain. Cities Soc. 59, 102205.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102205.
Yeganeh, M., Baygi, F., Sargazi, A., 2018. Evaluation of environ-
mental quality components on satisfaction, delight and
behavior intentions of customers (Case study: gorgan restau-
rants). Am. J. Res. 2, 84e99. https://doi.org/10.26739/2573-
5616-2018-3-2-10.
Yeganeh, M., Kamalizadeh, M., 2018. Territorial behaviors and
integration between buildings and city in urban public spaces of
Iran‫׳‬s metropolises. Front. Archit. Res. 7, 588e599. https:
//doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2018.06.004.
Zhang, T., Zhang, W., Meng, H., Zhang, Z., 2019. Analyzing visitors’
preferences and evaluation of satisfaction based on different
attributes, with forest trails in the akasawa national recrea-
tional forest, Central Japan. Forests 10, 431. https:
//doi.org/10.3390/f10050431.
Zhao, Z., Wang, Y., Hou, Y., 2020. Residents’ spatial perceptions
of urban gardens based on soundscape and landscape differ-
ences. Sustainability 12, 6809. https://doi.org/10.3390
/su12176809.