| Summary: | 碩士 === 靜宜大學 === 觀光事業學系研究所 === 93 === Past research show that landscape preference evaluation from the perspective of psychological paradigm mostly adopted Kaplan and Kaplan’s model of environmental preference matrix and Ulrich’s model of emotional experience. Significantly, their research ideas are to emphasize the importance of understanding what indicators of environmental preference matrix have an impact on landscape preference and what kind of emotion attribute can be used to interpret the landscape meanings. However, some researchers had criticized how to apply the psychological model of evaluating landscape beauty and then to interpret the process of users’ cognition is not specific. The nature of criticism is that the evaluation of cognitive process of landscape is not completely understood. The purpose of study is to integrate these two landscape evaluation models and then to explore the relationship between environmental preference matrix and emotional experience as well as to identify the path coefficient of environmental preference matrix and emotional experience to landscape preference.
The study sample consists of college students from three universities. The convenient sampling method was adopted in this study. After having instructors and students’ consent, 405 samples were interviewed. Sun-Moon Lake waterscapes were selected as landscape stimulus . The results indicate that environmental preference matrix and emotional experience have significant influence on students’ landscape preferences. In addition, environmental preference matrix influences emotional experience. Furthermore, the findings reveal that coherence is the most important factor of environmental preference matrix, following by mystery and legible, however, complexity is not important. Regarding emotional experience, “high-evoked and high-pleased” indicator is the most important, following by “high-evoked and low-pleased” indicator. However, both “low-evoked and high-pleased”indicator and “low-evoked and low-pleased” indicator are not important. Overall, the findings suggest that users’ cognition of landscape is a complement to design and plan the environment for landscape architecturers.
|
|---|
