Psychological and neural responses to architectural interiors

What the study found

Ratings of 200 interior images on 16 measures reduced to three components explaining 90% of variance: coherence, fascination and hominess (how much a scene reflects a personal space). Hominess emerged as a new dimension for interiors, and the structure replicated in an independent sample of 614. In fMRI, fascination covaried with right lingual gyrus activity in any task, coherence with left inferior occipital gyrus only during beauty judgments, and hominess with left cuneus only during approach-avoidance decisions.

Limitations

Images rather than occupied rooms. The fMRI sample was small (18) and a reanalysis of earlier data.

Neurodesign interpretation

Gives a measurable name to the sense that a room is a place to settle, distinct from how interesting it is.

Possible design implications

Hypothesis: hominess may be assessed separately from fascination, so a space could be designed to score high on both.

Study design

Two rating studies with principal components analysis, plus parametric fMRI reanalysis

Population

798 raters (Experiment 1), 614 raters (Experiment 2), 18 fMRI participants (Experiment 3).

Setting

Online ratings and fMRI laboratory

Field

Neuroaesthetics, architecture

Mechanism

Aesthetic appraisal, approach-avoidance

Spatial variable

Architectural interior images

Keywords

coherence, fascination, hominess, interiors, fMRI, aesthetics

Notes and follow-up

Related records: ND-0106, ND-0061, ND-0055.