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.
Environment and Behavior
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 Heft, H.
Right arrow Articles by Nasar, J. L.
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?

Evaluating Environmental Scenes Using Dynamic Versus Static Displays

Harry Heft

Denison University, Heft{at}denison.edu

Jack L. Nasar

Ohio State University, Nasar.1{at}osu.edu

Perceivers’ assessments of dynamic and static displays of environmental scenes were compared to evaluate how readily responses to static displays can be extrapolated to experience in situ. The dynamic displays were videotaped segments taken along a route presenting transition events characterized by the property mystery. The static displays were freeze frames from each segment. Results indicated that assessments of static displays do not simply parallel those of dynamic displays. Preference ratings were higher for static displays, but preference ratings in the dynamic condition were more strongly correlated with a wider range of variables. Moreover, epistemic ratings were higher for dynamic than static displays. Turn segments of the route, where the greatest amount of new information is revealed, produced the highest ratings on epistemic and evaluative variables. Differences across display modes point to a greater need for understanding environmental perceiving in relation to the dynamic quality of everyday experiences.

Environment and Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 3, 301-322 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0013916500323001
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
T. R. Herzog and A. G. Bryce
Mystery and Preference in Within-Forest Settings
Environment and Behavior, November 1, 2007; 39(6): 779 - 796.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
T. R. Herzog and K. M. Kirk
Pathway Curvature and Border Visibility as Predictors of Preference and Danger in Forest Settings
Environment and Behavior, September 1, 2005; 37(5): 620 - 639.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
T. R. Herzog and L. S. Kropscott
Legibility, Mystery, and Visual Access as Predictors of Preference and Perceived Danger in Forest Settings without Pathways
Environment and Behavior, September 1, 2004; 36(5): 659 - 677.
[Abstract] [PDF]