TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments
AU - Hull IV, R. B.
AU - Stewart, WP
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported, in part, by co-operative agreement no. 23-88-10 with the U.S.D.A. Forest Service, North Central Experiment Station, Chicago, IL. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsor. The authors acknowledge the thoughtful reviews made by Russ Parsons and Roger Ulrich.
PY - 1992/6
Y1 - 1992/6
N2 - This study examines whether scenic beauty judgments based upon photographs of landscapes are similar to scenic beauty judgments based upon on-site experiences of landscapes. Two concerns are emphasized: (1) a concern about the threat to the ecological validity of photo-based assessments caused by differences between on-site and photo-based contexts and (2) a concern that the individual rater, rather than the group average, is the more appropriate unit of analysis for tests of validity of photo-based assessments. On-site scenic beauty assessments were collected from day hikers. These data were compared to photo-based scenic beauty assessments collected from the same persons three months and nine months after their on-site experience. Approximately 38% of participants had insignificant correlations between their on-site and photo-based scenic beauty ratings. These and other results suggest that the validity of photo-based scenic beauty assessments is in doubt, at least for the situation studied here. Moreover, the results suggest that the difference between persons' on-site and photo-based ratings can be explained, in part, by contextual factors such as the mood, meaning, and novelty that differentiate photo-based from on-site landscape experiences. Group averaged on-site and photo-based assessments, however, were very similar, suggesting caution may be in order for studies interpreting summary measures.
AB - This study examines whether scenic beauty judgments based upon photographs of landscapes are similar to scenic beauty judgments based upon on-site experiences of landscapes. Two concerns are emphasized: (1) a concern about the threat to the ecological validity of photo-based assessments caused by differences between on-site and photo-based contexts and (2) a concern that the individual rater, rather than the group average, is the more appropriate unit of analysis for tests of validity of photo-based assessments. On-site scenic beauty assessments were collected from day hikers. These data were compared to photo-based scenic beauty assessments collected from the same persons three months and nine months after their on-site experience. Approximately 38% of participants had insignificant correlations between their on-site and photo-based scenic beauty ratings. These and other results suggest that the validity of photo-based scenic beauty assessments is in doubt, at least for the situation studied here. Moreover, the results suggest that the difference between persons' on-site and photo-based ratings can be explained, in part, by contextual factors such as the mood, meaning, and novelty that differentiate photo-based from on-site landscape experiences. Group averaged on-site and photo-based assessments, however, were very similar, suggesting caution may be in order for studies interpreting summary measures.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=38249011838&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=38249011838&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80063-5
DO - 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80063-5
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:38249011838
SN - 0272-4944
VL - 12
SP - 101
EP - 114
JO - Journal of Environmental Psychology
JF - Journal of Environmental Psychology
IS - 2
ER -