[HCG20-P07] Trends of respondents’ attributes affected to landscape appreciation until 2016 in the journals published in English
Keywords:appreciation of landscape, attributes of respondents, innate/obtained/human group
Introduction
Landscape evaluation using psychometrical methods was pioneered by Peterson (1967). Such studies were popularized during 1970-1990’s. And recently such research has tended to increase again (Aoki 2014). And the trends of research are now focusing in this research field (Aoki, 1999, Liu and Asami 2002, et al.). The respondents were most important component of the landscape phenomenon (Fig 1). If there are no observers in the environment, the landscape phenomena will not happen and the only nature exists there. So the existence of observer is the beginning of the landscape phenomenon. Various attributes of respondents were used as observers and their affects were examined in the psychological responses of landscapes until 2016.
Observer’s attributes and their perception
Here, abilities of perception on Landscape should not be discussed because it widespread in various research field (Aoki and Kitamura 2001). There are two types of attributes of respondents, first was the representative of the social human population, e.g. the national or ethnic, and second intended to represent a personal features. The personals were the innate features, e.g. gender, age and etc., the obtained features, e.g. education, profession, role of society, hobbies and etc., the environments, e.g. living, visiting and etc., and the kind of experiences at the site. Since 1968, discussion of a variety of attributes has been made.
Social human population (Table 1)
As for the representative of social human population (Table 1), the differences were firstly examined among western countries. Then, they focused to the comparison of westerners and easterners. And differences of racial groups were also examined. Recently, the identities of a nation also focused and examined. The details of the trends were follows.
Zube and Pitt (1981) discussed about ethnic (Yugoslavia, West Indies and the United States), Buhyoff et al. (1983) reported the difference among Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United States, Tips and Savasdisara (1986) represented difference of Asian and Europe, Kaplan and Talbot (1988) reported Black and White, Yang and Kaplan (1990) reported Korean and Westerners, Yu (1995) reported Chinese and USA, Newell (1997) reported USA, Ireland and Senegal.
In a recent study, Beza (2010) reported the taste of mountain tribe of Sherpa and Falk and Balling (2010) investigated the children of Nigeria. Petrova et al. (2015) reported the differences of the tastes on the natural landscape between Russians and Japanese which was the first comparison of the different cultural back grounds formed by the weak communication at their borders.
Personal attributes (Table 2)
As for the personal attributes, the attributes obtained in the respondent’s life were examined. And the effects of personal experiences were examined. Then the innate attributes, like as age or sex, were focused and examined. And recently, the effects of environmental or living condition were examined. These conditions were given after the beginning of dwelling in the area. The details of the research trends were follows.
To describe the main stream of personal attribute (Table 2), Lansing and Marans (1968) investigated college people and planners, Winkel (1969) used income and education, Zube (1973) used manager and planner, Peterson (1974) examined manager and users, and Buhyoff et al. (1978) examined the impact of professional experience. Brush (1979) examine effect of ownership, Micia (1979) reported effects of gender, Nieman (1979) effects of behavioral familiarity, Wellman and Buhyoff (1980) effects of regional familiarity, Balling and Falk (1981) effects of age, Aoki (1983) found the difference between old and new residents. Schroeder (1983) reported effects of naturalism, Tips and Savasdisara (1986) effects of religion, Kaplan and Helbert (1987) effects of wild flower lovers organization, Zube (1987) described the presence or absence of experience in the field, Kent (1993) effects of educational background, Scott and Canter (1997) effects of experience at the site, Brush, Chenoweth and Baman (2000) reported effect of profession of agriculture, Lange (2001) found the difference between the amateur and experts.
In the recent studies, Adevi and Grahn (2012) reported the influence of topographical condition of habitat (coastal or forest) and Howley, Hynes and Donoghue (2012) found effects of sibling and Bratman (2015) reported the effect of nature experiences.
Use of the Internet has increased as a research method because of the convenience to get data from the world. However, the problem of the reliability in their answer is still under study.
Landscape evaluation using psychometrical methods was pioneered by Peterson (1967). Such studies were popularized during 1970-1990’s. And recently such research has tended to increase again (Aoki 2014). And the trends of research are now focusing in this research field (Aoki, 1999, Liu and Asami 2002, et al.). The respondents were most important component of the landscape phenomenon (Fig 1). If there are no observers in the environment, the landscape phenomena will not happen and the only nature exists there. So the existence of observer is the beginning of the landscape phenomenon. Various attributes of respondents were used as observers and their affects were examined in the psychological responses of landscapes until 2016.
Observer’s attributes and their perception
Here, abilities of perception on Landscape should not be discussed because it widespread in various research field (Aoki and Kitamura 2001). There are two types of attributes of respondents, first was the representative of the social human population, e.g. the national or ethnic, and second intended to represent a personal features. The personals were the innate features, e.g. gender, age and etc., the obtained features, e.g. education, profession, role of society, hobbies and etc., the environments, e.g. living, visiting and etc., and the kind of experiences at the site. Since 1968, discussion of a variety of attributes has been made.
Social human population (Table 1)
As for the representative of social human population (Table 1), the differences were firstly examined among western countries. Then, they focused to the comparison of westerners and easterners. And differences of racial groups were also examined. Recently, the identities of a nation also focused and examined. The details of the trends were follows.
Zube and Pitt (1981) discussed about ethnic (Yugoslavia, West Indies and the United States), Buhyoff et al. (1983) reported the difference among Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United States, Tips and Savasdisara (1986) represented difference of Asian and Europe, Kaplan and Talbot (1988) reported Black and White, Yang and Kaplan (1990) reported Korean and Westerners, Yu (1995) reported Chinese and USA, Newell (1997) reported USA, Ireland and Senegal.
In a recent study, Beza (2010) reported the taste of mountain tribe of Sherpa and Falk and Balling (2010) investigated the children of Nigeria. Petrova et al. (2015) reported the differences of the tastes on the natural landscape between Russians and Japanese which was the first comparison of the different cultural back grounds formed by the weak communication at their borders.
Personal attributes (Table 2)
As for the personal attributes, the attributes obtained in the respondent’s life were examined. And the effects of personal experiences were examined. Then the innate attributes, like as age or sex, were focused and examined. And recently, the effects of environmental or living condition were examined. These conditions were given after the beginning of dwelling in the area. The details of the research trends were follows.
To describe the main stream of personal attribute (Table 2), Lansing and Marans (1968) investigated college people and planners, Winkel (1969) used income and education, Zube (1973) used manager and planner, Peterson (1974) examined manager and users, and Buhyoff et al. (1978) examined the impact of professional experience. Brush (1979) examine effect of ownership, Micia (1979) reported effects of gender, Nieman (1979) effects of behavioral familiarity, Wellman and Buhyoff (1980) effects of regional familiarity, Balling and Falk (1981) effects of age, Aoki (1983) found the difference between old and new residents. Schroeder (1983) reported effects of naturalism, Tips and Savasdisara (1986) effects of religion, Kaplan and Helbert (1987) effects of wild flower lovers organization, Zube (1987) described the presence or absence of experience in the field, Kent (1993) effects of educational background, Scott and Canter (1997) effects of experience at the site, Brush, Chenoweth and Baman (2000) reported effect of profession of agriculture, Lange (2001) found the difference between the amateur and experts.
In the recent studies, Adevi and Grahn (2012) reported the influence of topographical condition of habitat (coastal or forest) and Howley, Hynes and Donoghue (2012) found effects of sibling and Bratman (2015) reported the effect of nature experiences.
Use of the Internet has increased as a research method because of the convenience to get data from the world. However, the problem of the reliability in their answer is still under study.