Cargando…
The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study
People often form different aesthetic preferences for natural and built environments, which affects their behavioral intention; however, it remains unknown whether this difference in aesthetic preference is due to differences in thinking styles. However, whether tourists’ aesthetic preferences diffe...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9886090/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726514 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1027742 |
_version_ | 1784880062632296448 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Wan Ruan, Rongbin Deng, Weiwei Gao, Junxi |
author_facet | Chen, Wan Ruan, Rongbin Deng, Weiwei Gao, Junxi |
author_sort | Chen, Wan |
collection | PubMed |
description | People often form different aesthetic preferences for natural and built environments, which affects their behavioral intention; however, it remains unknown whether this difference in aesthetic preference is due to differences in thinking styles. However, whether tourists’ aesthetic preferences differ when using different visual attention processes has not been studied further. This study used eye-tracking and self-reporting to investigate these questions. The results show that natural environment images are more favored visually because they can evoke in tourists larger pupil diameters and longer scan paths, but we found no significant difference in fixation duration and fixation counts. We also found that the scanning path of tourists who predominantly rely on intuitive thinking is modulated by the bottom-up attention process, while the scanning path of tourists who prefer rational thinking is modulated by the top-down attention process. In the bottom-up process, tourists who prefer rational thinking exhibit more positive aesthetic preferences and emotional arousal. In summary, the present study verified that aesthetic preference is more likely to be influenced by both thinking style and visual attention processing. The results of the present work provide preliminary evidence that the aesthetic preference of the environment is not only related to visual attention but also affected by the individual visual attention process and thinking style. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9886090 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98860902023-01-31 The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study Chen, Wan Ruan, Rongbin Deng, Weiwei Gao, Junxi Front Psychol Psychology People often form different aesthetic preferences for natural and built environments, which affects their behavioral intention; however, it remains unknown whether this difference in aesthetic preference is due to differences in thinking styles. However, whether tourists’ aesthetic preferences differ when using different visual attention processes has not been studied further. This study used eye-tracking and self-reporting to investigate these questions. The results show that natural environment images are more favored visually because they can evoke in tourists larger pupil diameters and longer scan paths, but we found no significant difference in fixation duration and fixation counts. We also found that the scanning path of tourists who predominantly rely on intuitive thinking is modulated by the bottom-up attention process, while the scanning path of tourists who prefer rational thinking is modulated by the top-down attention process. In the bottom-up process, tourists who prefer rational thinking exhibit more positive aesthetic preferences and emotional arousal. In summary, the present study verified that aesthetic preference is more likely to be influenced by both thinking style and visual attention processing. The results of the present work provide preliminary evidence that the aesthetic preference of the environment is not only related to visual attention but also affected by the individual visual attention process and thinking style. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9886090/ /pubmed/36726514 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1027742 Text en Copyright © 2023 Chen, Ruan, Deng and Gao. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Chen, Wan Ruan, Rongbin Deng, Weiwei Gao, Junxi The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study |
title | The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study |
title_full | The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study |
title_fullStr | The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study |
title_full_unstemmed | The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study |
title_short | The effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: An eye-tracking study |
title_sort | effect of visual attention process and thinking styles on environmental aesthetic preference: an eye-tracking study |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9886090/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726514 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1027742 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenwan theeffectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT ruanrongbin theeffectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT dengweiwei theeffectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT gaojunxi theeffectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT chenwan effectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT ruanrongbin effectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT dengweiwei effectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy AT gaojunxi effectofvisualattentionprocessandthinkingstylesonenvironmentalaestheticpreferenceaneyetrackingstudy |