تأثیر آشنا بودن و پیچیدگی نماهای آپارتمانی در زیبایی سه سبک نما در تهران- مقایسه دیدگاه معماران و غیر معماران

Abu-Obeid, N.  2006. The effect of consistency between type and style in church and nonreligious buildings on the semantic responses of Jordanians. Architectural Science Review, 50(1): 65–76. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2007.5010

Akalin, A., Yildirim, K., Wilson, CH., & Kilicoglu, O. 2009. Architecture and engineering students’ evaluations of house façades: Preference, complexity, and impressiveness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1): 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.005

Belke, B., Leder, H., & Carbon, C. C. 2015. When challenging art gets liked: Evidences for a dual preference formation process for fluent and non-fluent portraits. PLoS ONE 10(8): 1-34. https://doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131796

Berlyne, D. E. 1970. Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Percept. Psychophys, 8: 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131796

Berlyne, D. E. 1974. Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Washington D.C.: Hemisphere. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2307/3394907

Blake, P. (1976). The Master Builders; Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, Frank Lloyd Wright. New York: W.W. Norton. https://archive.org/details/masterbuildersle0000blak

Chan, L. K. 1998. Less is more or a bore? Detail and formal complexity in architecture. Hong Kong Papers in Design and Development, 1: 59–68. https://hkapi.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/items/fa0566d1-ad2b-4b6c-842a-725afddf8b42

Chassy, P., Lindell, T. A. E., Jones, J. A., & Paramei, G. V. 2015. A relationship between visual complexity and aesthetic appraisal of car front images: an eye-tracker study. Perception, 44: 1085–1097. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006615596882

Chatterjee, A. & Vartanian, O. 2016. Neuroscience of aesthetics. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369(1): 172–194.https://doi.org/10.1111/ nyas. 13035

Cubukcu, E. & Diktas, E.O. 2013. Turkish modern and postmodern houses: evaluative differences between design and nondesign students. International Journal of Architectural Research, 7 (1): 37–51. https://www.archnet.org/publications/6921

Devlin, K. & Nasar, J. L. 1989. The beauty and the beast: Some preliminary comparisons of ‘high’ versus ‘popular’ residential architecture and public versus architect judgments of same. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 9(4): 333–344.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(89)80013-1

Erdogan, E. & Akalin, A. 2012. A cross-sectional study of the architectural preferences of students at two Schools of architecture. Journal of Selcuk University Natural and Applied Science, 1(3): 1–27. http://josunas.selcuk.edu.tr/login/index.php/josunas/article/view/19/16

Erdogan, E., Binici, S., Akalin, A., & Yildirim, K. 2013. Urban Codes: Familiarity, impressiveness, complexity, and liking in façades of houses. Gazi University Journal of Science, 26(2): 319–330. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287270886_URBAN_CODES_Familiarity_impressiveness_complexity_and_liking_in_facades_of_houses

Ewing, R. & Handy, S. 2009. Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability. Journal of Urban Design, 14(1): 65-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800802451155

Fantz, R. L. 1964. Visual experience in infants: decreased attention to familiar patterns relative to novel ones. Science, 146: 668–670. https://doi:10.1126/science.146.3644.668.

Harris, C. M. (ed.) 2006. Dictionary of Architecture & Construction. Fourth Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. https://www.academia.edu/33513469/Dictionary_of_architecture_and_construction

Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Muller-Clemm, W., Reynolds D’Arcy, J. & Shaw, K. T. 2000. Decoding Modern Architecture: A Lens Model Approach for Understanding the Aesthetic Differences of Architects and Laypersons, Journal of Environment and Behavior, 32(2): 163-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972487

Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Muller-Clemn, W., & Shaw, K. T. 2002. Why architects and laypersons judge buildings differently: cognitive properties and physical bases. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 19(2): 131–148. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228911177_Why_architects_and_laypersons_judge_buildings_differently_Cognitive_properties_and_physical_bases

Hedman, R. & Jaszewski, A. 1984. Fundamentals of Urban Design. Washington: American Planning Association. https://archive.org/details/fundamentalsofur0000hedm

Hekkert, P. 2006. Design aesthetics: principles of pleasure in design. Psychology Science, 48(2): 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972667

Ilbeigi, M. & Ghomeishi, M. 2017. An assessment of Aesthetics in Conceptual Properties and its Relation to Complexity among Architects and Non-Architects in Residential Façade Design in Iran. Journal of Buildings and Sustainability, 2(1): 50-58. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327578557_An_assessment_of_Aesthetics_in_Conceptual_Properties_and_its_Relation_to_Complexity_among_Architects_and_Non-Architects_in_Residential_Facade_Design_in_Iran

Ilbeigi, M., Kohneroudposht, A. M., Ghomeishi, M., & Behrouzifard, E. 2019. Cognitive differences in residential facades from the aesthetic perspectives of architects and nonarchitects: A case study of Iran. Sustainable Cities and Society, 51, 101760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101760

Imamoglu, C. 2000. Complexity, liking, and familiarity: Architecture and nonarchitecture Turkish students’ assessments of traditional and modern house facades. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20(1): 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0155

Jakesch, M. & Leder, H. 2009. Finding meaning in art: preferred levels of ambiguity in art appreciation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(11): 2105–2112. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210903038974

Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., & Wendt, J. S. 1972. Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material. Perception & Psychophysics, 12(4): 334–356. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207221

Kaplan, S. & Kaplan, R. 1982. Cognition and Environment. New York: Praeger. https://archive.org/details/cognitionenviron0000kapl

Klinger, A. & Salingaros, N. 2000. A pattern measure. Environment and Planning B, 27(4): 537-548. https://doi.org/10.1068/b2676

Krosnick, J. A., & Fabrigar, L. R. 1997. Designing rating scales for effective measurement in surveys. In:  L. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, L. Decker, E. de Leeuw, C. Dippo, N. Schwarz, & D. Trewin (Eds.), Survey measurement and process quality. New York: John Wiley & Sons: 141-164. https://web.stanford.edu/dept/communication/faculty/krosnick/docs/1997/1997%20Designing%20rating%20scales%20for%20effective%20measurement%20in%20surveys.pdf

Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. 2004. A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95: 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811

Liao, H. I., Yeh, S. L., & Shimojo, S. 2011. Novelty vs. familiarity principles in preference decisions: Task-context of past experience matters. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(43): 1–8. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00043

Mastandrea, S., Bartoli, G., & Carrus, G. 2011. The automatic aesthetic evaluation of different art and architectural styles. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 5(2): 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021126

Mehrabian, A. 1976. Public places and private spaces: The psychology of work, play, and living room environments. New York: Basic Books. https://archive.org/details/publicplacespriv0000mehr

Menninghaus, W., Wagner, V., Wassiliwizky, E., Schindler, I., Hanich, J., Jacobsen, T., & Koelsch, S. 2019. What are aesthetic emotions? Psychological Review, 126: 171–195. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000135

Muth, C., Hesslinger, V. M., & Carbon, C. C. 2015. The appeal of challenge in the perception of art: how ambiguity, solvability of ambiguity, and the opportunity for insight affect appreciation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9: 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038814

Nasar, J. L. 1983. Adult viewers’ preferences in residential scenes: A study of the relationship of environmental attributes to preference. Environment and Behavior, 15(5): 589-614. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916583155003

Nasar, J. L. 1984. Visual preferences in urban street scenes. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 15(1): 79-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002184015001005

Nasar, J.L. 1989. Symbolic meanings of house styles. Environment and Behavior, 21(3): 235-257. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391658921300

Nasar, J.L. 1994. Urban design aesthetics: the evaluative qualities of building exteriors. Environment and Behavior, 26(3): 377-401. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659402600305

Nasar, J. L. & Kang, J. 1999. House style preferences and meanings across taste cultures. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(1): 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00109-1

Nasar, J. L. & Devlin, A. S. 2000. Regional variation in preferences for vernacular houses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(1): 41–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02304.x

Park, J., Shimojo, E., & Shimojo, S. 2010. Roles of familiarity and novelty in visual preference judgments are segregated across object categories. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107: 14552-14555.http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1004374107

Pelowski, M., Markey, P. S., Forster, M., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. 2017. Move me, astonish me… delight my eyes and brain: The Vienna Integrated Model of top-down and bottom-up processes in Art Perception (VIMAP) and corresponding afective, evaluative, and neurophysiological correlates. Physics of Life Reviews, 21: 80–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2017.02. 003

Purcell, T. 1986. Environmental perception and affect: A schema discrepancy model. Environment and Behavior, 18(1): 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916586181001

Purcell, T. & Nasar, J. L. 1992. Experiencing other people's houses: a model of similarities and differences in environmental experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(3): 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80135-5

Purcell, T. 1995. Experiencing American and Australian high- and popular-style houses, Environment and Behavior, 27: 771-800. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916595276003

Reis, A. T. L. & Lay,  M.C. 2010. Internal and External Aesthetics of Housing Estates. Environment and Behavior, 42(2): 271-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916509334134

Ruta, N., Mastandrea, S., Penacchio, O., Lamaddalena, S., & Bove, G.  2018. A comparison between preference judgments of curvature and sharpness in architectural façades. Architectural Science Review, 62(2): 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2018.1558393

Sadeghifar, M., Pazhouhanfar, M. & Farrokhzad, M. 2018. An exploration of the relationships between urban building façade visual elements and people’s preferences in the city of Gorgan, Iran. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 15(6): 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2018.1548340

Smets, G. (1973). Aesthetic Judgement and Arousal: An Experimental Contribution to Psycho-Aesthetics. Belgium: Leuven University Press. https://www.amazon.com/Aesthetic-judgment-arousal-experimental-psycho-aesthetics/dp/9061860016

Stamps, A. E. & Nasar, J. L. 1997. Design review and public preferences: Effects of geographical location, public consensus, sensation seeking, and architectural styles. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(1): 11–32. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1996.0036

Stamps, A.E. 1999a. Architectural detail, Van der Laan septaves and pixel counts. Design Studies, 20(1): 83-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00025-

Stamps, A.E. 1999b. Physical Determinants of Preferences for Residential Facades. Environment and Behavior, 31(6): 723-751. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139169921972326

van de Cruys, S., and Wagemans, J. 2011. Putting reward in art: a tentative prediction error account of visual art. i-perception, 2(9): 1035–1062.https://doi:10.1068/i0466aap

Venturi, R. 1966. Complexity and contradiction in architecture. New York: Museum of Modern Art. https://www.amazon.com/Complexity-Contradiction-Architecture-Robert-Venturi/dp/0870702823

Whitfield, T. W. A. 1983. Predicting preference for familiar, everyday objects: An experimental confrontation between two theories of aesthetic behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3: 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(83)80002-4

Wickelgren, W. A. 1979. Cognitive psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Wohlwill, J. F. 1968. Amount of stimulus exploration and preference as differential functions of stimulus complexity. Perception and Psychophysics, 4(5): 307–312. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210521 

Wohlwill, J. F. 1975. Children's responses to meaningful pictures varying in diversity: Exploration time vs. preference. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 20(2): 341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(75)90108-3

Zajonc, R. B. 1968. Attitudinal efects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9: 1–27.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848

Zeki, S. 2019. Beauty in Architecture: Not a Luxury - Only a Necessity. Architectural Design, 89(5): 14–19.  https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ ad. 2473

www.wellcertified.com/standard, Retrieved at March 2019.