Abstract

Previous research suggests that curved vs. angular interior environments trigger affective (e.g., preference) and behavioural (e.g., approach-avoidance) responses. Yet, behavioural responses have mainly been assessed through explicit evaluations, such as self-reports. We aimed to investigate this phenomenon more ‘implicitly’ using a battery of reaction time (RT) paradigms, particularly focusing on approach-avoidance tendencies.Online participants (initial N = 219) undertook four randomized tasks involving 20 photo-realistic living room images matched for contours (angular vs. curved) and styles (modern vs. classic). We intended to capture attentional (Dot Probe Task [DPT]), motoric (Approach Avoidance Task [AAT]), as well as associative-semantic (Implicit Association Task [IAT]) and -motoric (Stimulus Response Compatibility Task [SRCT]) biases towards contours.The DPT and AAT showed no significant effects. However, we observed a significant congruency effect in the IAT (F(1,192) = 97.51, p < .001, ƞ2 = 0.074), whereby images were assigned faster into categories when those were curved-approach and angular-avoid (instead of curved-avoid, angular-approach). Additionally, we found a significant direction x contour interaction (F(1,179) = 7.08, p = .009, ƞ2 = 0.004) in the SRCT, attributable to within-curvature differences (faster approach compared to avoidance). Moreover, within-directions comparisons revealed a faster avoidance of angular than curved conditions.Our findings confirmed an effect of contours on approach-avoidance tendencies using RT paradigms. We identified semantic associations between curvature and approach and angularity and avoidance behaviour. Furthermore, we demonstrated differential approach (faster) – avoidance (slower) representations in relation to curvature rather than an avoidance of angularity. These findings may hint towards (partially) automatic responses to contours in interior design, which in addition to self-reports, should be further researched concerning criterion validity, such as in correlation with physiological and psychological reactions to built spaces.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.