A visual perception effect assessment of some large and broad-leaved trees under different lighting arrangements

References

• Acar, C., and Ç. Sakıcı. 2008. “Assessing Landscape Perception of Urban Rocky Habitats.” Building and Environment 43 (6): 1153–1170. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.02.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, L. M., B. E. Mulligan, L. S. Goodman, and H. Z. Regen. 1983. “Effects of Sound on Preferences for Outdoor Settings.” Environment and Behavior 15 (5): 539–566. doi: 10.1177/0013916583155001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergen, S. D., C. A. Ulbricht, J. L. Fridley, and M. A. Ganter. 1995. “The Validity of Computer Generated Graphic Images of Forest Landscapes.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 15 (2): 135–146. doi: 10.1016/0272-4944(95)90021-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bienabe, E., and R. R. Hearne. 2006. “Public Preferences for Biodiversity Conservation and Scenic Beauty Within a Framework of Environmental Services Payments.” Forest Policy and Economics 9 (4): 335–348. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2005.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, T. C., and T. C. Daniel. 1987. “Context Effects in Perceived Environmental Quality Assessments: Scene Selection and Landscape Quality Ratings.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 7 (3): 233–250. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(87)80032-4
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T. C., and T. C. Daniel. 1991. “Landscape Aesthetics of Riparian Environments: Relationships of Flow Quantity to Scenic Quality along a Wild and Scenic River.” Water Resource Research 27 (8): 1787–1795. doi: 10.1029/91WR00975
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulut, Z., F. Karahan, and I. Sezen. 2010. “Determining Visual Beauties of Natural Waterscapes: A Case Study for Tortum Valley (Erzurum/Turkey).” Scientific Research and Essay 5 (2): 170–182.
   Google Scholar
• CIBSE. 1992. Lighting Guide, the Outdoor Environment, 87. London: The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Clay, G. R., and T. C. Daniel. 2000. “Scenic Landscape Assessment: The Effects of Land Management Jurisdiction on Public Perception of Scenic Beauty.” Landscape and Urban Planning 49 (1–2): 1–13. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00055-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craik, K. H. 1983. “The Psychology of the Large Scale Environment.” In Environmental Psychology: Directions and Perspectives, edited by N. R. Feimer and E. S. Geller, 47–105. New York: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Daniel, T. C., and R. S. Boster. 1976. Measuring Landscape Esthetics: The Scenic Beauty Estimation Method, 66. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167. Fort Collins, CO: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
   Google Scholar
• Flynn, J. E. 1992. Environmental Aesthetics – Theory, Lighting Design Decisions as Interventions in Human Space. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flynn, J. E., T. J. Spencer, O. Martyniuk, and C. Hendrick. 1973. “Interim Study of Procedures for Investigating the Effect of Light on Impression and Behavior.” Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society 3 (2): 87–94.
   Google Scholar
• Gorp, A. J. 2000. “Guiding Issues of Artificial Light Use in Urban Landscape Architecture.” Thesis (master), University of Manitoba.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, C. W., and N. T. Dines. 1998. Time-Saver Standards for Landscape Architecture: Design and Construction Data, 900. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Hershberger, R. G., and R. C. Cass. 1974. “Predicting User Responses to Buildings.” In Man-Environment Interactions: Evaluations and Applications, edited by D. H. Carson, 117–134. Stroudsbury, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
   Google Scholar
• Herzog, T. R. 1985. “A Cognitive Analysis of Preference for Waterscapes.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 5 (3): 225–241. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(85)80024-4
   Google Scholar
• Hesselgren, S. 1975. Man's Perception of Man-Made Environment, 213. Stroudsburg: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross.
   Google Scholar
• Hetherington, J. 1991. “Representing the Environment: Visual Surrogates in Environmental Assesment.” Healthy Environments 22: 264–252.
   Google Scholar
• Hull, R. B., and W. P. Stewart. 1992. “Validity of Photo-Based Scenic Beauty Judgements.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 12 (2): 101–114. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80063-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, A., T. Taşkı n, and A. Önenç. 2006. “Assessing the Visual Quality of Rural and Urban–Fringed Landscapes Surrounding Livestock Farms.” Biosystems Engineering 95 (3): 437–448. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2006.07.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellomaki, S., and R. Savolainen. 1984. “The Scenic Value of the Forest Landscape as Assessed in the Field and the Laboratory.” Landscape Planning 11 (2): 97–107. doi: 10.1016/0304-3924(84)90033-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Küller, R. 1979. “A Semantic Test for Use in Cross-Cultural Studies.” Man-Environment Systems 9 (4 & 5): 253–256.
   Google Scholar
• Kwok, K. 1979. “Semantic Evaluation of Perceived Environment: A Cross-Cultural Replication.” Man-Environment Systems 9: 243–249.
   Google Scholar
• Law, C. S., and E. H. Zube. 1983. “Effects of Photographic Composition on Landscape Perception.” Landscape Research 8 (1): 22–23. doi: 10.1080/01426398308706052
   Google Scholar
• McClements, J., and S. Fitzgerrell. 1995. Landscaping Illustrated, the editors of Sunset books and Sunset magazine. Menlo Park, CA: Sunset.
   Google Scholar
• Millerson, G. 1991. The Technique of Lighting for Television and Film, 466. Boston, MA: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Misgav, A. 2000. “Visual Preference of the Public for Vegetation Groups in Israel.” Landscape and Urban Planning 48 (3–4): 143–159. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00038-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer, J. L. 1992. The Landscape Lighting Book, 282. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Moyer, J. L. 1998. Landscape Lighting Design Book. Munchen, Germany: Callwey.
   Google Scholar
• Nasar, J. L. 1998. The Evaluative Image of the City. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Nasar, J., and Yı-H. Lin. 2003. “Evaluative Responses to Five Kinds of Water Features, Short Communication.” Landscape Research 28 (4): 441–450. doi: 10.1080/0142639032000150167
   Google Scholar
• Osgood, C. E., W. H. May, and M. S. Miron. 1975. Cross-cultural Universals of Affective Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Özbilen, A., and A. Kalı n. 2001. “The Semantic Value of Plants in the Perception of Space.” Building and Environment 36 (2): 257–279. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1323(99)00058-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer, J. F., and R. E. Hoffman. 2001. “Rating Reliability and Representation Validity in Scenic Landscape Assessments.” Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1–4): 267–281. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00133-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribe, R. G. 2006. “Aesthetic Perceptions of Green–Tree Retention Harvests in Vista Views: The Interaction of Cut Level, Retention Pattern and Harvest Shape.” Landscape and Urban Planning 73 (4): 277–293. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakıcı, Ç. 2003. “Some Effects of the Lighting Techniques on Trees Physical Characteristics and Visual Perceptions.” Thesis (master), Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, urkey.
   Google Scholar
• Sheppard, S., and P. Picard. 2005. “Visual–Quality Impacts of Forest Pest Activity at the Landscape Level: A Synthesis of Published Knowledge and Research Needs.” Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (4): 321–342. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorcar, P. C. 1987. Architectural Lighting for Commercial Interiors, 272. New York: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Stamps, A. E. 1993. “Simulation Effects on Environmental Preference.” Journal of Environmental Management 38 (2): 115–132. doi: 10.1006/jema.1993.1033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, T. R., P. Middleton, M. Downton, and D. Ely. 1984. “Judgements of Photographs Versus Field Observations in Studies of Perception and Judgement of the Visual Environment.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 4 (4): 283–302. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(84)80001-8
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan, W. C., and S. T. Lovell. 2006. “Improving the Visual Quality of Commercial Development at the Rural–Urban Fringe.” Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (1–2): 152–166. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.01.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tahvanainen, L., M. Ihalainen, R. Hietala-Koivu, O. Kolehmainen, L. Tyrväinen, O. Nousiainen, and J. Helenius. 2002. “Measures of the EU Agri-environmental Protection Scheme (GAEPS) and Their Impacts on the Visual Acceptability of Finnish Agricultural Landscapes.” Journal of Environmental Management 66 (3): 213–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trent, R. B., E. Neuman, and A. Kvashny. 1987. “Presentation Mode and Question Formal Artifacts in Visual Assessment Research.” Landscape and Urban Planning 14: 225–235. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(87)90032-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzolova, G. V. 1995. “An Experiment in Greenway Analysis and Assesment: The Danı be River.” Landscape and Urban Planning 33 (1–3): 283–294. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(94)02023-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead, R. 1999. The Art of Outdoor Lighting: Landscapes with the Beauty of Lighting, 192. Gloucester, MA: Rockport Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, W. H. W. 1984. How to Design and Install Outdoor Lighting, 96. San Francisco, CA: Ortho Books.
   Google Scholar
• Zube, E. H. 1974. “Cross-disciplinary and Intermode Agreement on the Description and Evaluation of Landscape Resources.” Environment and Behavior 6 (1): 69–90. doi: 10.1177/001391657400600105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zube, E. H., D. E. Simcox, and C. S. Law. 1987. “Perceptual Landscape Simulations: History and Prospect.” Landscape Journal 6 (1): 62–80.
   Google Scholar