ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Vegetation Dispersion, Interspersion, and Landscape Preference.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spatial aggregation/dispersion of the vegetation in a landscape affects landscape texture, with potentially important implications for its perception. The aim of the study was to investigate how plant dispersion and interspersion in small-scale landscapes could affect garden preference. Dispersion referred to the proximity and distance between plants, and interspersion referred to the degree of intermixing between plants of different species. Fifty-six participants evaluated 40 pairs of landscapes that differed in terms of plant dispersion or plant interspersion. Participants were asked to rate their preference for each pair of landscapes. Furthermore, eye movements were recorded during the viewing time, and the number of fixations and fixation time were computed for each landscape image. Overall, plants arranged in a more dispersed and a more interspersed design resulted in a higher landscape preference. Dispersion was more effective than interspersion in affecting landscape preference. The number of fixations and fixation time were higher when viewing landscapes with plants arranged in a high-dispersion and high-interspersion layout.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.