ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
The contour effect: Differences in the aesthetic preference and stress response to photo-realistic living environments.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of preference for interior space design on incidental recognition memory.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Informing the redesign of psychiatric seclusion rooms: a mixed-methods pre-evaluation with individuals with lived experience.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Interactive room design as a tool for understanding form and style preferences.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Effects of green-wall layouts on psychological and physiological responses in office environments: a virtual-environment study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Neural dissociation between computational and perceived measures of curvature.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The Aesthetic Developmental Characteristics of Contour Features in Children and Adolescents with High- and Low- Level Visual Aesthetic Sensitivity across Grade Levels.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The interest in the response to contours has recently re-emerged, with various studies suggesting a universal preference for curved over angular stimuli. Although no consensus has yet been reached on the reasons for this preference, similar effects have been proposed in interior environments. However, the scarcely available research primarily depends on schematic or unmatched stimuli and faces heterogeneity in the reported results. In a within-subject design, we investigated the claimed contour effect in photo-realistic indoor environments using stimulus material previously tested in virtual reality (VR). A total of 198 online participants rated 20 living room images, exclusively manipulated on the contours (angular vs. curved) and style (modern vs. classic) levels. The scales represented aesthetic (beauty and liking) and stress (rest and stress) responses. Beyond our main focus on contours, we additionally examined style and sex effects to account for potential interactions. Results revealed a significant main effect of contours on both aesthetic (η
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.