ArticleScientific reports2025
Interactive room design as a tool for understanding form and style preferences.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given the substantial time people spend indoors, it is crucial to understand how aesthetic decisions in interior design are made, both to inform psychological research and guide practical applications. Recent studies show growing interest in form preferences, often suggesting a general preference for curved over angular shapes. Unlike previous research using predefined stimuli, our study allowed individuals to freely express their preferences in a living room through an interactive 3d web application. In an online experiment, participants (N = 196) furnished a virtual living room according to their personal preferences, using a controlled set of furniture items that varied systematically in form (angular vs. curved) and style (modern vs. classic). Contrary to prior findings, we observed a small but significant overall preference for angular furniture. This effect was mainly driven by male participants, who selected more angular than curved items, while female participants showed no form preference. We found no general preference in terms of style. Additionally, we explored associations between design preferences and personality traits (BFI-2), but no significant relationships emerged. Overall, this study demonstrates the value of interactive 3d environments for investigating aesthetic preferences in a controlled yet flexible setting, allowing personalised design decisions beyond predefined conditions.
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.