Pilot study investigates comfort perception in urban settings through emotional conditions, using multi-method analysis.
This pilot study examines how experimentally induced emotional states interact with the visual properties of urban environments to shape comfort perception. A controlled laboratory experiment was conducted with 17 participants assigned to one of four emotional conditions (Fear, Anger, Sad, Happy) through audio-visual induction. Participants evaluated 73 building façade and 42 pedestrian streetscape stimuli from three urban areas in Kitakyushu, Japan (Wakamatsu, Tobata, Mojiko) using a multi-method framework combining fractal analysis (D, Λ), six pedestrian visual metrics, webcam-based eye-tracking (Visual Attention Score, VAS), and self-reported comfort votes. Emotion induction was effective for Fear and Anger groups and partial for Sad and Happy groups, with the latter attributable to experimental fatigue. Cross-method correlation analysis revealed that fractal dimension D significantly predicted comfort vote consensus (Spearman r = 0.369, p = 0.013), while VAS showed no significant relationship with comfort votes (r = 0.097, ns) or with fractal dimension (r = 0.015, ns), confirming that visual attention and comfort preference are independent dimensions. For building façades, the ‘Complex but Organized’ fractal profile (D ≥ 1.70, Λ < 0.60) was the consistent comfort driver across all emotion groups. For pedestrian streetscapes, low spatial enclosure and spatially integrated tree canopy were the primary comfort predictors. Multi-method synthesis identified five empirical paradoxes and three design principles: (1) target D ≥ 1.70 with Λ < 0.60; (2) prioritize spatially integrated canopy over visible greenery quantity; and (3) leverage civic legibility as an independent comfort pathway. These findings support the development of emotion-independent frameworks for urban comfort evaluation. Replication with larger, more diverse samples is recommended.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perwira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: