Spaciousness and Emotional Responses to Curved Space Boundaries


  • Tuğçe Elver Boz
  • Halime Demirkan


Spaciousness, Emotional Responses, Curved Space Boundaries, Virtual Reality


Properties like size, light, texture and color unite to make a composition to form a space. Various properties that affect people’s attitudes and emotions towards a space are critical issues that have an impact on people’s life quality. Quality of life is a concept related to cognitive and affective assessments that are based on the matching of one’s expectations with the properties of physical space. Therefore, an interior architect design spaces while concentrating on the properties of that space. The study explores the perceived spaciousness of a 3D virtual model with curved boundary types using a Head Mounted Display (HMD) to find out the influence of specific space properties (size, light, texture, and color) and to associate the relationship between spaciousness and emotional responses.

The perceived spaciousness level of two-curved boundary types (horizontal and vertical) of interior spaces was analyzed with a HMD related to one of the specific properties varying in two levels of intensity; high and low. Sixteen different physical property spaces were designed to measure. Total of 128 participants assessed their emotional responses corresponding to three variables (pleasure, arousal, and dominance). The survey included both ranking and open-ended questions for each setting. According to the ranking results, perception of spaciousness was positively related with the curved boundaries and large size, bright light, lateral texture, and cool color of the spaces. In all specific properties, more spaciousness was perceived firstly in curved horizontal than vertical boundaries. Besides, curved boundaries evoked pleasing, satisfying, relaxed and happier emotional responses in perception of spaciousness of individuals. Also, according to the open-ended questions, three multiple-choice questions were provided in order to have an overall view of behavioral intention that were focused on time span, enjoyment and feel friendly level. As a result, the behavioral intentions (approach-avoidance behaviors) are different in the four settings in terms of specific properties. It is concluded that different, intensities of space properties could be used to control the amount of spaciousness level in interiors. Also, these levels provoke strong differences in emotional responses of individuals. Besides, designers and architects could use the findings to manipulate curvilinearity of the boundaries with many specific properties to provide a high level of perception of spaciousness.


Metrics Loading ...


Alp, A. 1993. An Experimental Study of Aesthetic Response to Geometric Configurations of Architectural Space. Leonardo, 26(2), 149.

Bharucha-Reid, R. and Kiak, H A. 1982. Environmental effects on affect: density, noise, and personality. Population and Environment, 5, 60-72.

Bokharaei, S. and Nasar, J. 2016. Perceived Spaciousness and Preference in Sequential Experience. Human Factors, 58(7), 1069-1081.

Dazkır, S. and Read, M. 2012. Furniture Forms and Their Influence on Our Emotional Responses Toward Interior Environments. Environment and Behavior, 44(5), 722- 732.

Elver, T. 2018. Perception of spatial enclosure as a function of different space boundaries (Master Thesis). Bilkent University, Turkey.

Franz, G., Von der Heyde, M. and Bülthoff, H. 2005. An empirical approach to the experience of architectural space in virtual reality—exploring relations between features and affective appraisals of rectangular indoor spaces. Automation in Construction, 14(2), 165-172.

Gifford, R. 2002. Environmental psychology: principles and practice. Victoria, British Columbia: Optimal Books.

Hopkins J. R., Kagan J., Brachfeld S., Hans S. and Linn S. 1976. Infant responsivity to curvature. Child Development, 47(4), 1166-1171.

Madani Nejad, K. 2007. Curvilinearity in Architecture: Emotional Effect of Curvilinear Forms in Interior Design (Doctoral Dissertation).

Mehrabian, A. and O'Reilly, E. 1980. Analysis of personality measures in terms of basic dimensions of temperament. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(3), 492-503.

Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J. A. 1974. An approach to environmental psychology.

Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

Nasar, J. 2008. Assessing Perceptions of Environments for Active Living. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(4), 357-363.

Ozdemir, A. 2010. The effect of window views’ openness and naturalness on the perception of room’s spaciousness and brightness: A visual preference study. Scientific Research and Essays, 5, 2275–2287.

Russell, J. A. 1992. Affective appraisals of environments. In J. L. Nasar (Ed.), Environmental aesthetics, theory, research and applications (pp. 260–274). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Russell, J. A. and Mehrabian, A. 1977. Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions.

Journal of Research in Personality, 11, 273-294.

Russell, J. A. and Pratt, G. 1980. A description of the affective quality attributed to environments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38 (2), 311-322.

Russell, J. A., Ward, L. M. and Pratt, G. 1981. Affective quality attributed to environments: A factor analytic study. Environment and Behavior, 13, 259-288.

Sadalla, E.K. and Oxley, D. 1984. The Perception of Room Size: The Rectangularity Illusion.

Environment and Behavior, 16(3), 394-405.

Sancaktar, İ. and Demirkan, H. 2008. Spatial updating of objects after rotational and translational body movements in virtual environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2682-2696.

Shemesh, A., Talmon, R., Karp, O., Amir, I., Bar, M. and Grobman, Y. 2016. Affective response to architecture – investigating human reaction to spaces with different geometry. Architectural Science Review, 1-10.

Stamps, A. E. 2009. On Shape and Spaciousness. Environment and Behavior, 41(4), 526- 548.

Stamps, A. E. 2010a. Effects of Permeability on Perceived Enclosure and Spaciousness.

Environment and Behavior, 42(6), 864-886.

Stamps, A. E. 2010b. Psychology and the aesthetics of the built environment. London: Kluwer Academic.

Stamps, A. E. 2011. Effects of Area, Height, Elongation, and Color on Perceived Spaciousness. Environment and Behavior, 43(2), 252-273.

Stamps, A. E. and Krishnan, V. 2006. Spaciousness and Boundary Roughness. Environment and Behavior, 38(6), 841-872.

Vartanian, O., Navarrete, G., Chatterjee, A., Fich, L.B., Leder, H., Modrono, C., Nadal, M., Rostrup, N. and Skov, M. 2013. Impact of Contour on Aesthetic Judgments and Approach Avoidance decisions in Architecture. PNAS, 110(2).




How to Cite

Elver Boz, T. ., & Demirkan, H. . (2020). Spaciousness and Emotional Responses to Curved Space Boundaries. ICONARCH International Congress of Architecture and Planning, (Iconarch -IV Proceeding Book), 725–738. Retrieved from



SESSION 6B Theme: Architectural/Urban Design, Art and Aesthetics