{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/87631"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/87631","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"The landscape adjective check list: a descriptive technique for landscape assessment","abstract":"The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to present a methodology that is systematic, yet flexible, for the descriptive assessment of landscapes, and second, to develop a minimal set of basic dimensions or scales that are invariant across observers and places described. The Landscape Adjective Check List (LACL), first developed by Kenneth Craik (1971), and modeled after the Gough Adjective Check List (1960) used for personality assessment, was administered to a group of 150 college students. Each was instructed to rate a series of natural scenes by marking off those adjectives they felt were descriptive of the particular scene they were viewing. The major results of a principal components factor analysis suggested that, within the range of scenes used, there are approximately twenty dimensions which people use in their descriptive assessments of natural scenery. The first factor, termed General Positive Evaluation, appeared consistently throughout the literature on both environmental and landscape perception and assessment. Other dimensions appearing both in the factor analysis and the literature included Ruggedness, Potency, Spaciousness, Barrenness, and Cultivation/Vegetation. A comparison was made between the factor analytic scales and a set of scales which had initially been hypothesized to be relevant to variations among landscapes. These dimensions consisted of two sets of scales which had been generated in different ways. First, a set of dimensions was proposed based upon a content analysis of the Landscape Adjective Check List. A second set of dimensions was developed based upon an analysis of the research literature. In general, the findings indicated a moderate to high degree of convergence between the factor analytic scales and the two sets of hypothesized scales. Before generalizing any further, however, it will be necessary to obtain comparable results from other persons (besides college students) and a wider range of scenery, as stimuli.","abstract_html":"The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to present a methodology that is systematic, yet flexible, for the descriptive assessment of landscapes, and second, to develop a minimal set of basic dimensions or scales that are invariant across observers and places described. The Landscape Adjective Check List (LACL), first developed by Kenneth Craik (1971), and modeled after the Gough Adjective Check List (1960) used for personality assessment, was administered to a group of 150 college students. Each was instructed to rate a series of natural scenes by marking off those adjectives they felt were descriptive of the particular scene they were viewing. The major results of a principal components factor analysis suggested that, within the range of scenes used, there are approximately twenty dimensions which people use in their descriptive assessments of natural scenery. The first factor, termed General Positive Evaluation, appeared consistently throughout the literature on both environmental and landscape perception and assessment. Other dimensions appearing both in the factor analysis and the literature included Ruggedness, Potency, Spaciousness, Barrenness, and Cultivation/Vegetation. A comparison was made between the factor analytic scales and a set of scales which had initially been hypothesized to be relevant to variations among landscapes. These dimensions consisted of two sets of scales which had been generated in different ways. First, a set of dimensions was proposed based upon a content analysis of the Landscape Adjective Check List. A second set of dimensions was developed based upon an analysis of the research literature. In general, the findings indicated a moderate to high degree of convergence between the factor analytic scales and the two sets of hypothesized scales. Before generalizing any further, however, it will be necessary to obtain comparable results from other persons (besides college students) and a wider range of scenery, as stimuli.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Willis, Lori Ann"],"institution":"Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University","degree_name":"M.S.","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"Psychology","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1982,"date_issued":"1982","date_published":"1982","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:56Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en_US"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/87631","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Willis, Lori Ann"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2019-02-15T20:59:42Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2019-02-15T20:59:42Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1982"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.dcmitype","label":"Dc Type Dcmitype","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.S."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en_US"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/87631"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to present a methodology that is systematic, yet flexible, for the descriptive assessment of landscapes, and second, to develop a minimal set of basic dimensions or scales that are invariant across observers and places described. The Landscape Adjective Check List (LACL), first developed by Kenneth Craik (1971), and modeled after the Gough Adjective Check List (1960) used for personality assessment, was administered to a group of 150 college students. Each was instructed to rate a series of natural scenes by marking off those adjectives they felt were descriptive of the particular scene they were viewing. The major results of a principal components factor analysis suggested that, within the range of scenes used, there are approximately twenty dimensions which people use in their descriptive assessments of natural scenery. The first factor, termed General Positive Evaluation, appeared consistently throughout the literature on both environmental and landscape perception and assessment. Other dimensions appearing both in the factor analysis and the literature included Ruggedness, Potency, Spaciousness, Barrenness, and Cultivation/Vegetation. A comparison was made between the factor analytic scales and a set of scales which had initially been hypothesized to be relevant to variations among landscapes. These dimensions consisted of two sets of scales which had been generated in different ways. First, a set of dimensions was proposed based upon a content analysis of the Landscape Adjective Check List. A second set of dimensions was developed based upon an analysis of the research literature. In general, the findings indicated a moderate to high degree of convergence between the factor analytic scales and the two sets of hypothesized scales. Before generalizing any further, however, it will be necessary to obtain comparable results from other persons (besides college students) and a wider range of scenery, as stimuli."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["M.S."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The landscape adjective check list: a descriptive technique for landscape assessment"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.department":["Psychology"],"dc:creator":["Willis, Lori Ann"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2019-02-15T20:59:42Z"],"dc:date.available":["2019-02-15T20:59:42Z"],"dc:date.issued":["1982"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to present a methodology that is systematic, yet flexible, for the descriptive assessment of landscapes, and second, to develop a minimal set of basic dimensions or scales that are invariant across observers and places described. The Landscape Adjective Check List (LACL), first developed by Kenneth Craik (1971), and modeled after the Gough Adjective Check List (1960) used for personality assessment, was administered to a group of 150 college students. Each was instructed to rate a series of natural scenes by marking off those adjectives they felt were descriptive of the particular scene they were viewing. The major results of a principal components factor analysis suggested that, within the range of scenes used, there are approximately twenty dimensions which people use in their descriptive assessments of natural scenery. The first factor, termed General Positive Evaluation, appeared consistently throughout the literature on both environmental and landscape perception and assessment. Other dimensions appearing both in the factor analysis and the literature included Ruggedness, Potency, Spaciousness, Barrenness, and Cultivation/Vegetation. A comparison was made between the factor analytic scales and a set of scales which had initially been hypothesized to be relevant to variations among landscapes. These dimensions consisted of two sets of scales which had been generated in different ways. First, a set of dimensions was proposed based upon a content analysis of the Landscape Adjective Check List. A second set of dimensions was developed based upon an analysis of the research literature. In general, the findings indicated a moderate to high degree of convergence between the factor analytic scales and the two sets of hypothesized scales. Before generalizing any further, however, it will be necessary to obtain comparable results from other persons (besides college students) and a wider range of scenery, as stimuli."],"dc:description.degree":["M.S."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/87631"],"dc:language.iso":["en_US"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["The landscape adjective check list: a descriptive technique for landscape assessment"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.dcmitype":["Text"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.S."],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:56Z"}