Emotional and visual perception of natural landscapes in Russia and Japan: a comparative analysis
https://doi.org/10.15356/0373-2444-2013-1-130-140
Abstract
Some common features of emotional and visual perception of landscapes, and the main points of difference between the Russian and Japanese cultures, as well as between different groups of Russian respondents were revealed. While grouping landscapes the most important feature appeared to be the presence / absence of water and type of water basin. Relief is also important for the Russians, while both visual and seasonal characteristics are signifi cant for the Japanese. Russian and Japanese respondents generally agree in assessing the attractiveness of different landscape types, but evaluate their exoticism differently. All groups of the Japanese respondents assess the attractiveness and exoticism of landscapes almost equally, whereas there are some differences in that respect between groups of Russian respondents from different regions. Images existing in both cultures don’t refl ect adequately the diversity of nature in Russia and Japan.
About the Authors
E. G. Petrova
Faculty of Geography, Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yu. V. Mironov
Vernadsky State Geological Museum, RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Девис Д. Статистика и анализ геологических данных. М.: Мир, 1977. 568 с.
2. Ермолаев О.Ю. Математическая статистика для психологов: учебник. М.: Московский психолого-социальный институт: Флинта, 2003. 336 с.
3. Желамский А.Г. Русский пейзажный вектор (очерки родиночувствия). Издание музея пейзажного наследия “Окоём”, 2008. 212 с.
4. Николаев В.А. Ландшафтоведение. Эстетика и дизайн. Учебное пособие. М.: Аспект Пресс, 2005. 176 с.
5. Петрова Е.Г. Особенности эстетического восприятия природных ландшафтов в России и Японии (природоохранный аспект) // Экологические проблемы. Взгляд в будущее. Сборник трудов V Междун. научно-практической конференции. ЗАО “Ростиздат”. Ростов-на-Дону, 2008. С. 371–374.
6. Петрова Е.Г., Миронов Ю.В. Сравнение восприятия ландшафтов в России и Японии (по данным кросскультурного анализа) // Страноведение и регионоведение в решении проблем устойчивого развития в современном мире. СПб.: ВВМ, 2010. С. 150–155.
7. Петрова Е.Г., Миронов Ю.В., Петрова А.А. Национальные парки Японии глазами россиян // Природа. 2008. № 11. С. 28–39.
8. Рельеф среды жизни человека (экологическая геоморфология) / Отв. ред. Лихачева Э.А., Тимофеев Д.А. М.: Медиа-ПРЕСС, 2002. 640 с.
9. Родоман Б.Б. Эстетика ландшафта // Наука о культуре: итоги и перспективы. Информационно-аналитический сборник. Вып. 3. М.: Росс. гос. биб-ка, 1995. С. 4–18.
10. Селиванов А.О. Природа, история, культура. Экологические аспекты культуры народов мира. М.: ГЕОС, 2000. 322 с.
11. Фролова М.Ю. Оценка эстетических достоинств природных ландшафтов. // Вестн. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 5. Геогр. 1994. № 2. С. 27–33.
12. Aoki Y. Review Article: Trends in the Study of the Psychological Evaluation of Landscape // Landscape Res. 1999. V. 24. № 1. P. 85–94.
13. Aoki Y. Recent Trends of English Paper on the Psychological Evaluation of Landscape // J.
14. Environmental Infor. Sci. March 2007. V. 35. № 5. Р. 181–188.
15. Bourassa S.C. The Aesthetics of Landscape. London: Belhaven Press, 1991.
16. Daniel T.C. Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century // Landscape and Urban Planning. 2001. V. 54. P. 267–281.
17. Gold-Geochemist 2.0. 1997 // http://www.gambler.ru/gold/
18. Kaltenborn B.P., Bjerke T. Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences // Landscape and Urban Planning. 2002. V. 59. P. 1–11.
19. Kent R.L. Attributes, features and reasons for enjoyment of scenic routes: a comparison of experts, residents, and citizens // Landscape research. 1993. № 18 (2). P. 92–102.
20. Kunikida D. Musashino (The Musashi Plain), 1901.
21. Linton D.L. The assessment of scenery as a natural resource // Scottish Geographical Magazine. 1968. V. 84. P. 219–238.
22. Okajima N., Petrova E., Petrova A. The influence of Russian literature on two Japanese literary figures and the Japanese sense of scenic beauty // Hawaii International Conference on Arts & Humanities, 8th Annual Conference, 2010 Conference Proceedings, ISSN: 1541–5899. Honolulu, 2010. P. 3135–3150.
23. Petrova E., Aoki Y., Mironov Y. et al. Comparison of natural landscapes appreciation between Russia and Japan: methods of investigation // Management for protection and sustainable development. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected Areas. Pisa (Italy), 2008. P. 198–202.
24. Tips W.E.J., Savasdisara T. The influence of the socioeconomic background of subjects on their landscape preference evaluation // Landscape and Urban Planning. 1986. № 13. P. 225–230.
25. Ueda H.A. Comparative Study on Forest Image in Japan and Germany // J. Japan. Institute of Landscape Architecture. 2006. V. 67(5): P. 691–694.
26. Ulrich R.S. Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. / Eds. Kellert S.R. and E.O. Wilsonb // The Biophilia Hypothesis, Washington DC: Island Press, 1993. P. 73–137.
27. Yang B.E., Kaplan R. The perception of landscape style: a cross-cultural comparison // Landscape and Urban Planning. 1990. V. 19. P. 251–262.
Review
For citations:
Petrova E.G., Mironov Yu.V. Emotional and visual perception of natural landscapes in Russia and Japan: a comparative analysis. Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya. 2013;(1):130-140. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15356/0373-2444-2013-1-130-140
Views:
672
Email this article 
