Interactive room design as a tool for understanding form and style preferences

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.

Keywords: Architectural psychology; Forms; Interior design; Living rooms; Style; Virtual environment.

Fig. 1

User Interface of the 3d web application. 1: Toggle switch to change the form of the windows; 2: information button for instructions; save button (accessible from 30 min onwards); camera button to switch between bird’s eye and first person view; 3: furniture categories and items to select from; from left to right: armchairs, chairs, sofas, ceiling lamps, floor lamps, table lamps, cabinets, tables, small tables, plants, paintings, candles, vases, and decorations; 4: action buttons to confirm items status, rotate, change colour or delete item; 5: options to modify material and (if applicable) fabric of the item; 6: buttons to move the selected item within the room.

Fig. 2

Examples of furnished rooms from study participants. The top and middle rows show rooms from a bird’s-eye view and the bottom row from a first-person view. Participants were free to switch between these perspectives at any time. The screenshots of the final rooms were taken after participants spent at least 30 min furnishing the rooms and clicked on the save button to proceed with the experiment.

Fig. 3

Comparison of the percentage of selected curved items (left) and modern items (right) between male (N = 99) and female (N = 97) participants. Boxplots display the median and interquartile range, while black dots represent group means. Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals around the mean. A significant difference was found between the groups (p = 0.002) for the percentage of selected curved items. Significant differences are marked with asterisks (*** for p < 0.001, ** for p < 0.01, and * for p < 0.05).

Fig. 4

Form preferences by furniture category. Bars indicate the overall count of selected items across all participants for form (angular and curved) and category. Significant differences are based on adjusted p-values and marked with asterisks (*** for p < 0.001, ** for p < 0.01, and * for p < 0.05).

Fig. 5

Style preferences by furniture category. Bars indicate the overall count of selected items across all participants for style (modern and classic) and category. Significant differences are based on adjusted p-values and marked with asterisks (*** for p < 0.001, ** for p < 0.01, and * for p < 0.05).