Author
Listed:
- Mei Yang
- Claudia Damiano
- Paul Gauvreau
- Dirk B Walther
Abstract
Bridges are works of public infrastructure designed to perform a practical function. They are unique among works of engineering in that they also have a significant aesthetic dimension. At their best, they inspire awe and wonder. At their worst, they are eyesores. Little is known about what shapes the aesthetic appeal of bridges. Here we explore how visible features originating primarily from practical considerations relate to aesthetic judgements of bridges. Our dataset comprises of images of 318 bridges from around the world, rated by 254 participants for aesthetic pleasure, interest, complexity, and safety. Civil engineers annotated each bridge’s type, depth, visible material, age, and aesthetic premium. Using Factorial Analysis of Mixed Data, we found two significant dimensions. The first dimension, “aesthetics”, shows strong correlations among aesthetic, complexity, and interest ratings and is related to bridge type. The second dimension, “perceived safety”, relates subjective ratings of safety to bridge age and material. Analyses of visual features, using the Mid-Level Vision Toolbox, shows that contour length and angularity are predictors of the “aesthetics” dimension. For example, cable-stayed bridges are represented by many short and angular contours and are generally rated as more complex, interesting, and aesthetically pleasing. Conversely, slab bridges are often represented by a few long contours and are rated as uninteresting and not aesthetically pleasing. Our study offers the first systematic attempt to collect and analyze subjective ratings of bridge aesthetics, paving the way for empirically supported decisions for the design of bridges and, potentially, other works of public infrastructure.
Suggested Citation
Mei Yang & Claudia Damiano & Paul Gauvreau & Dirk B Walther, 2025.
"Empirical aesthetics of bridges,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(12), pages 1-21, December.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0338493
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338493
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0338493. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.