Why beauty in the workplace is in the mind of the beholder

Corporate occupiers and their design advisers talk a lot about aesthetics. Some of their discussions can seem annoyingly theoretical, focused on hard-to-define concepts such as ‘beauty’. However, neuroscience research on aesthetics makes it clear that thinking about aesthetics can be time well spent.

According to a new American Psychological Association study by researchers Grzywacz, Correa and Correa-Herran, aesthetic values arise from image variables like colour, balance, symmetry, harmony and complexity, and vary across different domains of aesthetic activity, like paintings, sculptures or façades of buildings?

Their study revealed ‘significant differences in aesthetic values between these two domains of activities. We see more balance, symmetry, harmony, complexity, and rhythmicity in building façades than in artistic paintings. In contrast, artistic paintings give up some of these aesthetic values to obtain more drama, dynamism, and focus on the main subjects.’ The researchers conclude that ‘theories for the learning of aesthetic values must include a separation in domains of activity’.

Symmetry is positive

There are plenty of other useful findings to be drawn from earlier visual aesthetics research. We’ve known for decades (Campbell, 1941) that design options with visual balance, rhythm, harmony, etc. are judged more positively than those without these attributes. Symmetry, whatever its form (reflectional or rotational or translational), is positively experienced by humans (for example, Du Sautoy, 2008), preferred to asymmetry (for instance, Brielmann and Pelli, 2018), and perceived to be more attractive than asymmetry (Westphal-Fitch and Fitch, 2016).

This effect appears to cross cultures. Leder and colleagues (2024) report that ‘Symmetry has been recognised as one of the most important visual features to predict aesthetic preferences and was discussed as a potentially universal feature of beauty judgments. . . In the present study, we found that Japanese participants clearly evaluated symmetric stimuli as more beautiful than asymmetric ones.’

Symmetry and asymmetry bring different thoughts to mind in the field of branding. Luffarelli and associates (2015) found that ‘visual asymmetry is associated with excitement in memory’. Bejaj and Bond (2018) determined that ‘asymmetry in brand elements evokes arousal [excitement] in observers, which spills over to impressions of the brand itself. . . results suggested a strong association between visual symmetry and brand sophistication; indeed, luxury brands often adopt a classical style characterised by calmness, order, and idealism, in which symmetry is a fundamental characteristic.’

Curves versus angles

Curvier objects and shapes are preferred to more angular ones (for example, Brielmann and Pelli, 2018): ‘People like the appearance of otherwise equivalent shapes and objects more if their contours are round rather than sharp and angular, and this is the case in various cultures across the globe.’

We associate particular ideas with curved and straight lines just as we do to symmetry and asymmetry. Ghoshal and associates (2016) found that ‘for products where perceived functionality is more critical than perceived hedonics [pleasantness, pleasurableness], it may be advantageous for product contours to be designed angular rather than curved. Conversely, for products where hedonic perceptions are more critical, contours of the product should be curved or rounded, rather than angular.’ In a nutshell: the idea of functionality is tied to more angular designs and pleasure to curvier ones.

Blazhenkova and Kumar (2018) discussed that their study participants ‘associated curved shapes with sweet taste, quiet or calm sound, vanilla smell, green colour, smooth texture, relieved emotion, female gender’. In contrast, they associated angular shapes with sour taste, loud or dynamic sound, spicy or citrus smell, red colour, rough texture, excited or surprise emotion, and male gender.

‘Angular shapes induce associations with traits that express energy, toughness and strength…’

Zhang, Feick, and Price (2006) state that ‘angular shapes tend to induce associations with traits that express energy, toughness and strength. In contrast, rounded shapes tend to induce associations with traits that express approachableness, friendliness, and harmony.’ Also, Liu, Bogicevic, and Mattila (2018) found that ‘in busy settings, angular shape cues increase customer satisfaction through perceived competence of the service provider. Conversely, in non-busy settings, circular shape cues enhance customer satisfaction via warmth perceptions.’
Humans, it seems, are big fans of symmetry, harmony and balance, something to conder when planning your next workplace makeover.

Read more of the latest research insights from Sally Augustin in Research Roundup, her regular column in the Innovation Zone for WORKTECH Academy members and partners here.

Research sources

Aditi Bajaj and Samuel Bond. 2018. ‘Beyond Beauty: Design Symmetry and Brand Personality.’ Journal of Consumer Psychology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 77-98.

Olesya Blazhenkova and Melisa Kumar. 2018. “Angular Versus Curved Shapes: Correspondences and Emotional Processing.’ Perception, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 67-89.

Aenne Brielmann and Denis Pelli. 2018. ‘Aesthetics.’ Current Biology, vol. 28, pp. R859-R863.

Ivy Campbell. 1941. ‘Factors Which Work Toward Unity or Coherence in Visual Design.’
Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 145-162.

Marcus Du Sautoy. 2008. Symmetry: A Journey into the Patterns of Nature. New York: HarperCollins.

Tanuka Ghoshal, Peter Boatwright, and Malika M. [no surname provided]. 2016. ‘Curvature from All Angles: An Integrative Review and Implications for Product Design.’ In Rajeev Batra, Colleen Seifert, and Diann Brei (eds.), The Psychology of Design: Creating Consumer Appeal, Routledge: New York, pp. 91-106.

N. Grzywacz, C. Correa, and I. Correa-Herran. ‘Domain-Specific Aesthetic Values: A Comparison of Paintings and Architecture.’ Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, in press.

Helmut Leder, Jan Mikuni, Hideaki Kawabata, and Raphael Rosenberg. 2024. “Symmetry as an Inter-Cultural Feature Constituting Beauty: Implicit and Explicit Beauty Evaluation of Visual Symmetry in Japan.” Empirical Studies of the Arts, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 519-535.

Stephanie Liu, Vanja Bogicevic, and Anna Mattila. 2018. ‘Circular Vs. Angular Servicescape: ‘Shaping’ Customer Response to a Fast Service Encounter Pace.’ Journal of Business Research, vol. 89, pp. 47-56.

Jonathan Luffarelli, Antonios Stamatogiannakis and Haiyang Yang. 2015. ‘The Asymmetrical Logo Effect: The Interplay of Brand Personality and Logo Aesthetics on Brand Equity.’ Conference Proceedings, Society for Consumer Psychology, pp. 209-210.

Anna Pecchinenda, Marco Bertamini, Alexis Makin, and Nicole Ruta. 2014. ‘The Pleasantness of Visual Symmetry: Always, Never or Sometimes.’ PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 3.

Gesche Westphal-Fitch and W. Fitch. 2016. ‘Beauty for the Eye of the Beholder: Plane Pattern Perception and Production’ In Helmut Leder, Michael Forster, Gernot Gerger, Marcos Nadal, Matthew Pelowski, and Raphael Rosenberg(eds.), Proceedings IAEA [International Association of Empirical Aesthetics]. 2016 Vienna, August 29 – September 1, University of Vienna, p. 92.

Yinlong Zhang, Lawrence Feick, and Lydia Price. 2006. ‘The Impact of Self-Construal on Aesthetic Preference for Angular Versus Rounded Shapes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 794–805.