https://www.khanacademy.

org/test-prep/mcat/critical-analysis-and-reasoning-skills-practicequestions/critical-analysis-and-reasoning-skills-tutorial/e/designing-courthouses

Designing courthouses
Designing courthouses.
In
P a recent study, psychologist Anne Maass investigated the effects of courthouse architecture
on
r the psychological well-being and cognitive processes of potential users. Specifically, she
compared two courthouses located in Padova, Italy: the old courthouse, located in a former
o
convent originally built in 1345, and the new courthouse, built in 1991 and designed by Gino
b
Valle, an internationally known architect. Although serving or having served the same
lpurpose, the two buildings have completely different stylesone is an old building with a
e
rather residential look, warm colors, large windows, and a large wooden door, the other a
m
massive, gray, semi-circular building, with narrow windows, and an entrance enclosed
between two huge walls.
When study participants were asked to imagine themselves accompanying a friend to the
courthouse, they reported greater discomfort and stress when anticipating a trial in the
modern building. However, contrary to predictions, this was true only when they were already
familiar with the two buildings. It is possible that photographs reduced the actual impact of
the architectural design, although this would contradict prior research by architect Gavin
Stamp showing that distortions due to photographic presentation have negligible effects on
preference. Another possibility for participants greater discomfort when imagining going to
the new courthouse is that those with prior experience may have been exposed to the
building from multiple angles, whereas unfamiliar participants received information only
about the buildings facade.
It is important to note that participants did not generally dislike the new building. From the
standpoint of general aesthetic distinctions such as beauty versus ugliness, no differences
emerged between the two buildings; if anything, the new building was seen by the
participants as slightly more attractive. The data suggest that participants responded more to
the intimidating nature of the building than to its beauty.
The most important result of Maasss research is that courthouse architecture was found to
affect the estimated likelihood of conviction. Participants were more pessimistic about the
trial outcome when they imagined entering the new building than when they imagined
entering the old one. (This occurred regardless of whether participants had any prior
familiarity with the respective buildings.) It remains unclear exactly which architectural
features are responsible for the observed shift in likelihood of conviction estimates. The
modern building differs on so many dimensions (size, color, shape, building materials, age,
and so on) from the old building that it is impossible to isolate their individual impact. Also, it
may be the interaction of features that creates the overall impression of the building as
intimidating.

How exactly do architectural features affect social-cognitive processes such as likelihood

estimates? One possibility is that design features affect the emotional well-being or mood of
the user which, in turn, biases his or her thought processes. For example, the architectural
characteristics of the new courthouse seem to have made hypothetical users feel anxious and
tense, and a bad mood has been shown to induce negative thoughts and expectations.
However, building type affected perceived likelihood of conviction also for those participants
who showed no enhanced discomfort in reaction to the new building.
Another and more plausible possibility is that the design features of the new courthouse
activated specific thoughts and mental associations related to conviction. For example, some
participants spontaneously commented that the new building has greater resemblance to a
prison than to a courthouse; others mentioned that the two high walls enclosing the entrance
give the impression that those who enter the building are already convicted.
Adapted from A. Maass, Intimidating Buildings: Can courthouse architecture affect perceived
likelihood of conviction? Environment and Behavior. 2000 by Sage Publications, Inc.