公路景观审美主体与评价方法研究
|
摘要
截止2010年年底,我国公路网总里程达到了395万公里,其中高速公路通车里程居世界第二位,为6.5万公里。上世纪80年代我国开始出现私人汽车,至2010年我国汽车的保有量达到了7000万辆。如今,人们已经不满足于公路仅仅作为交通通道,对公路沿线优美景观的需求愈发强烈。国外对公路景观的研究已经有70多年的历史,并营造了许多风景如画的公路景观,极大提高了公路审美主体的满意度。如今,公路景观的研究在我国正蓬勃发展,但是由于起步较晚,我国公路景观研究包括基础理论与应用实践领域还有许多亟待解决的问题。本论文从公路景观审美主体和评价方法为出发点,在基础理论和应用实践方面开展研究,并最终为我国公路景观建设做出贡献。
本文首先针对公路景观审美主体偏好与差异性以及审美主体的动态视觉特征这一基础理论开展研究;其次对公路景观评价指标系统存在主观性强、缺乏有效性检验的现状进行了研究,并提出了解决方法;公众参与公路景观评价的深度一直是困扰公路景观研究者的难题,本文将经济学中的满意度理论成功引入到公路景观评价领域,圆满解决了这一难题;本文最后研究了融合环境保护理念的公路景观评价方法。本文完成的主要科研工作与研究成果概括如下:
1.通过对国内外大量关于公路景观审美主体视觉载体的研究文献,得到了审美主体的视觉载体发展历程,从最初的景观符号到纸质照片再到今天的数码照片,研究手段也从最初的现场调查到室内问卷调查到如今的网络调查。在分析研究了公路景观审美主体视觉载体这一理论基础之后,通过渝湛高速(粤境段)的实景照片,研究了审美主体对公路景观的感知偏好与差异,结果证明审美主体对自然性程度高的景观非常偏爱,而且审美主体比较偏爱水体景观。这一研究发现与国外景观评价领域的研究成果是一致的,这一研究成果也为提高我国公路景观建设的水平提供了理论参考。研究还发现,不同学历、不同性别、不同年龄和不同地区的审美主体对公路景观的感知没有显著性差异,这一基础理论的研究为以后的研究人员更加深入研究公路景观提供了理论支持。
2.从公路景观审美主体动态视觉出发,在综合考虑经济能力的情况下利用华南理工大学道路工程研究所自研设备“车载数码相机等距变距自动拍照控制系统”研究了审美主体动态视觉特征,进一步的研究发现,在动态视觉条件下,近景绿带面积对审美主体的影响最大,这一研究结论为公路建设和环境保护部门研究公路景观提供了理论支持,也为公路景观评价研究者展示了一个利用自研设备开展科学研究的范例。
3.针对目前在公路景观评价领域应用最多的数学方法包括描述因子法、层次分析法(AHP)和模糊综合评判法等在确定公路景观评价指标系统方面存在主观性强和指标效度不确定的重大缺陷,研究了将因子分析方法应用在定量化确定公路景观评价指标系统上的可能性,某景观路的实例应用证明了因子分析方法在公路景观评价指标确定中的良好应用,最后应用结构方程方法对这一指标系统的效度进行了检验,这一研究弥补了现在关于公路景观评价指标主观性强和效度不确定的缺陷。
4.公路景观建设是为公众服务的,但是在景观评价过程中,如何让普通民众理解专业性较强的景观和视觉影响评价,提高公众参与评价效果,一直是公路景观研究的难题。本文研究了将经济学中的顾客满意度理论引入到公路景观评价中,并研究了其在公路景观评价中的实际效果。本研究首先对经济学中顾客满意度理论以及顾客满意度模型的起源和发展进行了简要回顾,并将这一理论借鉴到公路景观评价中来;其次介绍了公众满意度与公路景观之间的关系,借鉴顾客满意度模型构建了以公众满意度为导向的公路景观评价模型,并通过景观道路实例,应用经过信度和效度检验的指标系统编制成公路景观评价满意度调查问卷,数据的分析印证了该模型的可行性与合理性;最后应用SWOT分析(强弱分析)方法对该景观路的进一步改善提供了定量化、科学化的建议,从而一举解决了公众参与公路景观评价深度的难题,为今后公众更加广泛和深入参与公路景观评价提供了理论与实践支持。
5.公路景观设计中融入环境保护理念是目前公路景观研究的热点之一,以广州市华南快速干线三期为研究对象,构建了融合环保理念的公路景观评价指标系统和评价模型,应用层次分析法对模型目标层、准则层、子准则层和指标层之间的权重进行计算与分析,结果表明华快三期沿线的声环境对评价目标影响最大,其次为公路景观的自然性和生动性,公路沿线光环境和公路景观的服务性对评价目标影响最小。实地调查指标层各因子的得分,SWOT分析表明华南快线三期景观美质优势项目比较少,其优势包括景观明洞、沿线绿化覆盖率、沿线建筑小品特色等,劣势区包括路域自然景观美、噪声对睡眠的影响、噪声对精神的影响、噪声对日常生活的影响和沿线噪声实测值,劣势区项目是管理部门应该首先改善的。本文最后部分有针对性地研究公众对常用的防噪措施景观美质感知,结果表明景观明洞在美感、安全感和综合认知方面均得到了市民认可。
By the end of 2010, the total mileage of Chinese highway network has reached 3.95 million kilometers, including 65 thousand kilometers of express way, which ranks the second in the word. In the late 80s, personal car began to emerge in china, while the number has been increased to 70 million by 2010. Nowadays people come to be unsatisfactory with the road merely as a mean of transportation, and begin to concern more about the landscape along the road. The foreign countries have already had more than 70 years' history to investigate the road landscape, and achieve some success in this field, which improve the satisfactory of the road users enormously. Presently, the investigating of road landscape is developing vigorously in china. Due to a late starting, many problems of road landscape in our country need to be solved urgently, which include the field of basic theories and applications. To contribute to the development of road landscape in our country, this paper describes the investigation of the basic theories and applications based on the aesthetic subject and evaluation approach.
Firstly, this paper studies the preference and difference and dynamic visual features of the aesthetic subject, and then investigates the current condition of the subjectivity of evaluation index system and the lack of valid examination, and put forward the solutions in the end. The degree of public participation has always been a hard problem that disturbs the investigators. To solve it, the paper successfully incorporates the theory of customer satisfaction in economics with road landscape evaluation. Finally a new design approach of road landscape incorporated with concept of environment protection is presented. The following are the main work and achievements.
1. The development process of visual carrier of aesthetic subject is obtained based on the literatures of road landscape at home and abroad. From initial landscape symbols to paper photos to today's digital pictures, with the development of them, the research means are improved from on-the-spot investigation to indoor questionnaire survey until to now network survey. After this study, this paper investigates the preference and difference of the aesthetic subject through the photos of Yu-Zhan Expressway in Guangdong Province and concludes that the aesthetic subject prefer more of the landscape with better naturalness, especially the water landscape. This conclusion is consistent with the research at abroad and provides a theoretical reference to enhance the level of highway landscape construction. The study also found that the aesthetic subject of different degree, gender, age and regions have no significant perception difference, this basic theory provides a theoretical support of more in-depth study for later researchers.
2. Based on the dynamic vision of aesthetic subject referring to road landscape, and considering the economic capability, the researcher adopts the "on-board digital camera isometric change control system" developed by South China University of Technology road engineering institute. Further study finds that under the condition of dynamic vision, the green belt area in close range has the largest effect of aesthetic subject. This conclusion provides a theoretical support of road landscape for highway construction and environmental protection department, and also sets a precedent for road landscape evaluation researchers of making use of self-study equipments in research.
3. Application of mathematical methods to the present road landscape evaluation filed include describe factor method and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, etc. however, those methods have major defects in subjective strong and index validity uncertain in the aspect of determining the evaluation index system of highway landscape. In this paper, study the possibility of applying the factor analysis method to quantitative determining the evaluation index system of highway landscape, and the application of one landscape road proves that it has good application. Finely, using the structural equation tests the validity of this index system. This research makes up the defect of strong subjectivity and uncertain validity in present road landscape evaluation index.
4. Though the construction of road landscape severs the public, how to let ordinary people to understand the strong professional landscape and visual impact assessment, to improve public participation evaluation effect has been the difficult problem in highway landscape study during the landscape evaluation process. This paper researches introduction the customer satisfaction theory in economics to road landscape evaluation and also studies it actual result in road landscape evaluation. In this paper, firstly we briefly look back on the origin and development of the customer satisfaction theory and customer satisfaction model and introduce those theories to road landscape evaluation. According to public satisfaction construct with public satisfaction oriented highway landscape evaluation model, presenting the relationship between public satisfaction and road landscape evaluation. Though road landscape example, apply index system which pass through the reliability and validity test writing into "highway landscape evaluation satisfaction questionnaire”and data analysis proves the feasibility and the rationality of this model. Finally for this landscape further improve we apply SWOT analysis (strong and weak analysis) method and provide a quantitative, scientific advice.Thereby solve the hard problem of the depth of the public participating in highway landscape evaluation, and also provide theory and practical support for future public more widely and deeply being involved in highway landscape evaluation.
5. Blending environmental protection concept in highway landscape design is one of hot spot in current road landscape research. Guangzhou south China rapid trunk three phase as research object, build highway landscape evaluation index system and evaluation model which fuse the concept of environmental protection, and use AHP method to calculate and analyze model criterion layer, the son of rule layer, index layer. Results show that the first effect is its sound environment, and the second effect is the naturalness and vividness in road landscape, and light environment along the road and service of road landscape is the last effect. Field investigation index layer the score of each factor, SWOT analysis express landscape of Guangzhou south China rapid trunk three phase lacking of advantages, the advantages including landscape open cut tunnel, the green coverage ratio along the road and architectural features along, est. The disadvantage include road area natural landscape beauty,the influence of noise on sleep, the influence of noise on spirit, the influence of noise on everyday life and measure the noise along the road. Also management department should first pay attention to disadvantage area improvement. In the last part of this paper, focusing on studying public senses of commonly used the measure of noise proof, and the results show that open cut tunnel has got citizens recognition in the aspect of beauty, security, comprehensive cognitive.
本文首先针对公路景观审美主体偏好与差异性以及审美主体的动态视觉特征这一基础理论开展研究;其次对公路景观评价指标系统存在主观性强、缺乏有效性检验的现状进行了研究,并提出了解决方法;公众参与公路景观评价的深度一直是困扰公路景观研究者的难题,本文将经济学中的满意度理论成功引入到公路景观评价领域,圆满解决了这一难题;本文最后研究了融合环境保护理念的公路景观评价方法。本文完成的主要科研工作与研究成果概括如下:
1.通过对国内外大量关于公路景观审美主体视觉载体的研究文献,得到了审美主体的视觉载体发展历程,从最初的景观符号到纸质照片再到今天的数码照片,研究手段也从最初的现场调查到室内问卷调查到如今的网络调查。在分析研究了公路景观审美主体视觉载体这一理论基础之后,通过渝湛高速(粤境段)的实景照片,研究了审美主体对公路景观的感知偏好与差异,结果证明审美主体对自然性程度高的景观非常偏爱,而且审美主体比较偏爱水体景观。这一研究发现与国外景观评价领域的研究成果是一致的,这一研究成果也为提高我国公路景观建设的水平提供了理论参考。研究还发现,不同学历、不同性别、不同年龄和不同地区的审美主体对公路景观的感知没有显著性差异,这一基础理论的研究为以后的研究人员更加深入研究公路景观提供了理论支持。
2.从公路景观审美主体动态视觉出发,在综合考虑经济能力的情况下利用华南理工大学道路工程研究所自研设备“车载数码相机等距变距自动拍照控制系统”研究了审美主体动态视觉特征,进一步的研究发现,在动态视觉条件下,近景绿带面积对审美主体的影响最大,这一研究结论为公路建设和环境保护部门研究公路景观提供了理论支持,也为公路景观评价研究者展示了一个利用自研设备开展科学研究的范例。
3.针对目前在公路景观评价领域应用最多的数学方法包括描述因子法、层次分析法(AHP)和模糊综合评判法等在确定公路景观评价指标系统方面存在主观性强和指标效度不确定的重大缺陷,研究了将因子分析方法应用在定量化确定公路景观评价指标系统上的可能性,某景观路的实例应用证明了因子分析方法在公路景观评价指标确定中的良好应用,最后应用结构方程方法对这一指标系统的效度进行了检验,这一研究弥补了现在关于公路景观评价指标主观性强和效度不确定的缺陷。
4.公路景观建设是为公众服务的,但是在景观评价过程中,如何让普通民众理解专业性较强的景观和视觉影响评价,提高公众参与评价效果,一直是公路景观研究的难题。本文研究了将经济学中的顾客满意度理论引入到公路景观评价中,并研究了其在公路景观评价中的实际效果。本研究首先对经济学中顾客满意度理论以及顾客满意度模型的起源和发展进行了简要回顾,并将这一理论借鉴到公路景观评价中来;其次介绍了公众满意度与公路景观之间的关系,借鉴顾客满意度模型构建了以公众满意度为导向的公路景观评价模型,并通过景观道路实例,应用经过信度和效度检验的指标系统编制成公路景观评价满意度调查问卷,数据的分析印证了该模型的可行性与合理性;最后应用SWOT分析(强弱分析)方法对该景观路的进一步改善提供了定量化、科学化的建议,从而一举解决了公众参与公路景观评价深度的难题,为今后公众更加广泛和深入参与公路景观评价提供了理论与实践支持。
5.公路景观设计中融入环境保护理念是目前公路景观研究的热点之一,以广州市华南快速干线三期为研究对象,构建了融合环保理念的公路景观评价指标系统和评价模型,应用层次分析法对模型目标层、准则层、子准则层和指标层之间的权重进行计算与分析,结果表明华快三期沿线的声环境对评价目标影响最大,其次为公路景观的自然性和生动性,公路沿线光环境和公路景观的服务性对评价目标影响最小。实地调查指标层各因子的得分,SWOT分析表明华南快线三期景观美质优势项目比较少,其优势包括景观明洞、沿线绿化覆盖率、沿线建筑小品特色等,劣势区包括路域自然景观美、噪声对睡眠的影响、噪声对精神的影响、噪声对日常生活的影响和沿线噪声实测值,劣势区项目是管理部门应该首先改善的。本文最后部分有针对性地研究公众对常用的防噪措施景观美质感知,结果表明景观明洞在美感、安全感和综合认知方面均得到了市民认可。
By the end of 2010, the total mileage of Chinese highway network has reached 3.95 million kilometers, including 65 thousand kilometers of express way, which ranks the second in the word. In the late 80s, personal car began to emerge in china, while the number has been increased to 70 million by 2010. Nowadays people come to be unsatisfactory with the road merely as a mean of transportation, and begin to concern more about the landscape along the road. The foreign countries have already had more than 70 years' history to investigate the road landscape, and achieve some success in this field, which improve the satisfactory of the road users enormously. Presently, the investigating of road landscape is developing vigorously in china. Due to a late starting, many problems of road landscape in our country need to be solved urgently, which include the field of basic theories and applications. To contribute to the development of road landscape in our country, this paper describes the investigation of the basic theories and applications based on the aesthetic subject and evaluation approach.
Firstly, this paper studies the preference and difference and dynamic visual features of the aesthetic subject, and then investigates the current condition of the subjectivity of evaluation index system and the lack of valid examination, and put forward the solutions in the end. The degree of public participation has always been a hard problem that disturbs the investigators. To solve it, the paper successfully incorporates the theory of customer satisfaction in economics with road landscape evaluation. Finally a new design approach of road landscape incorporated with concept of environment protection is presented. The following are the main work and achievements.
1. The development process of visual carrier of aesthetic subject is obtained based on the literatures of road landscape at home and abroad. From initial landscape symbols to paper photos to today's digital pictures, with the development of them, the research means are improved from on-the-spot investigation to indoor questionnaire survey until to now network survey. After this study, this paper investigates the preference and difference of the aesthetic subject through the photos of Yu-Zhan Expressway in Guangdong Province and concludes that the aesthetic subject prefer more of the landscape with better naturalness, especially the water landscape. This conclusion is consistent with the research at abroad and provides a theoretical reference to enhance the level of highway landscape construction. The study also found that the aesthetic subject of different degree, gender, age and regions have no significant perception difference, this basic theory provides a theoretical support of more in-depth study for later researchers.
2. Based on the dynamic vision of aesthetic subject referring to road landscape, and considering the economic capability, the researcher adopts the "on-board digital camera isometric change control system" developed by South China University of Technology road engineering institute. Further study finds that under the condition of dynamic vision, the green belt area in close range has the largest effect of aesthetic subject. This conclusion provides a theoretical support of road landscape for highway construction and environmental protection department, and also sets a precedent for road landscape evaluation researchers of making use of self-study equipments in research.
3. Application of mathematical methods to the present road landscape evaluation filed include describe factor method and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, etc. however, those methods have major defects in subjective strong and index validity uncertain in the aspect of determining the evaluation index system of highway landscape. In this paper, study the possibility of applying the factor analysis method to quantitative determining the evaluation index system of highway landscape, and the application of one landscape road proves that it has good application. Finely, using the structural equation tests the validity of this index system. This research makes up the defect of strong subjectivity and uncertain validity in present road landscape evaluation index.
4. Though the construction of road landscape severs the public, how to let ordinary people to understand the strong professional landscape and visual impact assessment, to improve public participation evaluation effect has been the difficult problem in highway landscape study during the landscape evaluation process. This paper researches introduction the customer satisfaction theory in economics to road landscape evaluation and also studies it actual result in road landscape evaluation. In this paper, firstly we briefly look back on the origin and development of the customer satisfaction theory and customer satisfaction model and introduce those theories to road landscape evaluation. According to public satisfaction construct with public satisfaction oriented highway landscape evaluation model, presenting the relationship between public satisfaction and road landscape evaluation. Though road landscape example, apply index system which pass through the reliability and validity test writing into "highway landscape evaluation satisfaction questionnaire”and data analysis proves the feasibility and the rationality of this model. Finally for this landscape further improve we apply SWOT analysis (strong and weak analysis) method and provide a quantitative, scientific advice.Thereby solve the hard problem of the depth of the public participating in highway landscape evaluation, and also provide theory and practical support for future public more widely and deeply being involved in highway landscape evaluation.
5. Blending environmental protection concept in highway landscape design is one of hot spot in current road landscape research. Guangzhou south China rapid trunk three phase as research object, build highway landscape evaluation index system and evaluation model which fuse the concept of environmental protection, and use AHP method to calculate and analyze model criterion layer, the son of rule layer, index layer. Results show that the first effect is its sound environment, and the second effect is the naturalness and vividness in road landscape, and light environment along the road and service of road landscape is the last effect. Field investigation index layer the score of each factor, SWOT analysis express landscape of Guangzhou south China rapid trunk three phase lacking of advantages, the advantages including landscape open cut tunnel, the green coverage ratio along the road and architectural features along, est. The disadvantage include road area natural landscape beauty,the influence of noise on sleep, the influence of noise on spirit, the influence of noise on everyday life and measure the noise along the road. Also management department should first pay attention to disadvantage area improvement. In the last part of this paper, focusing on studying public senses of commonly used the measure of noise proof, and the results show that open cut tunnel has got citizens recognition in the aspect of beauty, security, comprehensive cognitive.
引文
[1]刘书套.高速公路环境保护与绿化[M].北京:人民交通出版社,2001
[2]宋子炜.公路生态绿化植物群落光环境及绿量研究[D].北京:北京林业大学, 2009, 6
[3]姜正军,单永体,刘另夯.浅析山区公路噪声防治措施[J].山西建筑, 2009, 35(29): 343-344
[4]魏中华,王海忠,任福田.公路景观设计理论框架研究[J].北京工业大学学报2007, 33(1): 41-45
[5]任文堂,郄维周.交通噪声及其控制[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 1984: 179-334
[6]刘朝晖,秦仁杰.公路环境与景观设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2003, 8: 135-160
[7]陈津萍,姚忠杰,梁亚宁.浅谈公路绿化与环境保护[J].林业科技情报, 2002(2): 126-128
[8]杨传永.浅谈公路绿化设计[J].公路, 2003(11): 112-113
[9] U.S. Department of transportation. Flexibility in highway design[R]. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 1997.
[10]王云,李海峰,崔鹏等.卧龙自然保护区旅游公路景观规划与设计[J].公路, 2006, 5: 153～155
[11] (联邦德国)汉斯·洛伦茨.公路线形与环境设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 1986
[12]张玉芬.高等级公路建设与环境协调发展若干问题的探讨[J].交通环保, 1999, 20(1): 28-30
[13]崔文波.高速公路景观研究初探[D].南京:南京林业大学,2003, 5
[14]史文中,贺志勇,张肖宁.公路景观设计与评价[J].中外公路, 2002, 22(5): l-4
[15]陈建新.高速公路路际景观系统研究[D].武汉:武汉理工大学, 2005, 5
[16] (日)土木学会,编,章俊华,陆伟,雷芸,译.道路景观设计[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2003
[17]冯先德.旅游区公路选线及景观设计[D].长沙:中南大学, 2007, 4
[18] Terry C. Daniel. Wither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning[J], 2001, 54: 267-281
[19]俞孔坚.园林风景偏好与社会文化背景的关系.《景观:文化、生态与感知》[M].北京:科学出版社, 1998
[20]俞孔坚.专家与公众审美差异研究及对策.《景观:文化、生态与感知》[M].北京:科学出版社, 1998
[21]刘福智,等.景园规划与设计[M].北京:机械工业出版社, 2004
[22] Hornbeck, P. L. and G. A. Okerland. Jr. Visual values for the highway user[M]. Washington D.C.: USDT, Federal Highway Administration, 1973
[23] Daniel, T.C. and R.S. Boster. Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method[M]. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167, 1976
[24] Thurstone, L. L. A law of comparative judgement[J]. Phychological Review, 1927: 273-286
[25] Buhyoff, G.J. and W.A. Leuschner. Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands[J]. Forest Science, 1978,24(3): 424-432
[26] Brush, R. O. 1979. The attractiveness of woodlands: perceptions of forest landowners in Massachusetts[J]. Forest Science,1979,25: 495-506
[27] Schroeder,H.W. and T.C.Daniel. Progress in predicting the perceived scenic beauty of forest landscapes[J]. Forest Science, 1981, 27(1): 71-80
[28] Gary G.C., Daniel T.C. Scenic landscape assessment: the effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2000,49:111-124
[29] Jones and Jones. Visual resource management for highway[M]. Washington D.C.: USDT, Federal Highway Administration National Highway Institute and Office of Environmental Policy, 1977: 1-12
[30] Gilg, A. W. Land use and landscape. In an introduction rural geography[M]. London: Edward Arnold. 1985, P: 127-137
[31] Hull, R. B. IV. Interpreting scenic beauty estimates[J]. Landscape Journal, 1989,8: 24-27
[32] Uzzell, D. L. Environmental psychological perspectives on landscape[J]. Landscape Research, 1991,16(1): 3-10
[33] Robert B., Chenoweth R.E., Barman T. Group difference in the enjoyability of driving through rural landscapes[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000,47:39-45
[34] Akbar K. F., Hale W.H.G. Headley Assessment of scenic beauty of the roadside vegetation in northern England[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2003,63: 139-150
[35] Meitner M.J. Scenic beauty of river views in the Grand Canyon: relating perceptual judgments to locations[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004,68: 3-13
[36]夏越超,冯正霖.推出GBM工程促进公路标准化美化[J].公路, 1989, 03: 5-10
[37]交通部公路司.新理念公路设计指南[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2005
[38]熊广忠.论公路美学的研究与应用[J].中国公路学报,1994, 1: 40-46
[39]熊广忠.城市道路美学[M].北京:中国建筑出版社, 1990
[40]张肖宁,李红杰,首艳芳.基于结构方程建模的道路景观评价[J].华南理工大学学报(自然科学版),2009 (37), 11: 17-21
[41]张肖宁.铺装景观[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2000
[42]陈丙秋,张肖宁.道路铺装景观设计[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2005.
[43]孙丙湘.道路绿化和美化工程[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 1983
[44]任福田.交通工程心理学[M].北京:北京工业大学出版社, 1993
[45]魏常林.交通美学[M].西安:陕西科学技术出版社, 1993
[46]王健.交通美学:理论与实践[M].北京:科学技术文献出版社, 1992
[47]陈雨人,朱照宏.道路环境影响评价指标体系的研究[J].同济大学学报, 1997, 25(6): 640-644
[48]赵剑强,编著,公路交通与环境保护[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2001
[49]刘滨谊.城市道路景观规划设计[M].南京:东南大学出版社, 2002
[50]梁立杰.生态公路理念及其评价体系研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2004
[51]王军锋.道路景观评价指标体系研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2005
[52]程胜高.高速公路环境评价与发展[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社, 2002
[53]陈鑫峰,贾黎明,王雁,等.京西山区风景游憩林季相景观评价及经营技术原则[J].北京林业大学学报, 2008, 30 (4) : 39-46
[54]彭波,李文茨,杜迁,等.道路绿化美学在高速公路中应用[J].长安大学学报(自然科学版), 2002, 22 (2) : 28-31
[55]刘朝晖,张映雪.公路线形与环境设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2003
[56]张阳.公路景观学[M].北京:中国建材工业出版社, 2004
[57]陈力.景观影响评价中“景观”的内涵和应用探讨[J].环境污染与防治, 2004, 26 (2): 148-153
[58]李昆仑.层次分析法在城市道路景观评价中的运用[J].武汉大学学报(工学版), 2005, 38 (1): 143～147
[59]王云,崔鹏,江玉林,陈学平.公路景观类型美学感知差异及其原因初步分析[J].中外公路, 2006, 1: 173-177
[60]杜智民,王建军.基于多级模糊评价方法的公路景观评价分析[J].公路交通科技, 2007, 24 (12): 144-148
[61]徐锦海.肇庆市区道路绿化带植物景观评价研究[J].生态科学, 2007, 26 (6): 513-518
[62]于守超,翟付顺,张秀省,王永兵.基于SBE法的聊城市公园植物景观量化评价[J].北方园艺, 2009 (8): 223-226
[63]贺志勇.公路景观评价与3S技术应用研究[D].广州:华南理工大学, 2003, 10
[64]秦晓春.公路景观评价的感知理论与方法研究[D].广州:华南理工大学, 2008, 10
[65]朱小刚.高速公路视觉空间研究及其在景观规划中的应用[D].广州:华南理工大学, 2010, 6
[66]于胜男.高等级公路景观设计与评价[D].北京:北京工业大学,2003.5
[67]魏中华.公路景观设计理论研究[D].北京:北京工业大学, 2005, 3
[68]杜智民.基于RS、GIS的高速公路生态景观技术研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2009, 2
[69]李曼两.公路景观设计研究与工程实践分析[D].西安:长安大学, 2007, 5
[70]慎小嶷.高速公路互通立交桥建筑的景观设计研究[D].长沙:长沙理工大学, 2006, 5
[71]陈兆君.公路环境景观设计理念探讨及模糊综合评价方法研究[D].长沙:长沙理工大学, 2007, 5
[72]张维妮.景观设计初步[M].北京:气象出版社, 2004, 8
[73]俞孔坚.论景观概念及其研究发展[J].北京林业大学学报, 1987 (4): 433-439
[74] Zube, E. H., J. L. Sell and J. G. Taylor. Landscape perception: research, application and theory[J]. Landscape Planning, 1982, 9: 1-34
[75] Gobster, P.H. 1999. An ecological aesthetic for forest landscape management. Landscape Journal. 18: 54-64.
[76] Lothian, A. (1999). Landscape and philosophy of aesthetic: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44, 177-198.
[77]俞孔坚,等.论乡土景观及其对现代景观的意义[J].华中建筑, 2005(4): 123-126
[78]舒楠.楠溪江流域乡土文化与农村园林[J].建筑师, 1997, (3): 30-32
[79]林显锋,符锌砂,等.融合地域文化的公路景观设计[J].中外公路,2008, 28 (1): 13-16
[80]马库斯,弗朗西斯.人性场所:城市开放空间设计导则[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2001
[81]蔡志洲.中国公路景观文化及实例[J].中国园林, 2004 (4): 42-46
[82]李红杰,张肖宁,首艳芳.高速公路景观的四维性研究[J].中外公路, 2008, 30(3): 15-17
[83]魏中华,王珊.公路景观的色彩效应[J].北京工业大学学报, 2004,30 (3): 329-332
[84]流本孝雄,藤尺英昭.色彩心理学[M].成同社译.北京:科学技术出版社, 1989
[85]聂庆娟,孟朝,陈洁.色彩在园林中的应用[J].河北林果研究, 2002, 17(3): 261-263
[86] Michael Busselle,著,隋梅,译.风景摄影[M].上海:上海书画出版社, 2002
[87]张宝鑫,白淑媛.地被植物景观设计与应用[M].北京机械工业出版社, 2006
[88] Lynch, K. The Image of the City[M]. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1960
[89] Litton, R. B., Jr. Forest landscape description and inventories-a basis for land planning and design[J]. U.S. For. Service Research Paper PSW-49. Pacific S.W. For. And Range Exp. Stn., Berkeley, California, 1968
[90] Cherem, G. J. Looking through the eyes of the public, or public images as social indicators of aesthetic opportunity[J]. In aesthetic opportunity colloquium proceedings, 1973, UT: Utah State University
[91] Chenoweth, R. E. Visitor employed photography: a potential tool for landscape architecture[J]. Landscape Journal, 1984, 3(2): 36-43
[92] Palmer J.F., Hoffman R.E. Rating reliability and representation validity in scenic landscape assessment[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2001,54:149-16
[93] Kongjian Yu. Cultural variations in landscape preference: comparisons among Chinese sub-groups and Western design experts[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1995, 32: 107-126
[94] Wherrett J.R. Issues in using the Internet as a medium for landscape preference research[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1999, 45: 209-219
[95] Arriaza M, Canas-Ortega J. F.. Canas-Madueno J.A. Assessing the visual quality of rural Landscapes[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004, 69: 115-125
[96] Michael Roth. Validating the use of Internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment-an empirical study from Germany[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2006, 78: 179-192
[97] Clay G.R, Smidt R.K. Assessing the validity and reliability of descriptor variables used in scenic highway analysis[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004,66: 239-255
[98]王云.风景区公路景观评价与环境保护设计[D].北京:中国科学院研究生院, 2007,5
[99] Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., Wendt, J.S.. Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material[J]. Percept. Psychophys, 1972, 12(4): 354–356.
[100] Ulrich, R. S.. Natural versus urban scenes: some psychological effects. Environ. Behav[J]. 1981, 13 (5): 523–556
[101] Herzog, T. R., Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R.. The prediction of preference for unfamiliar urban places[J]. Popul. Environ, 1982, 5: 43–59
[102] Purcell, A. T., Lamb, R. J.. Landscape perception: an examination and empirical investigation of two central issues in the area[J]. J. Environ. Manage, 1984, 19: 31–63
[103] Herzog, T. R.. A cognitive analyses of preference for natural environments: mountains, canyons and deserts[J]. Landsc. J., 1987, 6 (2): 140–152
[104] Hartig, T.. Nature experience in transactional perspective[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1993, 25: 17–36.
[105] Coeterier, J. F.. Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,1996, 34: 27–44
[106] Van den Berg, A.G., Vlek, C.A.J., Coeterier, J.F.. Group difference in the aesthetic evaluation of nature development plans: a multi-level approach[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology,1998, 18: 141–157
[107] Kaplan, R.. Impact of urban nature: a theoretical analysis[J]. Urban Ecol, 1984, 8, 189-197
[108] Anderson, L. M. , Stokes, G.. S.. Planting in parking lots to improve perceived attractiveness and security[J]. J. Arboric. 1989, 15 (1): 7-10
[109] Kaplan, R., Austin, M.E.,2003. Out in the country: sprawl and the quest for nature nearby[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2003 69: 235-243
[110] Schroeder, H.W., Anderson, L.M.,. Perception of personal safety in urban recreation sites[J]. J. Leisure Res. 1984, 16(2): 178-194
[111] Buhyoff G. J., Leuschner W. A. Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands[J]. For.Sci., 1978, 24: 424-432
[112] Jackson R.H., et al. Assessment of the environment al impact of high voltage power transmission lines[J]. Environ.Manage., 1978, 6: 153-170
[113] Brush R.O. The attractiveness of woodlands: perceptions of forest land owner sin Massachusetts[J]. For.Sci.,1979, 25(3): 495-50
[114] Daniel T. C., Vining J. Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality[M]. Behavior and the Natural Environment, New York: Plenum Press, 1983: 39-84
[115] Vodak M.C.. Scenic impacts of eastern hard wood management[J]. For.Sci., 1985, 31(2): 289-301
[116] Jensen F.S.. Landscape managers and politicians perception of the forest and landscape preferences of the population[J]. For. & Landsc. Res., 1993, 1: 79-93
[117]袁伟.城市道路环境中汽车驾驶员动态视觉特性试验研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2008, 6
[118]吴瑞麟,沈建武.高等级公路道路“视距”取值问题探讨[J].中南公路工程, 1994 (71): 14-17
[119] Harkey, D. L.. Operational Characteristics of Longer Combination Behicles and Related Geometric Design Issues[R]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1996, 1523: 22-28
[120]张雨化.道路勘测设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2001
[121]交通部公路管理司中国公路学会.公路工程技术标准(JTJ 001-97)[S].北京:人民交通出版社, 1997: 10-12
[122]刘哲义.高速公路驾驶员生/心理特点对行车安全的危害与预防[J].公路交通科技, 1999, 16(3): 72-75
[123]杜姗姗,高速公路广告牌对驾驶员视觉影响的研究[D],西安:长安大学, 2007, 5
[124]王红,基于眼动仪的高速公路广告牌对安全驾驶影响的研究[D],西安:长安大学, 2007, 5
[125]毛保华.评价指标体系分析及其权重系数的确定[J].系统工程, 1991, 9(4): 37-41
[126]张阳,董小林.公路景观及视觉影响评价方法研究[J].西安公路交通大学学报, 1999, 19(4): 65-67
[127] Federal Highway Administration (FHA), 1999. Byways Beginnings: Understanding, Inventorying, and Evaluating a Byway’s Intrinsic Qualities. National Scenic Byways Program Publication, Washington, DC, 80 pp
[128]间兴,苗永美.基于多元统计分析的风景区景观评价研究[J].林业实用技术, 2010, 6: 52-54
[129]杜智民,王建军.石灰岩山区的公路景观评价指标体系[J].长安大学学报(自然科学版), 2008, 28(3): 72-75
[130] Turner, L. and Reisinger, Y. Importance and expectations of destination attributes for Japanese tourists to Hawaii and the Gold Coadst compared[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Reearch, 1999, 4(2): 1-18
[131] Yvette Reisinger, Lindsay W. Turner.著,朱路平,译.旅游跨文化行为研究[M].天津:南开大学出版社, 2004
[132]张文彤.统计分析教程(高级篇)[M].北京:北京希望电子出版社, 2002
[133]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2004
[134]易丹辉.结构方程模型方法与应用[D].北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2008
[135] Hou T J, Cheng Z J. Application and analytical strategies of structural equation modeling [J]. Psychological Exploration, 1999, 1: 55-56
[136]中华人民共和国交通部.公路建设项目环境影响评价规范(JTGB03-2006)[S].北京:人民交通出版社, 2006
[137]戴明新.公路环境保护受测[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2004
[138]刘岚芳.基于民众满意度的社会发展评价研究[D].北京:首都经济贸易大学, 2006
[139] Hoppe E. Ergfolg and Misserfolg[J]. Psicologische Forschung, 1930: 41-62
[140] Lewin, K. Principles of Topological Psychology[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936
[141] Hunt, H. Keith. Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction[M]. Cambridge: Marketing Science Institute, 1977
[142] Oliver, Richard L. A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions[J]. Journal of Marketing Reaearch, 1980, 17(9): 460-469
[143] Oliver, Richard L. Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction Process in Retail Setting[J]. Journal of Reatailing, 1981, 57(9): 25-48
[144]董小林,赵方周.公路建设项目社会环境评价的公众参与方法[J].公路交通科技, 1998, 15(1): 71-73
[145]世界银行技术文件(第139号).环境评价资料汇编.北京:国家环境保护局, 1993
[146]赖曦,成书玲.公路参与环境保护活动的现状研究[J].法制与社会, 2008, 1: 58-59
[147]张肖宁.沥青路面施工质量控制与保证[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2009
[148]袁卫宁,任征.高等级公路环境影响综合评价[J].西安公路交通大学学报, 1999, 19(增刊): 22-25
[149]程胜高,鱼红霞,殷坤龙.高速公路生态环境评价的研究[J].检测与评价, 2000, 8: 21-23
[150]周正祥,凌征武,温可,等.高速公路环境影响后评价单要素指标体系及量化模型研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2008, 2(1): 93-96
[151]张阳,董小林.公路景观及视觉影响评价方法研究[J].西安公路交通大学学报, 1999, 19(4): 67-69
[152]张永发,王鸿庆.公路景观的评价及建设[J].油气田地面工程, 2003, 21(2): 74
[153]黄述芳.公路声屏障选型及综合评价的研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2002, 5
[154]马娜.上海轨道交通明珠线二期全封闭声屏障工程设计[J].现代城市轨道交通, 2005, (3): 41-43
[155]王庭佛,徐剑.道路全封闭声屏障的实践[J].环境工程, 2004(22), 6: 50-54
[2]宋子炜.公路生态绿化植物群落光环境及绿量研究[D].北京:北京林业大学, 2009, 6
[3]姜正军,单永体,刘另夯.浅析山区公路噪声防治措施[J].山西建筑, 2009, 35(29): 343-344
[4]魏中华,王海忠,任福田.公路景观设计理论框架研究[J].北京工业大学学报2007, 33(1): 41-45
[5]任文堂,郄维周.交通噪声及其控制[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 1984: 179-334
[6]刘朝晖,秦仁杰.公路环境与景观设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2003, 8: 135-160
[7]陈津萍,姚忠杰,梁亚宁.浅谈公路绿化与环境保护[J].林业科技情报, 2002(2): 126-128
[8]杨传永.浅谈公路绿化设计[J].公路, 2003(11): 112-113
[9] U.S. Department of transportation. Flexibility in highway design[R]. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 1997.
[10]王云,李海峰,崔鹏等.卧龙自然保护区旅游公路景观规划与设计[J].公路, 2006, 5: 153～155
[11] (联邦德国)汉斯·洛伦茨.公路线形与环境设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 1986
[12]张玉芬.高等级公路建设与环境协调发展若干问题的探讨[J].交通环保, 1999, 20(1): 28-30
[13]崔文波.高速公路景观研究初探[D].南京:南京林业大学,2003, 5
[14]史文中,贺志勇,张肖宁.公路景观设计与评价[J].中外公路, 2002, 22(5): l-4
[15]陈建新.高速公路路际景观系统研究[D].武汉:武汉理工大学, 2005, 5
[16] (日)土木学会,编,章俊华,陆伟,雷芸,译.道路景观设计[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2003
[17]冯先德.旅游区公路选线及景观设计[D].长沙:中南大学, 2007, 4
[18] Terry C. Daniel. Wither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning[J], 2001, 54: 267-281
[19]俞孔坚.园林风景偏好与社会文化背景的关系.《景观:文化、生态与感知》[M].北京:科学出版社, 1998
[20]俞孔坚.专家与公众审美差异研究及对策.《景观:文化、生态与感知》[M].北京:科学出版社, 1998
[21]刘福智,等.景园规划与设计[M].北京:机械工业出版社, 2004
[22] Hornbeck, P. L. and G. A. Okerland. Jr. Visual values for the highway user[M]. Washington D.C.: USDT, Federal Highway Administration, 1973
[23] Daniel, T.C. and R.S. Boster. Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method[M]. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167, 1976
[24] Thurstone, L. L. A law of comparative judgement[J]. Phychological Review, 1927: 273-286
[25] Buhyoff, G.J. and W.A. Leuschner. Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands[J]. Forest Science, 1978,24(3): 424-432
[26] Brush, R. O. 1979. The attractiveness of woodlands: perceptions of forest landowners in Massachusetts[J]. Forest Science,1979,25: 495-506
[27] Schroeder,H.W. and T.C.Daniel. Progress in predicting the perceived scenic beauty of forest landscapes[J]. Forest Science, 1981, 27(1): 71-80
[28] Gary G.C., Daniel T.C. Scenic landscape assessment: the effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2000,49:111-124
[29] Jones and Jones. Visual resource management for highway[M]. Washington D.C.: USDT, Federal Highway Administration National Highway Institute and Office of Environmental Policy, 1977: 1-12
[30] Gilg, A. W. Land use and landscape. In an introduction rural geography[M]. London: Edward Arnold. 1985, P: 127-137
[31] Hull, R. B. IV. Interpreting scenic beauty estimates[J]. Landscape Journal, 1989,8: 24-27
[32] Uzzell, D. L. Environmental psychological perspectives on landscape[J]. Landscape Research, 1991,16(1): 3-10
[33] Robert B., Chenoweth R.E., Barman T. Group difference in the enjoyability of driving through rural landscapes[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000,47:39-45
[34] Akbar K. F., Hale W.H.G. Headley Assessment of scenic beauty of the roadside vegetation in northern England[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2003,63: 139-150
[35] Meitner M.J. Scenic beauty of river views in the Grand Canyon: relating perceptual judgments to locations[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004,68: 3-13
[36]夏越超,冯正霖.推出GBM工程促进公路标准化美化[J].公路, 1989, 03: 5-10
[37]交通部公路司.新理念公路设计指南[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2005
[38]熊广忠.论公路美学的研究与应用[J].中国公路学报,1994, 1: 40-46
[39]熊广忠.城市道路美学[M].北京:中国建筑出版社, 1990
[40]张肖宁,李红杰,首艳芳.基于结构方程建模的道路景观评价[J].华南理工大学学报(自然科学版),2009 (37), 11: 17-21
[41]张肖宁.铺装景观[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2000
[42]陈丙秋,张肖宁.道路铺装景观设计[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2005.
[43]孙丙湘.道路绿化和美化工程[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 1983
[44]任福田.交通工程心理学[M].北京:北京工业大学出版社, 1993
[45]魏常林.交通美学[M].西安:陕西科学技术出版社, 1993
[46]王健.交通美学:理论与实践[M].北京:科学技术文献出版社, 1992
[47]陈雨人,朱照宏.道路环境影响评价指标体系的研究[J].同济大学学报, 1997, 25(6): 640-644
[48]赵剑强,编著,公路交通与环境保护[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2001
[49]刘滨谊.城市道路景观规划设计[M].南京:东南大学出版社, 2002
[50]梁立杰.生态公路理念及其评价体系研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2004
[51]王军锋.道路景观评价指标体系研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2005
[52]程胜高.高速公路环境评价与发展[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社, 2002
[53]陈鑫峰,贾黎明,王雁,等.京西山区风景游憩林季相景观评价及经营技术原则[J].北京林业大学学报, 2008, 30 (4) : 39-46
[54]彭波,李文茨,杜迁,等.道路绿化美学在高速公路中应用[J].长安大学学报(自然科学版), 2002, 22 (2) : 28-31
[55]刘朝晖,张映雪.公路线形与环境设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2003
[56]张阳.公路景观学[M].北京:中国建材工业出版社, 2004
[57]陈力.景观影响评价中“景观”的内涵和应用探讨[J].环境污染与防治, 2004, 26 (2): 148-153
[58]李昆仑.层次分析法在城市道路景观评价中的运用[J].武汉大学学报(工学版), 2005, 38 (1): 143～147
[59]王云,崔鹏,江玉林,陈学平.公路景观类型美学感知差异及其原因初步分析[J].中外公路, 2006, 1: 173-177
[60]杜智民,王建军.基于多级模糊评价方法的公路景观评价分析[J].公路交通科技, 2007, 24 (12): 144-148
[61]徐锦海.肇庆市区道路绿化带植物景观评价研究[J].生态科学, 2007, 26 (6): 513-518
[62]于守超,翟付顺,张秀省,王永兵.基于SBE法的聊城市公园植物景观量化评价[J].北方园艺, 2009 (8): 223-226
[63]贺志勇.公路景观评价与3S技术应用研究[D].广州:华南理工大学, 2003, 10
[64]秦晓春.公路景观评价的感知理论与方法研究[D].广州:华南理工大学, 2008, 10
[65]朱小刚.高速公路视觉空间研究及其在景观规划中的应用[D].广州:华南理工大学, 2010, 6
[66]于胜男.高等级公路景观设计与评价[D].北京:北京工业大学,2003.5
[67]魏中华.公路景观设计理论研究[D].北京:北京工业大学, 2005, 3
[68]杜智民.基于RS、GIS的高速公路生态景观技术研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2009, 2
[69]李曼两.公路景观设计研究与工程实践分析[D].西安:长安大学, 2007, 5
[70]慎小嶷.高速公路互通立交桥建筑的景观设计研究[D].长沙:长沙理工大学, 2006, 5
[71]陈兆君.公路环境景观设计理念探讨及模糊综合评价方法研究[D].长沙:长沙理工大学, 2007, 5
[72]张维妮.景观设计初步[M].北京:气象出版社, 2004, 8
[73]俞孔坚.论景观概念及其研究发展[J].北京林业大学学报, 1987 (4): 433-439
[74] Zube, E. H., J. L. Sell and J. G. Taylor. Landscape perception: research, application and theory[J]. Landscape Planning, 1982, 9: 1-34
[75] Gobster, P.H. 1999. An ecological aesthetic for forest landscape management. Landscape Journal. 18: 54-64.
[76] Lothian, A. (1999). Landscape and philosophy of aesthetic: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44, 177-198.
[77]俞孔坚,等.论乡土景观及其对现代景观的意义[J].华中建筑, 2005(4): 123-126
[78]舒楠.楠溪江流域乡土文化与农村园林[J].建筑师, 1997, (3): 30-32
[79]林显锋,符锌砂,等.融合地域文化的公路景观设计[J].中外公路,2008, 28 (1): 13-16
[80]马库斯,弗朗西斯.人性场所:城市开放空间设计导则[M].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2001
[81]蔡志洲.中国公路景观文化及实例[J].中国园林, 2004 (4): 42-46
[82]李红杰,张肖宁,首艳芳.高速公路景观的四维性研究[J].中外公路, 2008, 30(3): 15-17
[83]魏中华,王珊.公路景观的色彩效应[J].北京工业大学学报, 2004,30 (3): 329-332
[84]流本孝雄,藤尺英昭.色彩心理学[M].成同社译.北京:科学技术出版社, 1989
[85]聂庆娟,孟朝,陈洁.色彩在园林中的应用[J].河北林果研究, 2002, 17(3): 261-263
[86] Michael Busselle,著,隋梅,译.风景摄影[M].上海:上海书画出版社, 2002
[87]张宝鑫,白淑媛.地被植物景观设计与应用[M].北京机械工业出版社, 2006
[88] Lynch, K. The Image of the City[M]. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1960
[89] Litton, R. B., Jr. Forest landscape description and inventories-a basis for land planning and design[J]. U.S. For. Service Research Paper PSW-49. Pacific S.W. For. And Range Exp. Stn., Berkeley, California, 1968
[90] Cherem, G. J. Looking through the eyes of the public, or public images as social indicators of aesthetic opportunity[J]. In aesthetic opportunity colloquium proceedings, 1973, UT: Utah State University
[91] Chenoweth, R. E. Visitor employed photography: a potential tool for landscape architecture[J]. Landscape Journal, 1984, 3(2): 36-43
[92] Palmer J.F., Hoffman R.E. Rating reliability and representation validity in scenic landscape assessment[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2001,54:149-16
[93] Kongjian Yu. Cultural variations in landscape preference: comparisons among Chinese sub-groups and Western design experts[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1995, 32: 107-126
[94] Wherrett J.R. Issues in using the Internet as a medium for landscape preference research[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1999, 45: 209-219
[95] Arriaza M, Canas-Ortega J. F.. Canas-Madueno J.A. Assessing the visual quality of rural Landscapes[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004, 69: 115-125
[96] Michael Roth. Validating the use of Internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment-an empirical study from Germany[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2006, 78: 179-192
[97] Clay G.R, Smidt R.K. Assessing the validity and reliability of descriptor variables used in scenic highway analysis[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004,66: 239-255
[98]王云.风景区公路景观评价与环境保护设计[D].北京:中国科学院研究生院, 2007,5
[99] Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., Wendt, J.S.. Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material[J]. Percept. Psychophys, 1972, 12(4): 354–356.
[100] Ulrich, R. S.. Natural versus urban scenes: some psychological effects. Environ. Behav[J]. 1981, 13 (5): 523–556
[101] Herzog, T. R., Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R.. The prediction of preference for unfamiliar urban places[J]. Popul. Environ, 1982, 5: 43–59
[102] Purcell, A. T., Lamb, R. J.. Landscape perception: an examination and empirical investigation of two central issues in the area[J]. J. Environ. Manage, 1984, 19: 31–63
[103] Herzog, T. R.. A cognitive analyses of preference for natural environments: mountains, canyons and deserts[J]. Landsc. J., 1987, 6 (2): 140–152
[104] Hartig, T.. Nature experience in transactional perspective[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1993, 25: 17–36.
[105] Coeterier, J. F.. Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,1996, 34: 27–44
[106] Van den Berg, A.G., Vlek, C.A.J., Coeterier, J.F.. Group difference in the aesthetic evaluation of nature development plans: a multi-level approach[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology,1998, 18: 141–157
[107] Kaplan, R.. Impact of urban nature: a theoretical analysis[J]. Urban Ecol, 1984, 8, 189-197
[108] Anderson, L. M. , Stokes, G.. S.. Planting in parking lots to improve perceived attractiveness and security[J]. J. Arboric. 1989, 15 (1): 7-10
[109] Kaplan, R., Austin, M.E.,2003. Out in the country: sprawl and the quest for nature nearby[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2003 69: 235-243
[110] Schroeder, H.W., Anderson, L.M.,. Perception of personal safety in urban recreation sites[J]. J. Leisure Res. 1984, 16(2): 178-194
[111] Buhyoff G. J., Leuschner W. A. Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands[J]. For.Sci., 1978, 24: 424-432
[112] Jackson R.H., et al. Assessment of the environment al impact of high voltage power transmission lines[J]. Environ.Manage., 1978, 6: 153-170
[113] Brush R.O. The attractiveness of woodlands: perceptions of forest land owner sin Massachusetts[J]. For.Sci.,1979, 25(3): 495-50
[114] Daniel T. C., Vining J. Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality[M]. Behavior and the Natural Environment, New York: Plenum Press, 1983: 39-84
[115] Vodak M.C.. Scenic impacts of eastern hard wood management[J]. For.Sci., 1985, 31(2): 289-301
[116] Jensen F.S.. Landscape managers and politicians perception of the forest and landscape preferences of the population[J]. For. & Landsc. Res., 1993, 1: 79-93
[117]袁伟.城市道路环境中汽车驾驶员动态视觉特性试验研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2008, 6
[118]吴瑞麟,沈建武.高等级公路道路“视距”取值问题探讨[J].中南公路工程, 1994 (71): 14-17
[119] Harkey, D. L.. Operational Characteristics of Longer Combination Behicles and Related Geometric Design Issues[R]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1996, 1523: 22-28
[120]张雨化.道路勘测设计[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2001
[121]交通部公路管理司中国公路学会.公路工程技术标准(JTJ 001-97)[S].北京:人民交通出版社, 1997: 10-12
[122]刘哲义.高速公路驾驶员生/心理特点对行车安全的危害与预防[J].公路交通科技, 1999, 16(3): 72-75
[123]杜姗姗,高速公路广告牌对驾驶员视觉影响的研究[D],西安:长安大学, 2007, 5
[124]王红,基于眼动仪的高速公路广告牌对安全驾驶影响的研究[D],西安:长安大学, 2007, 5
[125]毛保华.评价指标体系分析及其权重系数的确定[J].系统工程, 1991, 9(4): 37-41
[126]张阳,董小林.公路景观及视觉影响评价方法研究[J].西安公路交通大学学报, 1999, 19(4): 65-67
[127] Federal Highway Administration (FHA), 1999. Byways Beginnings: Understanding, Inventorying, and Evaluating a Byway’s Intrinsic Qualities. National Scenic Byways Program Publication, Washington, DC, 80 pp
[128]间兴,苗永美.基于多元统计分析的风景区景观评价研究[J].林业实用技术, 2010, 6: 52-54
[129]杜智民,王建军.石灰岩山区的公路景观评价指标体系[J].长安大学学报(自然科学版), 2008, 28(3): 72-75
[130] Turner, L. and Reisinger, Y. Importance and expectations of destination attributes for Japanese tourists to Hawaii and the Gold Coadst compared[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Reearch, 1999, 4(2): 1-18
[131] Yvette Reisinger, Lindsay W. Turner.著,朱路平,译.旅游跨文化行为研究[M].天津:南开大学出版社, 2004
[132]张文彤.统计分析教程(高级篇)[M].北京:北京希望电子出版社, 2002
[133]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用[M].北京:教育科学出版社, 2004
[134]易丹辉.结构方程模型方法与应用[D].北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2008
[135] Hou T J, Cheng Z J. Application and analytical strategies of structural equation modeling [J]. Psychological Exploration, 1999, 1: 55-56
[136]中华人民共和国交通部.公路建设项目环境影响评价规范(JTGB03-2006)[S].北京:人民交通出版社, 2006
[137]戴明新.公路环境保护受测[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2004
[138]刘岚芳.基于民众满意度的社会发展评价研究[D].北京:首都经济贸易大学, 2006
[139] Hoppe E. Ergfolg and Misserfolg[J]. Psicologische Forschung, 1930: 41-62
[140] Lewin, K. Principles of Topological Psychology[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936
[141] Hunt, H. Keith. Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction[M]. Cambridge: Marketing Science Institute, 1977
[142] Oliver, Richard L. A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions[J]. Journal of Marketing Reaearch, 1980, 17(9): 460-469
[143] Oliver, Richard L. Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction Process in Retail Setting[J]. Journal of Reatailing, 1981, 57(9): 25-48
[144]董小林,赵方周.公路建设项目社会环境评价的公众参与方法[J].公路交通科技, 1998, 15(1): 71-73
[145]世界银行技术文件(第139号).环境评价资料汇编.北京:国家环境保护局, 1993
[146]赖曦,成书玲.公路参与环境保护活动的现状研究[J].法制与社会, 2008, 1: 58-59
[147]张肖宁.沥青路面施工质量控制与保证[M].北京:人民交通出版社, 2009
[148]袁卫宁,任征.高等级公路环境影响综合评价[J].西安公路交通大学学报, 1999, 19(增刊): 22-25
[149]程胜高,鱼红霞,殷坤龙.高速公路生态环境评价的研究[J].检测与评价, 2000, 8: 21-23
[150]周正祥,凌征武,温可,等.高速公路环境影响后评价单要素指标体系及量化模型研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2008, 2(1): 93-96
[151]张阳,董小林.公路景观及视觉影响评价方法研究[J].西安公路交通大学学报, 1999, 19(4): 67-69
[152]张永发,王鸿庆.公路景观的评价及建设[J].油气田地面工程, 2003, 21(2): 74
[153]黄述芳.公路声屏障选型及综合评价的研究[D].西安:长安大学, 2002, 5
[154]马娜.上海轨道交通明珠线二期全封闭声屏障工程设计[J].现代城市轨道交通, 2005, (3): 41-43
[155]王庭佛,徐剑.道路全封闭声屏障的实践[J].环境工程, 2004(22), 6: 50-54