Li, He, Li and Xu ask the question on which neuroarchitecture ultimately stands or falls: whether neural measurements can become architecturally actionable without being reduced to decorative scientific evidence. Their PRISMA review of seventeen neuroimaging studies maps the field’s methodological convergence around EEG, frequently coupled with VR, and extracts reported relations among proportion, curvature, openness, relaxation–arousal balance and aesthetic valuation. The authors move further by discussing candidate design thresholds, multimodal assessment and computational optimisation, thereby explicitly translating from neural decoding toward intervention. Yet the review is strongest where it identifies its own field’s fragility: only a small fraction of studies operate in real environments, protocols remain heterogeneous, cultural and individual differences are undersampled, and single-variable experiments poorly represent complex architectural situations. Its methodological contribution is therefore double: it catalogues measurable spatial–neural relations while delimiting their evidential scope. The wider bridge is evidence-based design, understood not as universal prescription but as a translation problem between controlled experiment, situated experience and architectural decision.
