Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
aesthetics: psychological theories (topics (stimulus information and…
aesthetics: psychological theories
topics
familiarity and mere exposure
Zajonc 1968
words that occur more frequently are prefered
found higher production of a product in America is correlated with word preference of the name of the product
possible explanations for correlation
occurrence leads to preference
preference leads to occurence
Experiment 1 and 2
12 "Turkish words" (nonsense), 12 Chinese characters, 6 frequencies; 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 25, task: guess if the word means same thing "good" or "bad"
found: positive correlation between the frequency and how positive participants rated the meaning
Experiment 3
12 faces, university graduates, 7 point scale on likeability, 6 frequencies: 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 25
found: positive correlation between frequency and favorability of face
Experiment 4
hyp: novel things are scary and therefore disliked, people prefer what they know (evolutionary), noel things induce negative arousal (skin conductance), preference should increase with decreasing arousal
found: increasing skin conductance with decreasing arousal
Cutting 2003
maintenance of artistic cannons through mere exposure
Caillebotte: impressionist collector
PP asked 2 AFC of Caillebotte chosen art vs art published frequently across 20th century
found frequency was the only predictor of preference
Bornstein 1989
boundary conditions of mere exposure
boredom is a limiting factor
preference reaches a limit
for the best results: brief, subliminal, heterogeneous presentations of 10-20 stimuli
stimulus information and complexity
Berlyne
The "new experimental aesthetics" Berlyne (1974)
concentrates on formal/structural "collative stimulus properties; complexity, redundancy, ambiguity, familiarity (collate info)
collative properties produce arousal: curve, simple familiar > simple novel >
optimum
> complex familiar > complex novel.
measuring collative properties
information theory
breaking information down into fundamental units or symbols
measuring and comparing information mathematically in bits
music: number of pitches, tone, durations, loudness levels
visual art: number of lines, colours, sizes, compressed file size
Dance: degrees of freedom, velocity of movement
Berlyne's psychobiological model. two factor model: combined effects of reward (familiarity) and aversion (boredom)
The Semantic differential: Osgood 1957
likert scakes of polar opposites: evaluation (eg like/dislike), activity (eg simple/complex)
link concepts to a point in multidimensional semantic space
"Semantic differential can be used to measure opinions, attitudes and values on a psychometrically controlled scale"
Factor analysis
correlation between scales within 1 out of evaluation, activity, and potency
extract and rotate factors
reliability across people
aesthetics and information: Berlyne 1974
aesthetic perception of sound sequencing
four rating scales
simple vs complex: /
uninteresting vs interesting: /
displeasing vs pleasing: n
ugly vs beautiful: n
criticism of Berlyne's theory: Martindale et al., 1990
the influence of complexity on aesthetic judgement depends on the stimuli used
Exp 1: 5 polygons, pp prefered intermediate levels of complexity
Exp 2: 7 polygons with different turns but same range, pp prefered most complex polygons. size and complexity account for 14% of varience
perceived meaningfulness of polygons predicts aesthetic preference better than complexity
Weak vs strong stimuli: some evidence for inverted U (displeasing vs pleasing and ugly vs beautiful) but only for "weak" stimuli; non prefered colours, small sizes, non-complex stimuli
Nadal 2010
"although a number of studies have verified Berlyne 's predicted maximum preference for intermediately complex stimuli, others have found that preference increased or decreased in relation to complexity"
results: three different forms of complexity (vision)
organisation of elements: n
asymmetry: n
variety of elements: /
complexity of complexity: Berlyne measured complexity as...
number of elements
heterogeneity and irregularity of forms
pattern regularity
processing fluency
definitions and claims
aesthetic pleasure (subjective)vs aesthetic value (objective)
the more fluently an object is processed, the more positive the aesthetic response (mere exposure link)
beauty "as a pleasurable subjective experience, that is directed toward an object and not mediated by intervening reasoning"
processing fluency "as speed and accuracy of stimulus processing
perceptual fluency: ease of identifying a stimulus based on presentation duration figure-ground contrast, repetition etc
conceptual fluency: familiarity and similarity of meaning and concepts
similarity...
high fluency elicits positive effect because it signals...
existence of appropriate knowledge strictures
error free processing
successful stimulus recognition
a familiar, non harmful stimulus
Reber, et al., 1998
Experiment 1: priming pictures
Experiment 2: changes in figure ground contrast
Experiment 3: duration of presentation
all manipulations either increase or decrease fluency
beauty = immediate and bottom-up
perceptual priming: subliminal priming improves fluency eg naming rabbit
conceptual priming: small significant effect (chicken vs windmill with rabbit)
perceptual fluency and reaction times
faster recognition correlates with greater liking
small effect but significant
perceptual fluency and figure ground contrast
contrast (B&W) prefered (vs G&G)
the longer the pictures were displayed the more they were liked
Felt fluency
objective fluency; priming, presentaation duration
subjective fluency: ratinggs of felt fluency
Foster et al 2013: felt fluency more important than objective fluency (predicted liking)
evaluation
combines different influences on aesthetic experience
subjective prototypicality and memory
individual differences such as familiarity, expertise and cultural background
objective stimulus objects properties and how they are processed
links to specific cognitive processes; perceptual vs conceptual fluency
makes clear behavioural predictions; faster responses and easier recognition should positively correlate with aesthetic preference
BUT...
only applies to mild pleasure and relatively neutral stimuli eg polygons
context?
processing fluency might be too crude a concept - circularity. perceptual vs conceptual fluency
protoype
prefer prototypical faces, easier to process (fluency)
shapes that resemble a prototype should be processed more fluently and should therefore be prefered to non-prototypical stimuli
represent a stimulus category (eg "typical" dog)
Winkielman et al., 2006
arranged dots: square/diamond
classification speed predicts preferance
effects of prototypicality remains significant even if classification speed is factored out
EMG: electromyography
a single presentation of a stimulus does not have a significant effect
need robust prior exposure
prototypical stimuli make you smile
application in models of aesthetic processing of visual art
The aesthetic triad: Chatterjee & Vartanian 2014
Sensory - motor: sensation, perception, motor system
Emotion - valuation: reward emotion, wanting/liking
Knowledge - meaning: expertise, context, culture
Mirror model of art: Tinio 2013
art making process
initialisation
expansion and adaption
finalising
aesthetic experince
early automatic processing
intermediate memory based processing
meaning-making, aesthetic judgements, aesthetic emotions
the myth of subliminal advertising
James vicary made up a study on subliminal messages in the cinema on popcorn and coca cola increases in sales
United Nations "the cultural implications of subliminal indoctrination is a major threat to human rights throughout the world"
In 1958 subliminal advertising was banned
two views on aesthetic judgement
objectivist approach: beauty = f(stimulus). Which object features carry aesthetic value?
balance
symmetry
Gestalt laws
vision, audio, taste, smell, touch, people
Fechner's aesthetics
information
subjectivist approach: beauty = f(recipient). Which brain processes mediate aesthetic judgement?
Berlyne 1974: interestingness, surprise, arousal, tension
Reber et al., 2004: processing fluency
Zajonc 1968: mere exposure
summary
the "new experimental aesthetics"
arousal - the inverted U
stimulus information
processing fluency
prototypes
perceptual and conceptual fluency
mere exposure: familiarity and liking
integrated models
Tinio's mirror model of art
Leder's model of aesthetic appreciation