Brain Electrical Responses to High- and Low-Ranking Buildings

Since the ancient world, architecture generally distinguishes two categories of buildings with either high- or low-ranking design. High-ranking buildings are supposed to be more prominent and, therefore, more memorable. Here, we recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) to drawings of buildings with either high- or low-ranking architectural ornaments and found that ERP responses between 300 and 600 ms after stimulus presentation recorded over both frontal lobes were significantly more positive in amplitude to high-ranking buildings. Thus, ERPs differentiated reliably between both classes of architectural stimuli although subjects were not aware of the two categories. We take our data to suggest that neurophysiological correlates of building perception reflect aspects of an architectural rule system that adjust the appropriateness of style and content (“decorum”). Since this rule system is ubiquitous in Western architecture, it may define architectural prototypes that can elicit familiarity memory processes.

[1]  Roger N Goldstein.  Architectural Design and the Collaborative Research Environment , 2006, Cell.

[2]  Axel Mecklinger,et al.  Electrophysiological Measures of Familiarity Memory , 2006, Clinical EEG and neuroscience.

[3]  Thomas Grunwald,et al.  Hippocampus proper distinguishes between identified and unidentified real-life visual objects: An intracranial ERP study , 2006, Neuroscience Letters.

[4]  E. Donchin,et al.  The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. , 2002, Psychophysiology.

[5]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Distributed representation of objects in the human ventral visual pathway. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  Thomas Jacobsen,et al.  Electrophysiological indices of processing aesthetics: Spontaneous or intentional processes? , 2007, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[7]  D. Yves von Cramon,et al.  Brain correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty , 2006, NeuroImage.

[8]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Memory systems for structural and semantic knowledge of faces and buildings , 2006, Brain Research.

[9]  M. Wilson,et al.  Neuroscience and Architecture: Seeking Common Ground , 2006, Cell.

[10]  M Mishkin,et al.  Brain activity evidence for recognition without recollection after early hippocampal damage , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  M. Rugg,et al.  Event-related potentials and recognition memory , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[12]  E. Donchin,et al.  Localization of the event-related potential novelty response as defined by principal components analysis. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[13]  Tim Curran,et al.  The FN400 indexes familiarity-based recognition of faces , 2007, NeuroImage.

[14]  K Lehnertz,et al.  Verbal novelty detection within the human hippocampus proper. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  D. Berlyne.  Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value , 1970 .

[16]  T. Jacobsen,et al.  Descriptive and evaluative judgment processes: Behavioral and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics , 2003, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[17]  M. D’Esposito,et al.  An Area within Human Ventral Cortex Sensitive to “Building” Stimuli Evidence and Implications , 1998, Neuron.

[18]  T. Grunwald,et al.  Hippocampal function and visual object processing in temporal lobe epilepsy , 2003, Neuroreport.

[19]  R Eisenman,et al.  Preferences for Complexity-Simplicity and Symmetry-Asymmetry , 1968, Perceptual and motor skills.

[20]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Bioelectrical echoes from evaluative categorization: II. A late positive brain potential that varies as a function of attitude registration rather than attitude report. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Heiner Mühlmann.  The Nature of Cultures: A Blueprint for a Theory of Culture Genetics , 1996 .

[22]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  A cortical representation of the local visual environment , 1998, Nature.

[23]  N. Sadato,et al.  Functional asymmetry of human prefrontal cortex in verbal and non-verbal episodic memory as revealed by fMRI. , 2000, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[24]  M. Bradley,et al.  Affective picture processing: the late positive potential is modulated by motivational relevance. , 2000, Psychophysiology.