Artistic Training and Interest in Visual Art: Applying the Appraisal Model of Aesthetic Emotions

Art experts find art more interesting, particularly when it is abstract or complex. These findings are explored in light of a model of aesthetic emotions rooted in appraisal theories (Silvia, 2005b, 2005d). This model attributes emotional responses to art to cognitive appraisal processes (as opposed to collative motivation, prototypicality, or processing fluency). Two experiments examined whether art experts and novices differed in the appraisals that make art interesting. In Experiment 1, people with art training found complex pictures more interesting, and they appraised them as easier to understand. Using multilevel modeling, Experiment 2 explored whether art training involved a qualitative shift in the appraisals that cause interest. Within-person effects of appraisals on emotions were essentially independent of between-person differences in training. People high and low in training make the same emotional appraisals of art, but they reach different answers to the appraisal questions.

[1]  P. Hekkert,et al.  'Most advanced, yet acceptable': typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[2]  Craig A. Smith,et al.  Appraisal theory: Overview, assumptions, varieties, controversies. , 2001 .

[3]  K. Scherer,et al.  Handbook of affective sciences. , 2003 .

[4]  H. I. Day,et al.  The factorial structure of responses to perceptual complexity , 1971 .

[5]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[6]  H. Day,et al.  The importance of symmetry and complexity in the evaluation of complexity, interest and pleasingness , 1968 .

[7]  D. Berlyne Behaviourism? Cognitive theory? Humanistic psychology? To Hull with them all. , 1975 .

[8]  P. Silvia Emotional Responses to Art: From Collation and Arousal to Cognition and Emotion , 2005 .

[9]  Craig A. Smith,et al.  Toward delivering on the promise of appraisal theory. , 2001 .

[10]  M. Aldenderfer,et al.  Cluster Analysis. Sage University Paper Series On Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 07-044 , 1984 .

[11]  B. Bastian,et al.  Painting Preference and Personality, with Particular Reference to Gray's Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Approach Systems , 2002 .

[12]  Ira J. Roseman A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications. , 2001 .

[13]  John B. Nezlek,et al.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Nezlek / Multilevel Random Coefficient Analyses Multilevel Random Coefficient Analyses of Event-and Interval-contingent Data in Social and Personality Psychology Research , 2022 .

[14]  Jan de Leeuw,et al.  Introducing Multilevel Modeling , 1998 .

[15]  Timothy J. Robinson,et al.  Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[16]  P. Russell Preferability, Pleasingness, and Interestingness: Relationships between Evaluative Judgements in Empirical Aesthetics , 1994 .

[17]  K. Scherer Profiles of Emotion-antecedent Appraisal: Testing Theoretical Predictions across Cultures , 1997 .

[18]  Paul J. Silvia,et al.  Positive and Negative Affect: Bridging States and Traits. , 2006 .

[19]  David E. Hunt,et al.  Intrinsic Motivation: A New Direction in Education , 1971 .

[20]  Adrian C. North,et al.  Collative Variables versus Prototypicality , 2000 .

[21]  D. Berlyne,et al.  The semantic differential and other measures of reaction to visual complexity. , 1966, Canadian journal of psychology.

[22]  Klaus R. Scherer,et al.  Chapter 6 Levels of processing in emotion-antecedent appraisal , 1997 .

[23]  Paul Hekkert,et al.  Beauty in the eye of expert and nonexpert beholders : A study in the appraisal of art , 1996 .

[24]  Keith K. Millis,et al.  Making meaning brings pleasure: the influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. , 2001, Emotion.

[25]  Paul J. Silvia,et al.  Appraisal components and emotion traits: Examining the appraisal basis of trait curiosity , 2008 .

[26]  P. Silvia What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. , 2005, Emotion.

[27]  P. Silvia Cognitive Appraisals and Interest in Visual Art: Exploring an Appraisal Theory of Aesthetic Emotions , 2005 .

[28]  Paul J. Locher,et al.  The Contribution of Eye-Movement Research to an Understanding of the Nature of Pictorial Balance Perception: A Review of the Literature , 1996 .

[29]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  Lisa F. Smith,et al.  The Influence of Presentation Format and Viewer Training in the Visual Arts on the Perception of Pictorial and Aesthetic Qualities of Paintings , 2001, Perception.

[31]  G. A. Marcoulides,et al.  Multilevel Analysis Techniques and Applications , 2002 .

[32]  K. Scherer,et al.  Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research. , 2001 .

[33]  D. Berlyne Curiosity and learning , 1978 .

[34]  H. Christiaans Creativity as a Design Criterion , 2002 .

[35]  R. Neiss Reconceptualizing arousal: psychobiological states in motor performance. , 1988, Psychological bulletin.

[36]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Multilevel analysis : an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling , 1999 .

[37]  L. F. Barrett,et al.  Handbook of emotions, 2nd ed. , 2000 .

[38]  P. V. Wieringen,et al.  The impact of level of expertise on the evaluation of original and altered versions of post-impressionistic paintings , 1996 .

[39]  K. Scherer,et al.  Appraisal processes in emotion. , 2003 .

[40]  P. P. Aitken Judgments of pleasingness and interestingness as functions of visual complexity. , 1974 .

[41]  R. Francés,et al.  Comparative effects of six collative variables on interest and preference in adults of different educational levels. , 1976 .

[42]  K. Scherer Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. , 2001 .

[43]  G. Rhodes,et al.  It’s not just average faces that are attractive: Computer-manipulated averageness makes birds, fish, and automobiles attractive , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  L. Matthews Cognitive science perspectives on personality and emotion , 1997 .

[45]  D. Rawlings The Interaction of Openness to Experience and Schizotypy in Predicting Preference for Abstract and Violent Paintings , 2000 .

[46]  Roger Carter,et al.  4 – Computer software , 1993 .

[47]  E. Walker,et al.  Psychological complexity and preference : a hedgehog theory of behavior , 1973 .

[48]  D. Cicchetti Emotion and Adaptation , 1993 .

[49]  H. Leder,et al.  A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. , 2004, British journal of psychology.

[50]  P. Silvia Exploring the Psychology of Interest , 2006 .

[51]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience? , 2004, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[52]  D. Berlyne,et al.  Aesthetics and Psychobiology , 1975 .

[53]  Frans Boselie,et al.  Against Prototypicality as a Central Concept in Aesthetics , 1991 .

[54]  G. Cupchik The Legacy of Daniel E. Berlyne , 1988 .

[55]  P. A. Russell,et al.  Relationships between Aesthetic Response Scales Applied to Paintings , 1990 .

[56]  C. Martindale,et al.  Aesthetic preference: Anomalous findings for Berlyne's psychobiological theory. , 1990 .

[57]  R. Dodhia A Review of Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed.) , 2005 .

[58]  P. Russell,et al.  Effort after meaning and the hedonic value of paintings. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[59]  C. Martindale,et al.  Relationship of Preference Judgments to Typicality, Novelty, and Mere Exposure , 1988 .