Kto jest zainteresowany współczesnym malarstwem zawierającym niespójności semantyczne i syntaktyczne?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24917/20845596.11.6Keywords:
semantic and syntactic violations, contemporary paintings, interest, individual differencesAbstract
Contemporary art often contains disruption of form and content, here operationalised as syntactic and semantic violations. The presented research examined whether violated paintings evoke interest in viewers and who in terms of personality and expertise would be interested in this type of art. Expert (N=37) and naive viewers (N=56) appraised 20 paintings (divided into four groups, i.e. no violation, single syntactic or semantic violation, and both violations) and filled in measures of Big Five and Need for Closure. In general, conflictual paintings evoked more interest in viewers, however the effect was significant only for syntactic violations. No interactions between types of violation, individual differences, and appraisal were observed. Expertise did not predict reaction of interest. In turn, we found that individuals high on Openness and Need for Closure and low on Neuroticism experienced more interest towards contemporary paintings.References
Augustin, M.,D., & Leder, H. (2006). Art expertise: a study of concepts and conceptual
spaces. Psychology Science, 48(2), 135-156.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker. S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models
Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.
Biederman, I., Mezzanotte, R.J., & Rabinowitz, J.C. (1982). Scene perception: Detecting
and judging objects undergoing relational violations. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2),
143-177.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Reimers, S. (2007). The artistic personality. The
Psychologist, 20(2), 84-87.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Reimers, S., Hsu, A., & Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Who art thou? Personality
predictors of artistic preferences in a large UK sample: the importance of
openness. British Journal of Psychology, 100(3), 501-516.
Costa, P.T.Jr., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and
NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Crozier, J.B. (1974). Verbal and exploratory responses to sound sequences varying in
uncertainty level. In D.E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics
(pp. 27-90). Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publication Services.
Cupchik, G.C., & Laszlo, J. (1992). Emerging visions of the aesthetic process. Psychology,
semiology and philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Feist, G., & Brady, T. (2004). Openness to experience, non-conformity, and the preference
for abstract art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(1), 77-89.
Francuz, P., Zaniewski, I., Augustynowicz, P., Kopiś, N., & Jankowski, T. (2018). Eye Movement
Correlates of Expertise in Visual Arts. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 12, 87.
Furnham, A., & Walker, J. (2001). Personality and judgements of abstract, pop art, and
representational paintings. European Journal of Personality, 15, 57-72.
Ganczarek, J., Pietras, K., & Rosiek, R. Subjective cognitive challenge predicts eye movements
during perception of contemporary paintings. Empirical Studies of the Arts
(under review).
Granell, A. (2016). The effect of contemporary art perception: Study of younger and older
adults’ art appreciation in museums experiences. Doctoral dissertation. Facultat
de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon
Llull, Barcelona.
Jakesch, M. & Leder, H. (2009). Finding meaning in art : Preferred levels of ambiguity in art
appreciation. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62(11), 2105-2112.
Jakesch, M., Leder, H., & Forster, M., (2013). Image Ambiguity and Fluency. PLoS ONE
8(9), 1-15
Kossowska, M., Hanusz, K., & Trejtowicz, M. (2012). Skrócona wersja Skali Potrzeby
Poznawczego Domknięcia. Dobór pozycji i walidacja skali [Short version of the
Need for Cognitive Closure Scale: Items selection and scale validation]. Psychologia
Społeczna, 7(1), 89-99.
Leder, H., Ring, A., & Dressler, S.G., (2013). See Me, Feel Me! Aesthetic Evaluations of Art
Portraits. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(4), 358-369.
Leder, H., Tinio, P.P., Brieber, D., Kröner, T., Jacobsen, T., & Rosenberg, R. (2018). Symmetry
Is Not a Universal Law of Beauty. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 0276237418777941.
Locher, P.J., Smith, J.K., & Smith, L.F. (2001). The influence of presentation format and
viewer training in the visual arts on the perception of pictorial and aesthetic qualities
of paintings. Perception, 30, 449-465.
Pelowsky, M., Markey, P., Forster, M., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2017). Move me, astonish
me… delight my eyes and brain: The Vienna Integrated Model of top-down and bottom-
up processes in Art Perception (VIMAP) and corresponding affective, evaluative,
and neurophysiological correlates. Physics of Life Reviews, 21, 80-125.
Russell, P.A. (1994). Preferability, pleasingness, and interestingness: Relationships between
evaluative judgments in empirical aesthetics. Empirical Studies of the Arts,
12, 141-157.
Silvia, P.J. (2005).What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion
5(1), 89-102.
Silvia, P.J. (2006). Artistic training and interest in visual art: Applying the appraisal model
of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 24, 139-161.
Silvia, P.J. (2010). Confusion and interest: The role of knowledge emotions in aesthetic
experience. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(2), 75-80.
Silvia, P.J., & Brown, E.M. (2007). Anger, disgust, and the negative aesthetic emotions:
Expanding an appraisal model of aesthetic experience. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity,
and the Arts 1(2), 100-106.
Szubielska, M., Niestorowicz, E., Bałaj, B. (2016). Wpływ figuratywości obrazu i zapoznania
się z informacją katalogową na percepcję estetyczną. Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae
Cracoviensis. Studia Psychologica, IX, 21-34.
Szubielska, M., Ratomska, M., Wójtowicz, M., Szymańska, A. (2018). The Effect of
Educational Workshops in an Art Gallery on Children’s Evaluation and Interpretation
of Contemporary Art. Empirical Studies of the Arts. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0276237418790917 (access 27.11.2018).
Tan, E.S. (2000). Emotion, art, and the humanities. In M. Lewis & J.M. Haviland-Jones
(Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 116-134). New York: Guilford Press.
Webster, D.M., & Kruglanski, A.W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive
closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1049-1062.
Wiersema, D.V., van der Schalk, J., & van Kleef, G.A. (2012). Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow,
and Blue? Need for Cognitive Closure Predicts Aesthetic Preferences. , 6(2),
168-174.
Võ, M.L.H., & Henderson, J.M. (2009). Does gravity matter? Effects of semantic and syntactic
inconsistencies on the allocation of attention during scene perception. Journal
of Vision, 9(3), 24-24.
Võ, M.L.H., & Henderson, J.M. (2011). Object-scene inconsistencies do not capture gaze:
Evidence from the flash-preview moving-window paradigm. Attention, perception &
psychophysics 73(6), 1742-1753.
Võ, M.L.H., & Wolfe, J.M. (2013). Differential electrophysiological signatures of semantic
and syntactic scene processing. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1816-1823.
Zawadzki, B., Szczepaniak, P., & Strelau, J. (1995). Diagnoza psychometryczna pięciu wielkich
czynników osobowości: adaptacja kwestionariusza NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae’a
do warunków polskich [Psychometric diagnosis of the Five Factors Model: Polish
adaptation of NEO-FFI by Costa & McCrae]. Studia Psychologiczne, 33, 189-225.
spaces. Psychology Science, 48(2), 135-156.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker. S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models
Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.
Biederman, I., Mezzanotte, R.J., & Rabinowitz, J.C. (1982). Scene perception: Detecting
and judging objects undergoing relational violations. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2),
143-177.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Reimers, S. (2007). The artistic personality. The
Psychologist, 20(2), 84-87.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Reimers, S., Hsu, A., & Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Who art thou? Personality
predictors of artistic preferences in a large UK sample: the importance of
openness. British Journal of Psychology, 100(3), 501-516.
Costa, P.T.Jr., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and
NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Crozier, J.B. (1974). Verbal and exploratory responses to sound sequences varying in
uncertainty level. In D.E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics
(pp. 27-90). Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publication Services.
Cupchik, G.C., & Laszlo, J. (1992). Emerging visions of the aesthetic process. Psychology,
semiology and philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Feist, G., & Brady, T. (2004). Openness to experience, non-conformity, and the preference
for abstract art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(1), 77-89.
Francuz, P., Zaniewski, I., Augustynowicz, P., Kopiś, N., & Jankowski, T. (2018). Eye Movement
Correlates of Expertise in Visual Arts. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 12, 87.
Furnham, A., & Walker, J. (2001). Personality and judgements of abstract, pop art, and
representational paintings. European Journal of Personality, 15, 57-72.
Ganczarek, J., Pietras, K., & Rosiek, R. Subjective cognitive challenge predicts eye movements
during perception of contemporary paintings. Empirical Studies of the Arts
(under review).
Granell, A. (2016). The effect of contemporary art perception: Study of younger and older
adults’ art appreciation in museums experiences. Doctoral dissertation. Facultat
de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon
Llull, Barcelona.
Jakesch, M. & Leder, H. (2009). Finding meaning in art : Preferred levels of ambiguity in art
appreciation. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 62(11), 2105-2112.
Jakesch, M., Leder, H., & Forster, M., (2013). Image Ambiguity and Fluency. PLoS ONE
8(9), 1-15
Kossowska, M., Hanusz, K., & Trejtowicz, M. (2012). Skrócona wersja Skali Potrzeby
Poznawczego Domknięcia. Dobór pozycji i walidacja skali [Short version of the
Need for Cognitive Closure Scale: Items selection and scale validation]. Psychologia
Społeczna, 7(1), 89-99.
Leder, H., Ring, A., & Dressler, S.G., (2013). See Me, Feel Me! Aesthetic Evaluations of Art
Portraits. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(4), 358-369.
Leder, H., Tinio, P.P., Brieber, D., Kröner, T., Jacobsen, T., & Rosenberg, R. (2018). Symmetry
Is Not a Universal Law of Beauty. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 0276237418777941.
Locher, P.J., Smith, J.K., & Smith, L.F. (2001). The influence of presentation format and
viewer training in the visual arts on the perception of pictorial and aesthetic qualities
of paintings. Perception, 30, 449-465.
Pelowsky, M., Markey, P., Forster, M., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2017). Move me, astonish
me… delight my eyes and brain: The Vienna Integrated Model of top-down and bottom-
up processes in Art Perception (VIMAP) and corresponding affective, evaluative,
and neurophysiological correlates. Physics of Life Reviews, 21, 80-125.
Russell, P.A. (1994). Preferability, pleasingness, and interestingness: Relationships between
evaluative judgments in empirical aesthetics. Empirical Studies of the Arts,
12, 141-157.
Silvia, P.J. (2005).What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion
5(1), 89-102.
Silvia, P.J. (2006). Artistic training and interest in visual art: Applying the appraisal model
of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 24, 139-161.
Silvia, P.J. (2010). Confusion and interest: The role of knowledge emotions in aesthetic
experience. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(2), 75-80.
Silvia, P.J., & Brown, E.M. (2007). Anger, disgust, and the negative aesthetic emotions:
Expanding an appraisal model of aesthetic experience. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity,
and the Arts 1(2), 100-106.
Szubielska, M., Niestorowicz, E., Bałaj, B. (2016). Wpływ figuratywości obrazu i zapoznania
się z informacją katalogową na percepcję estetyczną. Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae
Cracoviensis. Studia Psychologica, IX, 21-34.
Szubielska, M., Ratomska, M., Wójtowicz, M., Szymańska, A. (2018). The Effect of
Educational Workshops in an Art Gallery on Children’s Evaluation and Interpretation
of Contemporary Art. Empirical Studies of the Arts. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0276237418790917 (access 27.11.2018).
Tan, E.S. (2000). Emotion, art, and the humanities. In M. Lewis & J.M. Haviland-Jones
(Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 116-134). New York: Guilford Press.
Webster, D.M., & Kruglanski, A.W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive
closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1049-1062.
Wiersema, D.V., van der Schalk, J., & van Kleef, G.A. (2012). Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow,
and Blue? Need for Cognitive Closure Predicts Aesthetic Preferences. , 6(2),
168-174.
Võ, M.L.H., & Henderson, J.M. (2009). Does gravity matter? Effects of semantic and syntactic
inconsistencies on the allocation of attention during scene perception. Journal
of Vision, 9(3), 24-24.
Võ, M.L.H., & Henderson, J.M. (2011). Object-scene inconsistencies do not capture gaze:
Evidence from the flash-preview moving-window paradigm. Attention, perception &
psychophysics 73(6), 1742-1753.
Võ, M.L.H., & Wolfe, J.M. (2013). Differential electrophysiological signatures of semantic
and syntactic scene processing. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1816-1823.
Zawadzki, B., Szczepaniak, P., & Strelau, J. (1995). Diagnoza psychometryczna pięciu wielkich
czynników osobowości: adaptacja kwestionariusza NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae’a
do warunków polskich [Psychometric diagnosis of the Five Factors Model: Polish
adaptation of NEO-FFI by Costa & McCrae]. Studia Psychologiczne, 33, 189-225.
Downloads
Published
2018-12-01
How to Cite
Pietras, K., & Ganczarek, J. (2018). Kto jest zainteresowany współczesnym malarstwem zawierającym niespójności semantyczne i syntaktyczne?. Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis Studia Psychologica, 11, 88–97. https://doi.org/10.24917/20845596.11.6
Issue
Section
Articles
