What kind of impacts can artwork have on viewers? Establishing a taxonomy for aesthetic impacts

Abstract

Aesthetic cognitivism is the philosophical position that art can advance knowledge and understanding. Operationalizing the claim of aesthetic cognitivism is necessary to put this philosophical view to test empirically. In pursuit of this goal, we recruited five aesthetics experts from different academic disciplines: art history, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology, and theology. Together, the group curated a set of terms that corresponded to descriptive features (124 terms) and cognitive-affective impacts (69 terms) of artworks. Using these terms as prompts, participants (n = 899) were given one minute to generate words for each term related to how an artwork looked (descriptive features) or made them think or feel (cognitive-affective impacts). Using network psychometric approaches, we identified terms that were semantically similar based on participants’ responses and applied hierarchical exploratory graph analysis to map the relationships between the terms. Our analyses identified 17 descriptive dimensions which could be further reduced to 5, and 11 impact dimensions which could be further reduced to 4. The resulting taxonomy demonstrated overlap between the descriptive and impact networks as well as consistency with previous reports. Terms directly relevant to aesthetic cognitivism were centrally positioned relative to other terms in the networks. This taxonomy could serve as the foundation to empirically evaluate aesthetic cognitivism’s claim.

The role of the body in the experience of installation art: a case study of visitors' bodily, emotional, and transformative experiences in Tomás Saraceno's “in orbit”

“…To clarify the underlying psychological dimensions of bodily responses and their relationships to the experience of the installation art piece, we then used techniques from network science. The application of network science in empirical aesthetics has become more popular in recent years as a tool to discover underlying latent structures in multivariate data (e.g., Pelowski et al, 2018 ; Coburn et al, 2020 ; Hayn-Leichsenring et al, 2020 ; Specker et al, 2021 ; Weinberger et al, 2021 ; Christensen et al, 2022 ). This approach consisted of network construction, followed by community identification and stability analyses.…”

#Creativity: Exploring lay conceptualizations of creativity with Twitter hashtags.

“…TMFG structurally constrains the resulting network to cliques of three and for nodes, each. The cliques are initially formed when their sum of correlations is higher than the average correlation in the correlation matrix (Christensen, Cardillo, et al, 2022). Spearman correlation was used to account for skewed data (Isvoranu & Epskamp, 2021).…”

Art in an age of artificial intelligence

“…Imagine a nuanced taxonomy of words that describe different kinds of art and their potential impacts on viewers. At a small scale, such projects are underway ( Menninghaus et al, 2019 ; Christensen et al, 2022 ; Fekete et al, 2022 ). These research programs go beyond asking people if they like an image, or find it beautiful or interesting.…”