RELATION BETWEEN CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION AND THE SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE OF THE ARTISTIC PAINTINGS
The goal of this research was to examine relation between subjective experience of the artistic paintings and the information respondents were given about the paintings in question.
This relation was being examined through experiment with four groups of respondents. In the first group respondents graded paintings not knowing anything about them. In the second group respondents knew only the name of the author of the painting. In the third group respondents knew the name of the author, name of the painting and its description. In the fourth group respondents knew all of these informations and the estimated value of the painting (presented in American dollars).
The sample was convenient and it consisted of 82 students, of both sexes (M=7; F=75) average age=19.58. In each stage there was nearly the same number of respondents (N1=20; N2=21; N3=21; N4=20).
Stimuli were 14 artistic painting ranging from Renaissance through Impressionism to Modern art. Respondents answered questions, given in the form of semantic differential, while looking at the paintings in question.
Instruments used in this research were sixteen semantic differential scales regarding subjective experience of the artistic paintings, constructed by Radonjic and Markovic (2005) and divided into four factors, or four dimensions: Regularity, Arousal, Attractivity and Calmness.
The data was analyzed using program SPSS, version 20. Statistical analysis done on the collected data was Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), whereas factor or independent variable was the group in which respondents were deployed and dependent variables were dimensions of the subjective experience of the paintings.
Results from ANOVA show following: Regularity (F(3)=1.492; p=.215); Arousal (F=(3)1.236; p=.295); Attractvity (F(3)=2.457; p=.062); and Calmness (F(3)=.376; p=.769). It can be seen that independent variable didn’t statistically significant effect on any of the dependent variables. Only for one dimension, Attractivity, effect of the independent variable was close to the statistically significant effect. When it comes to the variable Attractivity, Post hoc testing shows somewhat different results. Post hoc test showed that the second group, the group which new only the name of the author differed from the fourth group, who knew the name of the author, the description of the painting and the estimated price of the painting. The differences were in the favor of the fourth group (Mean difference=-.297; p=.046).
From the results can be concluded that only one dimension of the subjective experience of the paintings can be influenced by the amount of given information about the paintings, and that that influence goes in the favor of lager amount of given information. In other terms, the more information respondents are given about the paintings, the more attractive paintings will seem to them.
Kreitler, H. & Kreitler, S. (1972). Psychology and the Arts. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.
Lipps, T. (1906). Ästhetik: Psychologie des Schönen und der Kunst. Hamburg: Leopold Voss.
Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 278-292.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Berkowitz, L. (1993). Towards a general theory of anger and emotional aggression: Implications of the Cognitive-Neoassociationistic Perspective for the analysis of anger and other emotions. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 6, pp. 1-46). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wyer, R. S., Clore, G. L., & Isbell, L. M. (1999). Affect and information processing. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 31, pp. 1-77). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Cupchik, G. C. (1992). From perception to production: A multilevel analysis of the aesthetic process. In G. Cupchik & J. Laszlo (Eds.), Emerging visions of the aesthetic process (pp. 83–99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Konecni, V. J. (1984). Elusive effects of artists’ messages. In W. R. Crozier & A. J. Chapman (Eds.), Cognitive processes in the perception of art (pp. 71–93). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Leder, H., Carbon, C-C., & Ripsas, A-L. (2006). Entitling art: The influence of title information on understanding and apperception of paintings. Acta Psychologica, 121, 176-198.
Millis, K. (2001). Making meaning brings pleasure: The influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. Emotion, 1, 320-329.
Russell, P. A. (2003). Effort after meaning and the hedonic value of paintings. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 99-110.
Temme, J. E. (1992). Amount and kind of information in museums: Its effects on visitors satisfaction and appreciation of art. Visual Arts Research, 18, 28-36.
Specht, S. M. (2008). The influence of artists’ statements on perceptions of artworks. Proceedings of the Twentieth Biennial Congress of the International Association of Empirical Aesthetics, 12-13.
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508.
Martindale, C., Moore, K., & Borkum, J . (1990). Aesthetic preference: anomalous findings for Berlyne’s Psychobiological theory. American Journal of Psychology, 103, 53–58.
Hekkert, P.C., & van Wieringen, P.C.W. (1990). Complexity and prototypically as determinants of the appraisal of Cubist paintings. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 483–495.
Radonjić, A., & Marković, S. (2005). Konstrukcija instrumenta za merenje doživljaja umetničkih slika: izbor reprezentativnih stimulusa. Emprijska istraživanja u psihologiji X, Filozofski fakultet u Beogradu, rezimei.