The link between composition and balance in master-works vs. paintings of lower artistic quality

British Journal of Psychology

Volumn 96, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 493-503

  Vartanian, Oshin ^a,b   Martindale, Colin ^a   Podsiadlo, Jacob ^a   Overbay, Shane ^a   Borkum, Jonathan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^b YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ART; ARTICLE; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PAINTING; VISION;

ADULT; ART; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PAINTINGS; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 27844489645     PISSN: 20448295     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/000712605X47927     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Arnheim, R. (1969). Art and visual perception. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
2. Arnheim, R. (1982). The power of the center. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
3. Frois, J. P., & Eysenck, H. J. (1995). The Visual Aesthetic Sensitivity Test applied to Portuguese children and fine arts students. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 277-284.
4. Götz, K. O. (1985). VAST: Visual Aesthetic Sensitivity Test (4th Ed.). Düsseldorf, Germany: Concept Verlag.
5. Hekkert, P., & van Wieringen, P. C. W. (1996). The impact of level of expertise on the evaluation of original and altered versions of post-impressionistic paintings. Acta Psychologica, 94, 117-131.
6. Iwawaki, S., Eysenck, H. J., & Götz, K. O. (1979). A new Visual Aesthetic Sensitivity Test (VAST). II. Cross-cultural comparison between England and Japan. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, 859-862.
7. Kulka, T. (1989). Art and science: An outline of a Popperian aesthetics. British Journal of Aesthetics, 29, 197-212.
8. Locher, P. J. (2003a). Experimental techniques for investigating the contribution of pictorial balance to the creation and perception of visual displays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 21, 127-135.
9. Locher, P. J. (2003b). An empirical investigation of the visual lightness theory of picture perception. Acta Psychologica, 114, 147-164.
10. Locher, P., Gray, S., & Nodine, C. (1996). The structural framework of pictorial balance. Perception, 25, 1419-1436.
11. Locher, P., Stappers, P. J., & Overbeeke, K. (1999). An empirical evaluation of the visual rightness theory of pictorial composition. Acta Psychologica, 103, 261-280.
12. Martindale, C. (1978). The therapist-as-fixed-effect fallacy in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 1526-1530.
13. McManus, I. C., Edmondson, D., & Rodger, J. (1985). Balance in pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 311-324.
14. McManus, I. C., & Kitson, C. M. (1995). Compositional geometry in pictures. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 13, 73-94.
15. Nodine, C. F., Locher, P. J., & Krupinski, E. A. (1993). The role of formal art training on perception and aesthetic judgment of art compositions. Leonardo, 26, 219-227.
16. Shaw, T. L. (1962). Hypocrisy about Art. Boston, Massachusetts: Stuart Publications.
17. Stankowicz, T., & Jackson, M. (1996). The Museum of Bad Art: Art too bad to be ignored. Kansas City, Missouri: Andrews McMeel.
18. Vartanian, O., Overbay, S., Podsiadlo, J., & Martindale, C. (2000). An investigation of Tomas Kulka's theory of aesthetics using Photoshop. In P. Locher & L. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Congress of the International Association of Empirical Aesthetics (pp. 134-135). Upper Montclair, NJ: Montclair State University Press.