Human Emotions and Aesthetic Experience: An overview of empirical aesthetics

Aesthetic Science: Connecting Minds, Brains, and Experience

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages

  Silvia, Paul J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

Aesthetic emotions; Aesthetics; Appraisal theories; Awe; Empirical aesthetics; Human emotions; Interest; Pleasure; Preference

Indexed keywords

EID: 84921816388     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199732142.003.0058     Document Type: Chapter

References (101)

1. Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Ends and means of experimental aesthetics. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 26, 303-325.
2. Lewin, K. (1931). The conflict between Aristotelian and Galileian modes of thought in contemporary psychology. Journal of General Psychology, 5, 141-177.
3. Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. New York: Van Nostrand.
4. See Solso, R. L. (1994). Cognition and the visual arts. Cambridge: MIT Press
5. Raynor, K., & Sereno, S. C. (1994). Eye movements in reading: psycholinguistic studies. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 57-81). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
6. Dufresne, J. (2004). The lie that tells a truth: a guide to writing fiction. New York: Norton.
7. Parsons, M. J. (1987). How we understand art: a cognitive developmental account of aesthetic experience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
8. For good examples, see 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;
9. Mastandrea, S., Bartoli, G., & Bove, G. (2007). Learning through ancient art and experiencing emotions with contemporary art: comparing visits in two different museums. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 25, 173-191;
10. Mastandrea, S., Bartoli, G., & Bove, G. (2009). Preferences for ancient and modern art museums: visitor experiences and personality characteristics. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 164-173.
11. Augustin, M. D., & Leder, H. (2006). Art expertise: A study of concepts and conceptual spaces. Psychology Science, 48, 135-156.
12. Konečni, V. J. (2005). The aesthetic trinity: awe, being moved, thrilled. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 5(2), 27-44
13. Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, A. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508.
14. Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill;
15. Berlyne, D. E. (1967). Arousal and reinforcement. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 1-110;
16. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts;
17. Berlyne, D. E. (1974). The new experimental aesthetics. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation (pp. 1-25). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
18. Gordon, K. (1909). Esthetics. New York: Henry Holt;
19. Valentine, C. W. (1913). An introduction to the experimental psychology of beauty. London: T. C. & E. C. Jack;
20. Valentine, C. W. (1962). The experimental psychology of beauty. London: Methuen.
21. Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior system. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22. Attneave, F. (1959). Applications of information theory to psychology. New York: Holt-Dryden;
23. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press;
24. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
25. Berlyne, D. E. (1957). Uncertainty and conflict: A point of contact between information-theory and behavior-theory concepts. Psychological Review, 64, 329-339.
26. Evans, D. R., & Day, H. I. (1971). The factorial structure of responses to perceptual complexity. Psychonomic Science, 27, 357-359.
27. Silvia, P. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Hare, F. G. (1974). Artistic training and responses to visual and auditory patterns varying in uncertainty. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics (pp. 159-168). Washington, DC: Hemisphere;
29. Walker, E. L. (1980). Psychological complexity and preference: A hedgehog theory of behavior. New York, NY: Brooks-Cole.
30. Nunnally, J. C. (1972). A human tropism. In S. R. Brown & D. J. Brenner (Eds.), Science, psychology and communication (pp. 255-277). New York: Teachers College.
31. Bar, M., & Neta, M. (2006). Humans prefer curved visual objects. Psychological Science, 17, 645-648;
32. Silvia, P. J., & Barona, C. M. (2009). Do people prefer curved objects? Angularity, expertise, and aesthetic preference. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27, 25-42.
33. Berlyne, D. E. (1975). Behaviorism? Cognitive theory? Humanistic psychology? To Hull with them all. Canadian Psychological Review, 16, 69-80.
34. Martindale, C., & Moore, K. (1988). Priming, prototypicality, and preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 661-670;
35. Martindale, C., Moore, K., & Borkum, J. (1990). Aesthetic preference: Anomalous findings for Berlyne's psychobiological model. American Journal of Psychology, 103, 53-80;
36. Martindale, C., Moore, K., & West, A. (1988). Relationship of preference judgments to typicality, novelty, and mere exposure. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 6, 79-96.
37. Whitfield, T. W. A. (1983). Predicting preference for familiar, everyday objects: an experimental confrontation between two theories of aesthetic behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 221-237;
38. Whitfield, T. W. A., & Slatter, P. E. (1979). The effect of categorization and prototypicality on aesthetic choice in a furniture selection task. British Journal of Psychology, 70, 65-75.
39. Halberstadt, J. (2006). The generality and ultimate origins of the attractiveness of prototypes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 166-183.
40. Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., & van Wieringen, P. C. W. (2003). "Most advanced, yet acceptable": Typicality and novelty as joint predictors of aesthetic preference in industrial design. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 111-124.
41. Farkas, A. (2002). Prototypicality-effect in Surrealist paintings. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 20, 127-136.
42. Boselie, F. (1991). Against prototypicality as a central concept in aesthetics. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 9, 65-73;
43. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2000). Collative variables versus prototypicality. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 18, 13-17.
44. Reber, R., Schwartz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 364-382;
45. Chenier, T., & Winkielman, P. (2009). The origins of aesthetic pleasure: processing fluency and affect in judgment, body, and the brain. In M. Skov & O. Vartanian (Eds.), Neuroaesthetics (pp. 275-289). Amityville, NY: Baywood;
46. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219-235.
47. Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., & Catty, S. (2006). Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological Science, 17, 799-806.
48. Armstrong, T., & Detweiler-Bedell, B. (2008). Beauty as an emotion: The exhilarating prospect of mastering a challenging world. Review of General Psychology, 12, 307.
49. Armstrong, T., & Detweiler-Bedell, B. (2008). Beauty as an emotion: The exhilarating prospect of mastering a challenging world. Review of General Psychology, 12, 305.
50. Brickman, P., Redfield, J., Harrison, A. A., & Crandall, R. (1972). Drive and predisposition as factors in the attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 31-44.
51. Silvia, P. J. (2005). Emotional responses to art: From collation and arousal to cognition and emotion. Review of General Psychology, 9, 342-357;
52. Silvia, P. J. (2009). Looking past pleasure: Anger, confusion, disgust, pride, surprise, and other unusual aesthetic emotions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 48-51.
53. Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der Ästhetik. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
54. Gordon, K. (1909). Esthetics. New York: Henry Holt;
55. Valentine, C. W. (1962). The experimental psychology of beauty. London: Methuen.
56. Smith, C. A., & Kirby, L. D. (2009). Putting appraisal in context: Toward a relational model of appraisal and emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 1352-1372.
57. Cooper, J. M., & Silvia, P. J. (2009). Opposing art: rejection as an action tendency of hostile aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27, 109-126;
58. 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, 100-106.
59. Siemer, M., Mauss, I., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Same situation-Different emotions: How appraisals shape our emotions. Emotion, 7, 592-600.
60. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press;
61. Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 572-595). New York: Oxford University Press.
62. Demir, E., Desmet, P. M. A., & Hekkert, P. (2009). Appraisal patterns of emotions in human-product interaction. International Journal of Design, 3, 41-51;
63. Reddy, W. M. (2001). The navigation of feeling: a framework for the history of emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press;
64. Robinson, J. (2005). Deeper than reason: Emotion and its role in literature, music, and art. New York: Oxford University Press.
65. Parsons, M. J. (1987). How we understand art: a cognitive developmental account of aesthetic experience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
66. Roseman, I. J. (2001). A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (pp. 68-91). New York: Oxford University Press.
67. Scherer, K. R. (2001). Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (pp. 92-120). New York: Oxford University Press.
68. Ludden, G. D. S., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Hekkert, P. (2008). Surprise as a design strategy. Design Issues, 24(2), 28-38;
69. Ludden, G. D. S., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Hekkert, P. (2009). Visual-tactual incongruities in products as sources of surprise. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27, 61-87.
70. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.
71. Silvia, P. J. (2005). Cognitive appraisals and interest in visual art: exploring an appraisal theory of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 23, 119-133;
72. Silvia, P. J. (2005). What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion, 5, 89-102;
73. 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;
74. Silvia, P. J. (2008). Appraisal components and emotion traits: examining the appraisal basis of trait curiosity. Cognition and Emotion, 22, 94-113;
75. Silvia, P. J. (2008). Interest-the curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 57-60;
76. 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;
77. Silvia, P. J., & Berg, C. (2011). Finding movies interesting: how expertise and appraisals influence the aesthetic experience of film. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29(1), 73-88;
78. Silvia, P. J., Henson, R. A., & Templin, J. L. (2009). Are the sources of interest the same for everyone? Using multilevel mixture models to explore individual differences in appraisal structures. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 1389-1406;
79. Turner, S. A., Jr., & Silvia, P. J. (2006). Must interesting things be pleasant? A test of competing appraisal structures. Emotion, 6, 670-674.
80. Silvia, P. J. (2007). An introduction to multilevel modeling for research on the psychology of art and creativity. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 25, 1-20.
81. 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.
82. Silvia, P. J., & Berg, C. (2011). Finding movies interesting: how expertise and appraisals influence the aesthetic experience of film. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29(1), 73-88;
83. 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.
84. Craig, S. D., D'Mello, S., Witherspoon, A., & Graesser, A. (2008). Emote aloud during learning with AutoTutor: Applying the Facial Action Coding System to cognitive-affective states during learning. Cognition and Emotion, 22, 777-788;
85. Rozin, P., & Cohen, A. B. (2003). High frequency of facial expressions corresponding to confusion, concentration, and worry in an analysis of naturally occurring facial expressions of Americans. Emotion, 3, 68-75.
86. 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;
87. Silvia, P. J., & Berg, C. (2011). Finding movies interesting: how expertise and appraisals influence the aesthetic experience of film. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29(1), 73-88.
88. Demir, E., Desmet, P. M. A., & Hekkert, P. (2009). Appraisal patterns of emotions in human-product interaction. International Journal of Design, 3, 41-51.
89. Parsons, M. J. (1987). How we understand art: a cognitive developmental account of aesthetic experience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
90. Kuppens, P., Van Mechelen, I., Smits, D. J. M., & Ceulemans, E. (2007). Individual differences in patterns of appraisal and anger experience. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 689-713.
91. 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, 100-106.
92. Cooper, J. M., & Silvia, P. J. (2009). Opposing art: Rejection as an action tendency of hostile aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27, 109-126.
93. Demir, E., Desmet, P. M. A., & Hekkert, P. (2009). Appraisal patterns of emotions in human-product interaction. International Journal of Design, 3, 41-51.
94. Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2003). Shame and guilt. New York: Guilford;
95. Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). Emerging insights into the nature and function of pride. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 147-150;
96. Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). The self in self-conscious emotions: A cognitive appraisal approach. In J. L. Tracy, R. W. Robins, & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), The self-conscious emotions: theory and research (pp. 3-20). New York: Guilford.
97. Parkinson, B. (2001). Putting appraisal in context. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (pp. 173-186). New York: Oxford University Press.
98. Carroll, N. (1996). The paradox of suspense. In P. Vorderer, H. J. Wulff, & M. Friedrichsen (Eds.), Suspense (pp. 71-91). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates;
99. Juslin, P. N., & Västfjäll, D. (2008). Emotional responses to music: The need to consider underlying mechanisms. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 559-575;
100. Miall, D. S. (2009). Neuroaesthetics of literary reading. In M. Skov & O. Vartanian (Eds.), Neuroaesthetics (pp. 233-248). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
101. Dutton, D. (2008). The art instinct: beauty, pleasure, and human evolution. New York: Bloomsbury.