This article questions certain assumptions concerning film form made by the recent (neuro)psychological film research and compares them to those of precursors of film psychology like Hugo Münsterberg and Rudolf Arnheim, as well as the principles of Gestalt psychology. It is argued that principles of Gestalt psychology such as those of ‘good form’ and good continuation are still underlying the psychological research of film, becoming particularly apparent in its approach to continuity editing. Following an alternative Gestalt genealogy that links Gestalt theory with more recent dynamic models of brain activity and with accounts of brain complexity and neuronal synchronisation, the article concludes that psychological research on film needs to shift the focus from form to transformation, both in conceiving the perceptual and cognitive processing of films and in approaching film aesthetics more broadly.
Spivey, M. (2007). The continuity of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spivey, M., & Dale, R. (2004). On the continuity of mind: Toward a dynamical account of cognition. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 45, 87–142.
Tan, E. (1994). Film-induced affect as a witness emotion. Poetics, 23, 7–32.
Tognoli, E., & Kelso, S. J. A. (2014). Enlarging the scope: Grasping brain complexity. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 8, 122.
Wagemans, J., Feldman, J., Gepshtein, S., Kimchi, R., Pomerantz, J. R., van der Helm, P. A., & van Leeuwen, C. (2012). A century of gestalt psychology in visual perception II. Conceptual and theoretical foundations. Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1218–1252.
Zacks, J. M., Speer, N. K., & Reynolds, J. R. (2009). Segmentation in reading and film comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(2), 307.
Zacks, J. M., Speer, N. K., Swallow, K. M., & Maley, C. J. (2010). The brain’s cutting-room floor: Segmentation of narrative cinema. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 4, 168.
Zacks, J. M., & Magliano, J. (2011). Film, narrative, and cognitive neuroscience. In F. Bacci & D. Melcher (Eds.), Art and the senses (pp. 435–453). Oxford: Oxford University Press.