This research aimed to perform linguistic analysis of the statements of experts and novices in the arts concerning figurative paintings from the 16th to 19th century of different aesthetic value under different instructions. The experts were selected based on a formal criterion of education in visual arts. Based on previous research, the paintings were divided into three groups: beautiful, not beautiful and controversial. The participants viewed them from different points of view defined by seven instructions. The Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) was used to measure the connotation of statements in emotional and cognitive terms. Hypotheses, according to which the statements of novices are marked more with emotional, and those of experts more with cognitive processes, were only partially confirmed. It turned out that the emotional or cognitive connotation of statements concerning paintings is mostly modified by the point from which they are viewed and their aesthetic value.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
Barthes R. (1981). Camera lucida: Reflections on Photography. New York: Hill & Wang.
Belke B. Leder H. Strobach T. & Carbon C. -C. (2010). Cognitive fluency: High-level processing dynamics in art appreciation. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts4(4) 214–222. doi: 10.1037/a0019648
Berlyne D. E. (1960). Conflict arousal and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bubić A. Sušac A. & Palmović M. (2017). Observing individuals viewing art: The effects of titles on viewers eye-movement profiles. Empirical Studies of the Arts35(2) 194-213. doi: 10.1177/0276237416683499
Cooper J. M. & Silvia P. J. (2009). Opposing art: Rejection as an action tendency of hostile aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts27 111–128. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.27.1.f
Cupchik G. C. (2011). The digitized self in the internet age. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts5(4) 318–328. doi: 10.1037/a0024820
Cupchik G. C. (2016). The aesthetics of emotion: Up the down staircase of the mind-body. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cupchik G. C. & Gignac A. (2007). Layering in art and in aesthetic experience. Visual Arts Research33(1) 56–71.
Cupchik G. C. & László J. (1992). Emerging visions of the aesthetic process: Psychology semiology and philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
de Paiva Vieira M. (2011). Ekphrasis in “Girl with a Pearl Earring.” Scripta Uniandrade9(2) 11–29.
DeAngelus M. & Pelz J. B. (2009). Top-down control of eye movements: Yarbus revisited. Visual Cognition17(6–7) 790–811. doi: 10.1080/135062 80902793843
Di Dio C. & Gallese V. (2009). Neuroaesthetics: A review. Current Opinion in Neurobiology19 682–687. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2009.09.001
Ericsson K. A. & Simon H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review87(3) 215–251. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215
Francuz P. Jankowski T. & Augustynowicz P. (in the review). What do you mean when you say you like this painting?
Francuz P. Zaniewski I. Augustynowicz P. Kopiś N. & Jankowski T. (2018). Eye movement correlates of expertise in visual arts. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience12(87) 1–13. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00087/full
Freedberg D. & Gallese V. (2007). Motion emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences11(5) 197–203. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.003
Gerger G. & Leder H. (2015). Titles change the esthetic appreciations of paintings. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience9(464) 1–10. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00464
Gombrich E. H. (1995). The story of art (16th ed.). London: Phaidon Press.
Hirsh J. B. & Peterson J. B. (2009). Personality and language use in self-narratives. Journal of Research in Personality43(3) 524–527. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.01.006
Jahoda G. (2005). Theodor Lipps and the shift from “sympathy” to “empathy.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences41(2) 151–163. doi: 10.1002/jhbs.20080
Jakesch M. & Leder H. (2009). Finding meaning in art: Preferred levels of ambiguity in art appreciation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology62(11) 2105–2112. doi: 10.1080/17470210903038974
Jucker J. -L. Barrett J. L. & Wlodarski R. (2014). “I just don’t get it”: Perceived artists’ intentions affect art evaluations. Empirical Studies of the Arts32(2) 149–182. doi: 10.2190/EM.32.2.c
Kaplan S. & Kaplan R. (1989). The visual environment: Public participation in design and planning. Journal of Social Issues45(1) 59–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1989.tb01533.x
Knobloch-Westerwick S. & Keplinger C. (2006). Mystery appeal: Effects of uncertainty and resolution on the enjoyment of mystery. Media Psychology8(3) 193–212. doi: 10.1207/s1532785xmep0803_1
Kuchinke L. Trapp S. & Jacobs A. M. (2009). Pupillary responses in art appreciation: Effects of aesthetic emotions. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts3(3): 156–163. doi: 10.1037/a0014464
Leder H. Belke B. Oeberst A. & Augustin D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology95(4) 489–508. doi: 10.1348/0007126042369811
Leder H. Carbon C. C. & Ripsas A. L. (2006). Entitling art: Influence of title information on understanding and appreciation of paintings. Acta Psychologica121(2) 176–198. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.005
Leder H. Gerger G. Brieber D. & Schwarz N. (2014). What makes an art expert? Emotion and evaluation in art appreciation. Cognition & Emotion28(6) 1137–1147. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2013.870132
Levinson J. (1985). Titles. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism44(1) 29–39. doi: 10.2307/430537
Locher P. Krupinski E. A. Mello-Thoms C. & Nodine C. F. (2007). Visual interest in pictorial art during an aesthetic experience. Spatial Vision21(1–2) 55–77. doi: 10.1163/156856808782713762
Massaro D. Savazzi F. Di Dio C. Freedberg D. Gallese V. Gilli G. & Marchetti A. (2012). When art moves the eyes: A behavioral and eye-tracking study. PLoS ONE7(5) 1–16. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037285
McSorley E. & McCloy R. (2011). The impact of domain and expertise on aesthetic experience: An eye movement study. In Poster to the European Conference of Visual Perception (Toulouse France).
Mehl M. R. & Pennebaker J. W. (2003). The sounds of social life: A psychometric analysis of students’ daily social environments and natural conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology84 857–870. doi: 10.1037/0022-35220.127.116.117
Millis K. (2001). Making meaning brings pleasure: The influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. Emotion1(3) 320–329. doi: 10.1037/1528-3518.104.22.1680
Mills M. Hollingworth A. van der Stigchel S. Hoffman L. & Dodd M. D. (2011). Examining the influence of task set on eye movements and fixations. Journal of Vision11(8) 1–15. doi: 10.1167/11.8.17
Mullennix J. W. & Robinet J. (2018). Art expertise and the processing of titled abstract art. Perception47(4) 359–378. doi: 10.1177/0301006617752314
Nodine C. F. Locher P. J. & Krupinski E. A. (1993). The role of formal art training on perception and aesthetic judgment of art compositions. Leonardo26(3) 219–227. doi: 10.2307/1575815
Pelowski M. Markey P. S. Forster M. Gerger G. & Leder H. (2017). Move me astonish me… delight my eyes and brain: The Vienna integrated model of top-down and bottom-up processes in art perception (VIMAP) and corresponding affective evaluative and neurophysiological correlates. Physics of Life Reviews21 80–125. doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2017.02.003
Pelowski M. Markey P. S. Lauring J. O. & Leder H. (2016). Visualizing the impact of art: An update and comparison of current psychological models of art experience. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience10 1–21. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00160
Pennebaker J. W. & King L. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology77 1296–1312. doi: 10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.1246
Pennebaker J. W. Chung C. Ireland M. Gonzales A. & Booth R. (2007). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2007. [Computer software]. Austin: LIWC.net.
Pennebaker J. W. Francis M. E. & Booth R. J. (2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC): LIWC 2007. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reber R. Schwarz N. & Winkielman P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review8(4): 364–382. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3
Roald T. (2007). Cognition in emotion: An investigation through experiences with art. New York: Rodopi.
Russell P. A. (2003). Effort after meaning and the hedonic value of paintings. British Journal of Psychology 94(1) 99–110. doi: 10.1348/000712603762842138
Scherer K. R. (2001). Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In T. Johnstone (Ed.) Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory methods research (pp. 92–120). New York: Oxford University Press.
Schwarz N. (2012). Feelings-as-information theory. In: P. Van Lange A. Kruglanski and E.T. Higgins (Eds). Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 289–308). London: Sage.
Silvia P. J. (2005). Emotional responses to art: From collation and arousal to cognition and emotion. Review of General Psychology9 342–357. doi: 10.1037/1089-26126.96.36.1992
Silvia P. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195158557.001.0001
Silvia P. J. (2009). Looking past pleasure: Anger confusion disgust pride surprise and other unusual aesthetic emotions. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts3(1) 48–51. doi: 10.1037/a0014632
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 Arts1 100–106. doi: 10.1037/1931-38188.8.131.52
Stamatopoulou D. (2017). Empathy and the aesthetic: Why does art still move us? Cognitive Processing19(2) 169–186. doi: 10.1007/s10339-017-0836-3
Stamps A. (2004). Mystery complexity legibility and coherence: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology24(1) 1–16. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00023-9
Swami V. (2013). Context matters: Investigating the impact of contextual information on aesthetic appreciation of paintings by Max Ernst and Pablo Picasso. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts7(3) 285–295. doi: 10.1037/a0030965
Szymczyk B. Żakowicz W. & Stemplewska-Żakowicz K. (2012). Computerized text analysis: Polish adaptation of James Pennebaker’s LIWC dictionary. Przegląd Psychologiczny55(2): 195–209.
Tatler B. W. Wade N. J. Kwan H. Findlay J. M. & Velichkovsky B. M. (2010). Yarbus eye movements and vision. I-Perception1(1) 7–27. doi: 10.1068/i0382
Tausczik Y. R. & Pennebaker J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology29(1) 24–54. doi: 10.1177/0261927X09351676
Thömmes K. & Hübner R. (2014). A picture is worth a word: The effect of titles on aesthetic judgments. In A. Kozbelt (Ed.) Proceedings of the twenty-third Biennial Congress of the International Association of Empirical Aesthetics (pp. 599–603).
Vogt S. & Magnussen S. (2007). Expertise in pictorial perception: Eye-movement patterns and visual memory in artists and laymen. Perception36(1) 91–100. doi: 10.1068/p5262
Waligórska A. (2006). The eye and narration. Relations of artistic expertise and mode of interpretation of narrative and non-narrative paintings. Psychology of Language and Communication10(1) 45–64.
Weston S. J. Cox K. S. Condon D. M. & Jackson J. J. (2016). A comparison of human narrative coding of redemption and automated linguistic analysis for understanding life stories. Journal of Personality84(5) 594–606. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12183
Yarbus A. L. (1967). Eye movements and vision. New York: Plenum.