Aesthetic psychology has discussed many aspects of aesthetic preferences for spatial composition. However, there have been few empirical explorations of the spatial composition of traditional Chinese paintings. The results of this experiment showed that the shape of the frame had a significant effect on aesthetic preferences. Participants preferred to put two figures at certain relative horizontal distances from each other according to the horizontal shape of the frame but may have difficulty in adapting the relative vertical distance according to the vertical shape of the frame. Furthermore, the unique aesthetic interest of traditional Chinese long-vertical scroll paintings was discussed. This discussion revealed that, in a creative way, ancient Chinese artists followed the same aesthetic principles we observed, and they developed the artistic conception and romantic charm of traditional Chinese paintings.
ArnheimR. (1974). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
2.
ArnheimR. (1988). The power of the center. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
3.
BarnhartR.YangX.NieC.CahillJ.LangS.HungW. (2002). Three thousand years of Chinese painting. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
4.
BerlyneD. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
5.
BertaminiM.BennettK. M.BodeC. (2011). The anterior bias in visual art: The case of images of animals. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 16673–689.
6.
BloodA. J.ZatorreR. J. (2001). Intensely pleasurable response to music correlate with activity in the brain regions implicated in reward and emotion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 9811818–11823.
7.
Cela-CondeC. J.AyalaF. J.MunarE.MaestúF.NadalM.CapóM. A. …MartyG. (2009). Sex-related similarities and differences in the neural correlates of beauty. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 1063847–3852.
8.
Cela-CondeC. J.MartyG.MaestúF.OrtizT.MunarE.FernándezA.QuesneyF. (2004). Activation of the prefrontal cortex in the human visual aesthetic perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 1016321–6325.
9.
ChangR. (2008). Spatial composition on paintings. Beijing: People's Fine Arts Publishing House. (In Chinese).
10.
CharkravartyA. (2010). Mona Lisa's smile: A hypothesis based on a new principle of art neuroscience. Medical Hypotheses, 7569–72.
11.
ChatterjeeA. (2003). Prospects for a cognitive neuroscience of visual aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 455–59.
12.
Chinese Paintings Gallery. (2002). Beijing: People's Fine Arts Publishing House. (In Chinese).
CupchikG. C.VartanianO.CrawleyA.MikulisD. J. (2009). Viewing artworks: Contributions of cognitive control and perceptual facilitation to aesthetic experience. Brain and Cognition, 7084–91.
15.
Di DioC.MacalusoE.RizzolattiG. (2007). The golden beauty: Brain response to classical and renaissance sculptures. PLoS ONE, 2(11): e1201.
16.
EllisA. W.MillerD. (1981). Left and wrong in adverts: Neuropsychological correlates of aesthetic preference. British Journal of Psychology, 72225–229.
17.
FairhallS. L.IshaiA. (2008). Neural correlates of object indeterminacy in art compositions. Consciousness and Cognition, 17923–932.
18.
FengM. (2007). The comparative study of spatial expression in traditional Chinese paintings and western paintings. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Press. (In Chinese).
19.
GaffronM. (1950). Left and right in pictures. Art Quarterly, 13312–321.
20.
GershoniS.HochsteinS. (2011). Measuring pictorial balance perception at first glance using Japanese calligraphy. i-Perception, 2508–527.
21.
GreenC. D. (1995). All that glitters: A review of psychological research on the aesthetics of the golden section. Perception, 24937–968.
22.
GuidiS.PalmerS. E. (in press). The internal structure of a rectangular frame: Position, orientation, and direction. Art & Perception, 319–52.
23.
HuangZ.ZhangW. (2012). Neuroaesthetics: Exploring aesthetics and the brain. Advances in Psychological Science, 20672–681. (In Chinese).
24.
JacobsenT.BuchtaK.KöhlerM.SchrögerE. (2004). The primacy of beauty in judging the aesthetics of objects. Psychological Reports, 941253–1260.
25.
JacobsenT.HöfelL. (2002). Aesthetic judgments of novel graphic patterns: Analyses of individual judgments. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 95755–766.
26.
JacobsenT.HöfelL. (2003). Descriptive and evaluative judgement processes: Behavioural and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioural Neuroscience, 3289–299.
27.
JacobsenT.SchubotzR. I.HöfelL.CramonD. Y. (2006). Brain correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty. NeuroImage, 29276–285.
28.
KawabataH.ZekiS. (2004). Neural correlates of beauty. Journal of Neurophysiology, 911699–1705.
29.
KirkU.SkovM.ChristensenM. S.NygaardN. (2009). Brain correlates of aesthetic expertise: A parametric fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 69306–315.
30.
LattoR.BrainD.KellyB. (2000). An oblique effect in aesthetics: Homage to Mondrian (1872–1944). Perception, 29981–987.
31.
LevyJ. (1976). Lateral dominance and aesthetic preference. Neuropsychologia, 14431–445.
32.
LeyssenM.LinsenS.SammartinoJ.PalmerS. E. (2012). Aesthetic preference for spatial composition in multiobject pictures. i-Perception, 325–49.
33.
LinsenS.LeyssenM.SammartinoJ.PalmerS. E. (2011). Aesthetic preferences in the size of images of real-world objects. Perception, 40291–298.
34.
LivingstoneM. (2002). Vision and art: The biology of seeing. New York: Abrams.
35.
LocherP.OverbeekeK.StappersP. (2005). Spatial balance of color triads in the abstract art of Piet Mondrian. Perception, 34169–189.
36.
LocherP.StappersP. J.OverbeekeK. (1998). The role of balance as an organizing design principle underlying adults' compositional strategies for creating visual displays. Acta Psychologica, 99141–161.
37.
McManusI. C.StöverK.KimD. (2011). Arnheim's Gestalt theory of visual balance: Examining the compositional structure of art photographs and abstract images. i-Perception, 2615–647.
38.
McManusI. C.ThomasP. (2007). Eye centring in portraits: A theoretical and empirical evaluation. Perception, 36167–182.
39.
McManusI. C.WuW. (2013). “The square is … bulky, heavy, contented, plain, good-natured, stupid …”: A cross-cultural study of the aesthetics and meanings of rectangles. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7130–139.
40.
NachsonI.ArgamanE.LuriaA. (1999). Effects of directional habits and handedness on aesthetic preference for left and right profiles. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30106–114.
41.
NadalM.MunarE.CapóM.RossellóJ.Cela-CondeC. J. (2008). Towards a framework for the study of the neural correlates of aesthetic preference. Spatial Vision, 21379–396.
42.
NalbantianS. (2008). Neuroaesthetics: Neuroscientific theory and illustration from the arts. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 33357–368.
43.
OsborneH. (1979). Some theories of aesthetic judgment. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 38135–144.
44.
PalmerS. E. (1991). On goodness, Gestalt, groups, and Garner: Local symmetry subgroups as a theory of figural goodness. In LockheadGPomerantzJ. (Eds.), The perception of structure: Essays in honor of Wendell R. Garner (pp. 23–39). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
45.
PalmerS. E.GardnerJ.WickensT. (2008). Aesthetic issues in spatial composition: Effects of position and direction on framing single objects. Spatial Vision, 21421–449.
46.
PalmerS. E.GriscomW. (2013). Accounting for taste: Individual differences in preference for harmony. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20453–461.
47.
PalmerS. E.GuidiS. (2011). Mapping the perceptual structure of rectangles through goodness-of-fit ratings. Perception, 401428–1446.
48.
PalmerS. E.SchlossK.SammartinoJ. (2013). Visual aesthetics and human preference. Annual Review of Psychology, 64,17.1–17.31.
49.
RamachandranV. S.HirsteinW. (1999). The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(7), 15–51.
50.
ReimannM.ZaichkowskyJ.NeuhausC.BenderT.WeberB. (2010). Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20431–441.
51.
SammartinoJ.PalmerS. E. (2012). Aesthetic issues in spatial composition: Effects of vertical position and perspective on framing single objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38865–879.
52.
SusanB.ShihH. (1985). Early Chinese texts on painting. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53.
TurnerM. (2009). Classical Chinese landscape painting and the aesthetic appreciation of nature. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 43(1), 106–121.
54.
TylerC. W. (1998a). Painters centre one eye in portraits, Nature, 392877–878.
55.
TylerC. W. (1998b). Eye placement principles in portraits and figure studies over the past two millennia. In RogowitzB. E.PappasT. N. (Eds.), Human Vision and Electronic Imaging III, SPIE Proceedings, 3299431–437.
56.
VartanianO.GoelV. (2004). Neuroanatomical correlates of aesthetic preference for paintings. NeuroReport, 15893–897.
57.
XieH. (2004). Spatial composition. Guangdong: Ling Nan Fine Arts Publishing House. (In Chinese).
58.
ZekiS. (1999a). Inner vision: An exploration of art and the brain. New York: Oxford University Press.
59.
ZekiS. (1999b). Art and the brain. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 676–96.
60.
ZhangW. (2011). The rise and development of neuroaesthetics in the West. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 29(4), 48–56. (In Chinese).
61.
ZhangZ.TanY. (2001). The spatial composition of Chinese landscape paintings. Jinan: Shandong Fine Arts Publishing House. (In Chinese).
62.
ZongB. (1987). The spatial consciousness expressed by Chinese painting and pooetry. In Aesthetics and artistic conception. Beijing: People's Publishing House. (In Chinese).
