Some forms of art provide information through a single sensory modality, whereas multisensory information usually enhances aesthetic experience. When external information is unavailable, mental imagery can function as “weak perception”, supplying additional sensory details. A preregistered virtual reality study was conducted in an immersive virtual museum to examine how multisensory imagery, professional background, and sensory imagery ability relate to imagery vividness, emotional arousal, valence, and the aesthetic appeal of paintings. The results demonstrated that multisensory imagery significantly influenced aesthetic evaluations, and that individuals’ imagery abilities were associated with these evaluations. Further analyses indicated that vividness and emotional arousal statistically accounted for the association between multisensory imagery and aesthetic appeal, and that vividness accounted for the association between sensory imagery ability and aesthetic evaluations. These findings link multisensory imagery to vividness and aesthetic appeal, offering implications for aesthetic cognition. They also suggest that intentional multisensory imagery training may improve art appreciation.
AlbertazziL.CanalL.MiccioloR. (2015). Cross-modal associations between materic painting and classical Spanish music. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00424
2.
AndradeJ.MayJ.DeeproseC.BaughS.-J.GanisG. (2014). Assessing vividness of mental imagery: The Plymouth Sensory Imagery Questionnaire. British Journal of Psychology, 105(4), 547–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12050
3.
BauerD.SchwanS. (2018). Expertise influences meaning-making with Renaissance portraits: Evidence from gaze and thinking-aloud. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(2), 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000085
4.
BeckerP. A. (2020). Teaching language and literacy through the visual arts: An interdisciplinary, literature-based approach. Teaching Exceptional Children, 52(3), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059919894736
5.
BelfiA. M. (2019). Emotional valence and vividness of imagery predict aesthetic appeal in music. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, and Brain, 29(2–3), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/pmu0000232
6.
BelfiA. M.VesselE. A.StarrG. G. (2018). Individual ratings of vividness predict aesthetic appeal in poetry. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(3), 341–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000153
7.
BerryD. T.WetterM. W.BaerR. A.LarsenL.ClarkC.MonroeK. (1992). MMPI-2 random responding indices: Validation using a self-report methodology. Psychological Assessment, 4(3), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.3.340
8.
Boutoleau-BretonnièreC.BretonnièreC.EvrardC.RocherL.MazziettiA.KoenigO.VercellettoM.DerkinderenP.Thomas-AntérionC. (2016). Ugly aesthetic perception associated with emotional changes in experience of art by behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia patients. Neuropsychologia, 89, 96–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.06.001
9.
BrieberD.ForsterM.LederH. (2020). On the mutual relation between art experience and viewing time. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(2), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000210
10.
BrieberD.NadalM.LederH.RosenbergR. (2014). Art in time and space: Context modulates the relation between art experience and viewing time. PLoS ONE, 9(6), e99019. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099019
BrielmannA. A.ValeL.PelliD. G. (2017). Beauty at a glance: The feeling of beauty and the amplitude of pleasure are independent of stimulus duration. Journal of Vision, 17(14), 9. https://doi.org/10.1167/17.14.9
13.
ChamberlainR.DrakeJ. E.KozbeltA.HickmanR.SievJ.WagemansJ. (2019). Artists as experts in visual cognition: An update. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000156
14.
ChamberlainR.McManusI. C.RileyH.RankinQ.BrunswickN. (2013). Local processing enhancements associated with superior observational drawing are due to enhanced perceptual functioning, not weak central coherence. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(7), 1448–1466. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.750678
15.
ChamberlainR.WagemansJ. (2015). Visual arts training is linked to flexible attention to local and global levels of visual stimuli. Acta Psychologica, 161, 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.08.012
ChenJ.MokminN. A. M. (2024). Enhancing primary school students’ performance, flow state, and cognitive load in visual arts education through the integration of augmented reality technology in a card game. Education and Information Technologies, 29(12), 15441–15461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12456-x
18.
ChenZ.LiuY.WangX.WuL.HuangJ. (2025). Can sounds change the perception of pictures? Exploring the influence of semantic and spatial congruency on aesthetic perception. Collabra: Psychology, 11(1), 133241. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.133241
19.
ChengF. P.-H.SaglamA.AndréS.PooresmaeiliA. (2020). Cross-modal integration of reward value during oculomotor planning. eNeuro, 7(1), ENEURO.0381-19.2020. https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0381-19.2020
20.
CleeremansA.GinsburghV.KleinO.NouryA. (2016). What’s in a name? The effect of an artist’s name on aesthetic judgments. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 34(1), 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237415621197
21.
ContiF.IrishM. (2021). Harnessing visual imagery and oculomotor behaviour to understand prospection. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(4), 272–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.01.009
22.
CornilY.ChandonP. (2016). Pleasure as a substitute for size: How multisensory imagery can make people happier with smaller food portions. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(5), 847–864. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0299
23.
CotterK. N.Rodriguez-BoerwinkleR. M.ChristensenA. P.FeketeA.SmithJ. K.SmithL. F.TinioP. P.SilviaP. J. (2023). Updating the Aesthetic Fluency Scale: Revised long and short forms for research in the psychology of the arts. PLoS ONE, 18(2), e0281547. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281547
24.
CurrieG. (1985). The authentic and the aesthetic. American Philosophical Quarterly, 22(2), 153–160.
25.
DeloguF.GravinaM.DongX.FrolkaM.KuhnD.YuN. (2021). Tactile beauty is in the hand, but also in the eye of the beholder: Interaction between haptic and visual experiences in aesthetic judgement. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(4), 725–734. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000327
26.
DiessnerR.GenthôsR.ArthurK.AdkinsB.PohlingR. (2021). Olfactory and gustatory beauty: Aesthetic emotions and trait appreciation of beauty. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000262
27.
DijkstraN.BoschS. E.van GervenM. A. (2019). Shared neural mechanisms of visual perception and imagery. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(5), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.02.004
28.
DixonS. (2015). Digital performance: A history of new media in theater, dance, performance art, and installation. MIT Press.
29.
Elver BozT.DemirkanH.UrgenB. A. (2024). Visual perception of the built environment in virtual reality: A systematic characterization of human aesthetic experience in spaces with curved boundaries. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 18(6), 1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000504
30.
FanJ.NiX.WuT.WangY.QianY. (2024). Psychological benefits of arts participation for emerging adulthood: A pathway to flourishing. Behavioral Sciences, 14(6), 448. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14060448
31.
FeketeA.PelowskiM.SpeckerE.BrieberD.RosenbergR.LederH. (2023a). The Vienna Art Picture System (VAPS): A data set of 999 paintings and subjective ratings for art and aesthetics research. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 17(5), 660–671. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000460
32.
FeketeA.SpeckerE.MikuniJ.TruppM. D.LederH. (2023b). When the painting meets its musical inspiration: The impact of multimodal art experience on aesthetic enjoyment and subjective well-being in the museum. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 19(6), 1549–1564. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000641
33.
FelisbertiF. M.CropperS. J. (2025). Mental imagery in aesthetic appreciation and the understanding of the self and others. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 19(4), 672–683. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000568
34.
FoxJ.WeisbergS. (2011). An R companion to applied regression (2nd ed.). Sage.
35.
FrameJ.MehlK.HeadK.BelfiA. M. (2024). The influence of sensory modality on aesthetic evaluations of poetry. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000673
36.
GiorgiA.MenicocciS.ForteM.FerraraV.MingioneM.Alaimo Di LoroP.InguscioB. M. S.FerraraS.BabiloniF.VozziA.RoncaV.CartocciG. (2023). Virtual and reality: A neurophysiological pilot study of the sarcophagus of the spouses. Brain Sciences, 13(4), 635. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13040635
37.
HashimS.StewartL.KüssnerM. B. (2020). Saccadic eye-movements suppress visual mental imagery and partly reduce emotional response during music listening. Music & Science, 3, 2059204320959580. https://doi.org/10.1177/2059204320959580
38.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
39.
HeM.ZhangW.ShahidH.LiuY.LiangX.DuanY.WangH.HeX. (2021). The impact of motor imageries on aesthetic judgment of Chinese calligraphy: An fMRI study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15, 706425. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2021.706425
40.
HerholzS. C.HalpernA. R.ZatorreR. J. (2012). Neuronal correlates of perception, imagery, and memory for familiar tunes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(6), 1382–1397. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00216
41.
HitsuwariJ.NomuraM. (2022). How individual states and traits predict aesthetic appreciation of haiku poetry. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 40(1), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237420986420
HowlinC.VicaryS.OrgsG. (2020). Audiovisual aesthetics of sound and movement in contemporary dance. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 38(2), 191–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237418818633
44.
HuiJ.ZhouY.OubibiM.DiW.ZhangL.ZhangS. (2022). Research on art teaching practice supported by virtual reality (VR) technology in the primary schools. Sustainability, 14(3), 1246. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031246
JiJ. L.HeyesS. B.MacLeodC.HolmesE. A. (2016). Emotional mental imagery as simulation of reality: Fear and beyond—A tribute to Peter Lang. Behavior Therapy, 47(5), 702–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2015.11.004
47.
JohnsonK. T.WilliamsP. G.SmithT. W.BaucomB. R. (2023). Individual differences in aesthetic engagement and proneness to aesthetic chill: Associations with stress-related growth orientation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 17(6), 748–761. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000410
48.
JoungJ.KimJ. (2023). Comparison of audiovisual components of dance in novices and experts’ aesthetic interest perceptions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 41(2), 591–622. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374231152775
49.
KozbeltA.SeeleyW. P. (2007). Integrating art historical, psychological, and neuroscientific explanations of artists’ advantages in drawing and perception. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(2), 80–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.2.80
50.
KüssnerM. B.EerolaT. (2019). The content and functions of vivid and soothing visual imagery during music listening: Findings from a survey study. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, and Brain, 29(2-3), 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/pmu0000238
51.
KüssnerM. B.TaruffiL.FloridouG. A. (2023). Music and mental imagery. Routledge.
52.
LavouéÉVillenaveS.SernaA.DidierC.BaertP.LavouéG. (2023). Influence of scenarios and player traits on flow in virtual reality. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 30(9), 6208–6221. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2023.3332261
53.
LeeH.YounN. (2025). Immersed in art: The impact of affinity for technology interaction and hedonic motivation on aesthetic experiences in virtual reality. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 43(1), 355–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241282938
54.
LocherP.SmithL.SmithJ. (1999). Original paintings versus slide and computer reproductions: A comparison of viewer responses. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 17(2), 121–129. https://doi.org/10.2190/R1WN-TAF2-376D-EFUH
55.
ManolikaM.JacobsenT. (2025). What makes people high in openness to experience happy? The mediating effect of arts engagement. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 43(1), 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241267934
56.
MargulisE. H.LevineW. H.Simchy-GrossR.KrogerC. (2017). Expressive intent, ambiguity, and aesthetic experiences of music and poetry. PLoS ONE, 12(7), e0179145. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179145
57.
MarinM. M.LederH. (2018). Exploring aesthetic experiences of females: Affect-related traits predict complexity and arousal responses to music and affective pictures. Personality and Individual Differences, 125, 80–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.12.027
58.
Marín-MoralesJ.Higuera-TrujilloJ. L.GrecoA.GuixeresJ.LlinaresC.GentiliC.ScilingoE. P.AlcañizM.ValenzaG. (2019). Real vs. immersive-virtual emotional experience: Analysis of psycho-physiological patterns in a free exploration of an art museum. PLoS ONE, 14(10), e0223881. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223881
59.
MarkovićS. (2012). Components of aesthetic experience: Aesthetic fascination, aesthetic appraisal, and aesthetic emotion. i-Perception, 3(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1068/i0450aap
60.
MeadeA. W.CraigS. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085
61.
MehlK.GuglianoM.BelfiA. M. (2023). The role of imagery and emotion in the aesthetic appeal of music, poetry, and paintings. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts., 19(6), 1373–1382. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000623
62.
MyszkowskiN.ZenasniF. (2016). Individual differences in aesthetic ability: The case for an aesthetic quotient. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 750. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00750
63.
PearsonJ.NaselarisT.HolmesE. A.KosslynS. M. (2015). Mental imagery: Functional mechanisms and clinical applications. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(10), 590–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.08.003
64.
PeckJ.BargerV. A.WebbA. (2013). In search of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.001
65.
PelowskiM.ForsterM.TinioP. P.SchollM.LederH. (2017). Beyond the lab: An examination of key factors influencing interaction with ‘real’ and museum-based art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(3), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000141
66.
PiccardiL.MassiddaM.TravagliniL.PescarinS.GiancolaM.PalmieroM.DeflorianM.ApollaroS.ListaR.NoriR. (2025). Comparing immersive and non-immersive VR: Effects on spatial learning and aesthetic experience in museum settings. Brain Sciences, 15(8), 852. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15080852
67.
Piechowski-JozwiakB.BollerF.BogousslavskyJ. (2017). Universal connection through art: Role of mirror neurons in art production and reception. Behavioral Sciences, 7(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs7020029
68.
PițurS.MiuA. C. (2025). Poetry-elicited emotions: Reading experience and psychological mechanisms. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 19(2), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000525
69.
QiuL.ZhengX.WangY. F. (2008). Revision of the positive affect and negative affect scale. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology, 14(3), 249–254.
70.
RhodesJ.NedzaK.MayJ.ClementsL. (2024). Imagery training for athletes with low imagery abilities. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 36(5), 831–844. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2024.2337019
71.
RodriguezR. M.FeketeA.SilviaP. J.CotterK. N. (2024). The art of feeling different: Exploring the diversity of emotions experienced during an art museum visit. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 18(3), 303–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000443
72.
SahmurovaA.ArikanS.GursesliM. C.DuradoniM. (2022). ADHD Symptoms as a Stressor Leading to Depressive Symptoms among University Students: The mediating role of perceived stress between ADHD and depression. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(17), 11091. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711091
73.
SchindlerI.HosoyaG.MenninghausW.BeermannU.WagnerV.EidM.SchererK. R. (2017). Measuring aesthetic emotions: A review of the literature and a new assessment tool. PLoS ONE, 12(6), e0178899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178899
74.
SchubertT.FriedmannF.RegenbrechtH. (2001). The experience of presence: Factor analytic insights. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 10(3), 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474601300343603
75.
SchwabeK.MenzelC.MullinC.WagemansJ.RediesC. (2018). Gist perception of image composition in abstract artworks. i-Perception, 9(3), 2041669518780797. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669518780797
76.
ShiJ.HonjoT.ZhangK.FuruyaK. (2020). Using virtual reality to assess landscape: A comparative study between on-site survey and virtual reality of aesthetic preference and landscape cognition. Sustainability, 12(7), 2875. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072875
77.
SilviaP. J. (2013). Interested experts, confused novices: Art expertise and the knowledge emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 31(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.2190/em.31.1.f
78.
SpeckerE.ForsterM.BrinkmannH.BoddyJ.PelowskiM.RosenbergR.LederH. (2020). The Vienna Art Interest and Art Knowledge Questionnaire (VAIAK): A unified and validated measure of art interest and art knowledge. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(2), 172–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000205
79.
SpeckerE.TinioP. P.Van ElkM. (2017). Do you see what I see? An investigation of the aesthetic experience in the laboratory and museum. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(3), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000107
80.
ŞenyurtA. Y.GültepeB.Kiremitçi CanıözE. (2025). Artists and mate preferences: The effects of being a painter and intellectuality. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 44(1), 429–445. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374251314647
81.
Van PaasschenJ.BacciF.MelcherD. P. (2015). The influence of art expertise and training on emotion and preference ratings for representational and abstract artworks. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0134241. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134241
82.
VenkatesanT.WangQ. J. (2023). Feeling connected: The role of haptic feedback in VR concerts and the impact of haptic music players on the music listening experience. Arts, 12(4), 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts12040148
WangX.BylinskiiZ.HertzmannA.PepperellR. (2025). A computational approach to studying aesthetic judgments of ambiguous artworks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 19(3), 396–410. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000579
85.
WangY.ZhengM. (2025). Effects of emotional valence, training experience, and audiovisual dual modality on emotion in dance. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 44(1), 371–398. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374251320531
86.
WanzerD. L.FinleyK. P.ZarianS.CortezN. (2020). Experiencing flow while viewing art: Development of the aesthetic experience questionnaire. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(1), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000203
87.
WatsonD.ClarkL. A.TellegenA. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
88.
WedelM.BignéE.ZhangJ. (2020). Virtual and augmented reality: Advancing research in consumer marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(3), 443–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.04.004
89.
WickenM.KeoghR.PearsonJ. (2021). The critical role of mental imagery in human emotion: Insights from fear-based imagery and aphantasia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 288(1946), 20210267. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.0267
90.
WilliamsP. G.JohnsonK. T.CurtisB. J.KingJ. B.AndersonJ. S. (2018). Individual differences in aesthetic engagement are reflected in resting-state fMRI connectivity: Implications for stress resilience. NeuroImage, 179, 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.042
91.
WuH. Y.KuoB. C.HuangC. M.TsaiP. J.HsuA. L.HsuL. M.LiuC.-Y.ChenJ.-H.WuC. W. (2020). Think hard or think smart: Network reconfigurations after divergent thinking associate with creativity performance. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 14, 571118. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.571118
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
