When Science Meets Art on Instagram: Examining the Effects of Visual Art on Emotions,Interest,and Social Media Engagement

Abstract

While artistic representations of scientific subjects, phenomena, and data have gained traction on social media, their effects on audience engagement remain understudied. Using an experiment with Instagram users in the United States (N = 655), this study found that exposure to artistic representations of COVID-19 information on Instagram significantly increased individuals’ interest and positive emotions compared with exposure to informationally equivalent data graphs. Positive emotions also mediated the relationship of art exposure on one’s liking and sharing of Instagram posts. We discuss the potential roles of visual art and social media in shaping public engagement with science.

Keywords

visual art Instagram science communication social media engagement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ayzenberg

Hickey

M. R.

Lourenco

S. F.

(2018). Pupillometry reveals the physiological underpinnings of the aversion to holes. PeerJ, 6, Article e4185. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4185

Berger

Milkman

K. L.

(2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of Marketing Research, 49(2), 192–205. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.10.0353

Bredbenner

Simon

S. M.

(2019). Video abstracts and plain language summaries are more effective than graphical abstracts and published abstracts. PLOS ONE, 14(11), Article e0224697. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224697

Cao

Meadows

Wong

Xia

(2021). Understanding consumers’ social media engagement behaviour: An examination of the moderation effect of social media context. Journal of Business Research, 122, 835–846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.025

Caspari

(2022). Instagram as a tool for archaeological science communication. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, 24, Article e00219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2022.e00219

Chadwick

A. E.

(2015). Toward a theory of persuasive hope: Effects of cognitive appraisals, hope appeals, and hope in the context of climate change. Health Communication, 30(6), 598–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2014.916777

Cheung

M. C.

Law

Yip

Wong

C. W. Y.

(2019). Emotional responses to visual art and commercial stimuli: Implications for creativity and aesthetics. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00014

Chou

W.-Y. S.

Budenz

(2020). Considering emotion in COVID-19 vaccine communication: Addressing vaccine hesitancy and fostering vaccine confidence. Health Communication, 35(14), 1718–1722. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1838096

Constine

(2016). Instagram doubles monthly users to 500M in 2 years, sees 300M daily. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/21/instagram-500-million/?guccounter=1

10.

Dobos

A. R.

Orthia

L. A.

Lamberts

(2015). Does a picture tell a thousand words? The uses of digitally produced, multimodal pictures for communicating information about Alzheimer’s disease. Public Understanding of Science, 24(6), 712–730. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514533623

11.

Dolan

Conduit

Frethey-Bentham

Fahy

Goodman

(2019). Social media engagement behavior: A framework for engaging customers through social media content. European Journal of Marketing, 53(10), 2213–2243. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-03-2017-0182

12.

Dryhurst

Schneider

C. R.

Kerr

Freeman

A. L. J.

Recchia

van der Bles

Spiegelhalter

van der Linden

(2020). Risk perceptions of COVID-19 around the world. Journal of Risk Research, 23(7–8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2020.1758193

13.

Fadelli

(2021). SciComm corner—Can art communicate science? Scientia. https://www.scientia.global/scicomm-corner-can-art-communicate-science/

14.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A. G.

Buchner

(2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146

15.

Feldman

Hart

P. S.

(2016). Using political efficacy messages to increase climate activism: The mediating role of emotions. Science Communication, 38(1), 99–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015617941

16.

Freiling

Krause

N. M.

Scheufele

D. A.

Brossard

(2023). Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19. New Media & Society, 25(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211011451

17.

Glade-Wright

(2020). The persistence of plastic: Environmental public art and micro-plastic pollution. Philosophy Activism Nature, 15, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.26180/13461410.v1

18.

Hahn

Berkers

(2021). Visualizing climate change: An exploratory study of the effectiveness of artistic information visualizations. World Art, 11(1), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/21500894.2020.1769718

19.

Hameleers

Powell

T. E.

Van Der Meer

T. G. L. A.

Bos

(2020). A picture paints a thousand lies? The effects and mechanisms of multimodal disinformation and rebuttals disseminated via social media. Political Communication, 37(2), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1674979

20.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.

21.

Jarreau

P. B.

(2020). Why should scientists work with artists? Lifeology. https://lifeology.io/blog/2020/02/10/why-should-scientists-work-with-artists/

22.

Jeannotte

M. S.

(2021). When the gigs are gone: Valuing arts, culture and media in the COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3(1), 100097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100097

23.

Kang

Chen

Kang

(2019). Art in the age of social media: Interaction behavior analysis of Instagram art accounts. Informatics, 6(4), 52. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics6040052

24.

Kennedy

Atske

(2019). Science knowledge varies by race and ethnicity in U.S. Pew Research Center. https://policycommons.net/artifacts/616863/science-knowledge-varies-by-race-and-ethnicity-in-us/1597577/

25.

Khoury

C. K.

Kisel

Kantar

Barber

Ricciardi

Klirs

Kucera

Mehrabi

Johnson

Klabin

Valiño

Á.

Nowakowski

Bartomeus

Ramankutty

Miller

Schipanski

Gore

M. A.

Novy

(2019). Science–graphic art partnerships to increase research impact. Communications Biology, 2(1), 295. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-019-0516-1

26.

Klöckner

C. A.

Sommer

L. K.

(2021). Visual art inspired by climate change: An analysis of audience reactions to 37 artworks presented during 21st UN climate summit in Paris. PLOS ONE, 16(2), Article e0247331. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247331

27.

Knochel

A. D.

(2013). Assembling visuality: Social media, everyday imaging, and critical thinking in digital visual culture. Visual Arts Research, 39(2), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.5406/visuartsrese.39.2.0013

28.

Lauring

J. O.

Pelowski

Forster

Gondan

Ptito

Kupers

(2016). Well, if they like it . . . effects of social groups’ ratings and price information on the appreciation of art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(3), 344–359. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/aca0000063

29.

Leder

Augustin

Belke

(2005). Art and cognition! Consequences for experimental aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 5, 11–20.

30.

Leder

Belke

Oeberst

Augustin

(2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95(4), 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811

31.

Leder

Gerger

Dressler

S. G.

Schabmann

(2012). How art is appreciated. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026396

32.

Lesen

A. E.

Rogan

Blum

M. J.

(2016). Science communication through art: Objectives, challenges, and outcomes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 31(9), 657–660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2016.06.004

33.

Molder

A. L.

Yang

(2022). Visual representations of SARS-CoV-2, emotions, and risk perception of COVID-19. Health Science Reports, 5(1), Article e496. https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.496

34.

Villanueva

I. I.

Jilk

Van Matre

B. R.

Brossard

(2023). Artistic representations of data can help bridge the US political divide over climate change. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1), 195. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00856-9

35.

Xie

(2020). Is a picture worth a thousand words? An empirical study of image content and social media engagement. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243719881113

36.

Liu

P. L.

(2021). COVID-19 information on social media and preventive behaviors: Managing the pandemic through personal responsibility. Social Science & Medicine, 277, 113928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113928

37.

Madan

C. R.

Bayer

Gamer

Lonsdorf

T. B.

Sommer

(2018). Visual complexity and affect: Ratings reflect more than meets the eye. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 2368. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02368

38.

Menninghaus

Wagner

Hanich

Wassiliwizky

Jacobsen

Koelsch

(2017). The distancing-embracing model of the enjoyment of negative emotions in art reception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, Article e347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X17000309

39.

Milkman

K. L.

Berger

(2014). The science of sharing and the sharing of science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(Suppl. 4), 13642–13649. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317511111

40.

Moere

A. V.

Purchase

(2011). On the role of design in information visualization. Information Visualization, 10(4), 356–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473871611415996

41.

Moser

S. C.

(2014). Communicating adaptation to climate change: The art and science of public engagement when climate change comes home. WIREs Climate Change, 5(3), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.276

42.

Mosleh

Pennycook

Rand

D. G.

(2022). Field experiments on social media. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31(1), 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211054761

43.

Nabi

R. L.

Gustafson

Jensen

(2018). Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication, 40(4), 442–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018776019

44.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2022). NASA’s Webb takes star-filled portrait of Pillars of Creation. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-takes-star-filled-portrait-of-pillars-of-creation

45.

Nelson-Field

Riebe

Newstead

(2013). The emotions that drive viral video. Australasian Marketing Journal, 21(4), 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.07.003

46.

Noehrer

Gilmore

Jay

Yehudi

(2021). The impact of COVID-19 on digital data practices in museums and art galleries in the UK and the US. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), Article 236. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00921-8

47.

Pew Research Center. (2021, September). News consumption across social media in 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2021/09/20/news-consumption-across-social-media-in-2021/

48.

Rádlová

Janovcová

Sedláčková

Polák

Nácar

Peléšková

Š.

Frynta

Landová

(2019). Snakes represent emotionally salient stimuli that may evoke both fear and disgust. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1085. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01085

49.

Ricci

McLauchlin

Hua

(2023). Impact of a science art exhibit on public interest and student comprehension of disease ecology research. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 24, Article e00162-22. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00162-22

50.

Rodriguez

(2021, December 14). Instagram surpasses 2 billion monthly users while powering through a year of turmoil. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/14/instagram-surpasses-2-billion-monthly-users.html

51.

Russell

J. A.

(1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077714

52.

Russell

P. A.

(2003). Effort after meaning and the hedonic value of paintings. British Journal of Psychology, 94(1), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712603762842138

53.

Schreiner

Fischer

Riedl

(2021). Impact of content characteristics and emotion on behavioral engagement in social media: Literature review and research agenda. Electronic Commerce Research, 21(2), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-019-09353-8

54.

Sheldon

Bryant

(2016). Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.059

55.

Silvia

P. J.

(2005a). Cognitive appraisals and interest in visual art: Exploring an appraisal theory of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 23(2), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.2190/12AV-AH2P-MCEH-289E

56.

Silvia

P. J.

(2005b). What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion, 5(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.89

57.

Silvia

P. J.

(2006). Artistic training and interest in visual art: Applying the appraisal model of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 24(2), 139–161. https://doi.org/10.2190/DX8K-6WEA-6WPA-FM84

58.

Smith

C. A.

Kirby

L. D.

(2001). Toward delivering on the promise of appraisal theory. In Scherer

K. R.

Schorr

Johnstone

(Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 121–138). Oxford University Press.

59.

Sommer

L. K.

Klöckner

C. A.

(2021). Does activist art have the capacity to raise awareness in audiences? A study on climate change art at the ArtCOP21 event in Paris. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000247

60.

Sommer

L. K.

Swim

J. K.

Keller

Klöckner

C. A.

(2019). “Pollution Pods”: The merging of art and psychology to engage the public in climate change. Global Environmental Change, 59, 101992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101992

61.

Specker

(2021). Further validating the VAIAK: Defining a psychometric model, configural measurement invariance, reliability, and practical guidelines. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000427

62.

Specker

Cotter

K. N.

Kim

K. Y.

(2023). The next step for the VAIAK: An item-focused analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000559

63.

Specker

Forster

Brinkmann

Boddy

Pelowski

Rosenberg

Leder

(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

64.

Spee

B. T. M.

Pelowski

Arato

Mikuni

Tran

U. S.

Eisenegger

Leder

(2022). Social reputation influences on liking and willingness-to-pay for artworks: A multimethod design investigating choice behavior along with physiological measures and motivational factors. PLOS ONE, 17(4), Article e0266020. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266020

65.

Stower

Guennot

(2021). Art in a pandemic: A digital gallery. Nature Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41591-021-00009-5

66.

Thömmes

Hübner

(2018). Instagram likes for architectural photos can be predicted by quantitative balance measures and curvature. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1050. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01050

67.

van Paasschen

Bacci

Melcher

D. P.

(2015). The influence of art expertise and training on emotion and preference ratings for representational and abstract artworks. PLOS ONE, 10(8), Article e0134241. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134241

68.

Wang

Corner

Chapman

Markowitz

(2018). Public engagement with climate imagery in a changing digital landscape. WIREs Climate Change, 9(2), Article e509. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.509

69.

Wang

Segal

Klatzky

Keefe

D. F.

Isenberg

Hurtienne

Hornecker

Dwyer

Barrass

(2019). An emotional response to the value of visualization. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 39(5), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2019.2923483

70.

Wong-Parodi

Feygina

(2021). Engaging people on climate change: The role of emotional responses. Environmental Communication, 15(5), 571–593. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2020.1871051

71.

YouGov. (2022). US/GB: Consumers are getting their news from social—but the majority don’t trust it completely. YouGov. https://business.yougov.com/content/44161-usgb-consumers-are-getting-their-news-social-media

72.

Zaelzer

(2020). The value in science-art partnerships for science education and science communication. ENeuro, 7(4), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0238-20.2020

73.

Zhao

Gao

Jiang

Yao

Chua

T.-S.

Sun

(2014). Exploring principles-of-art features for image emotion recognition. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Conference on Multimedia (pp. 47–56). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2647868.2654930