Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The effects of presenting titles along with abstract and semi-abstract paintings was examined in two experiments. In the first, subjects rated twenty paintings for meaningfulness, pleasingness, interestingness, abstractness or complexity, in a between-subjects design, and either with or without titles. The titles increased rated meaningfulness and decreased rated abstractness but had no effect upon pleasingness (hedonic value) and the other measures. In the second experiment, it was shown that only the paintings' actual titles, and not bogus ones, increased their meaningfulness. The results are discussed in terms of the notion that titles are an aid to meaningful interpretation of paintings. The finding that titles increased meaningfulness but did not affect hedonic value is inconsistent with the theory that the hedonic value of paintings is linked to cognitive processes associated with the interpretation of their meaning.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Berlyne

D. E.

, Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics, Wiley, London, 1974.

Machotka

, Aesthetics: If Not From Below, Whence? Empirical Studies of the Arts, 13, pp. 105–118, 1995.

Berlyne

D. E.

, Aesthetics and Psychobiology, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1971.

Hekkert

and van Wieringen

P. C. W.

, Complexity and Prototypicality as Determinants of the Appraisal of Cubist Paintings, British Journal of Psychology, 81, pp. 483–495, 1990.

Martindale

Moore

, and Borkum

, Aesthetic Preference: Anomalous Findings for Berlyne's Psychobiological Theory, American Journal of Psychology, 103, pp. 53–80, 1990.

Martindale

, The Pleasures of Thought: A Theory of Cognitive Hedonics, The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 5, pp. 49–80, 1984.

Cupchik

G. C.

and Gebotys

R. J.

, Interest and Pleasure as Dimensions of Aesthetic Response, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 8, pp. 1–14, 1990.

Crazier

W. R.

and Chapman

A. J.

, Cognitive Processes in the Perception of Art, North-Holland, Oxford, 1984.

Humphrey

N. K.

, Consciousness Regained, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1983.

10.

Whitfield

T. W. A.

and Slatter

P. E.

, The Effecte of Categorization and Prototypicality on Aesthetic Choice in a Furniture Selection Task, British Journal of Psychology, 70, pp. 65–75, 1979.

11.

Martindale

and Moore

, Priming, Prototypicality, and Preference, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, pp. 661–670, 1988.

12.

Konečni

V. J.

, Elusive Effects of Artists' ‘Messages’, in Cognitive Processes in the Perception of Art, Crazier

W. R.

and Chapman

A. J.

(eds.), North-Holland, Oxford, pp. 71–93, 1984.

13.

McManus

I. C.

Cheema

, and Stoker

, The Aesthetics of Composition: A Study of Mondrian, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 11, pp. 83–94, 1993.

14.

Ognjenovic

, Processing of Aesthetic Information, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 9, pp. 1–9, 1991.

15.

Winner

Dion

Rosenblatt

, and Gardner

, Do Lateral or Vertical Reversals Affect Balance in Paintings? Visual Arts Research, 13, pp. 1–9, 1987.

16.

Ashton

, Picasso on Art: A Selection of Views, Thames and Hudson, London, 1972.

17.

Russell

P. A.

, Preferability, Pleasingness and Interestingness: Relationships between Evaluative Judgements in Empirical Aesthetics, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 12, pp. 141–157, 1994.

18.

Russell

P. A.

and George

D. A.

, Relationships between Aesthetic Response Scales Applied to Paintings, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 8, pp. 15–30, 1990.

19.

Kettlewell

Lipscomb

Evans

, and Rosston

, The Effect of Subject Matter and Degree of Realism on Aesthetic Preferences for Paintings, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 8, pp. 85–93, 1990.

20.

Kettlewell

and Lipscomb

, Neurological Correlates for Realism-Abstraction, a Dimension of Aesthetics, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, pp. 1023–1026, 1992.

21.

Russell

P. A.

and Gray

C. D.

, Ranking or Rating? Some Data and Their Implications for the Measurement of Evaluative Response, British Journal of Psychology, 85, pp. 79–92, 1994.

22.

Aitken

P. P.

, Judgments of Pleasingness and Interestingness as Functions of Visual Complexity, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, pp. 240–244, 1974.

23.

Vitz

P. C.

, Preference for Different Amounts of Visual Complexity, Behavioral Science, 11, pp. 105–114, 1966.

24.

Parsons

M. J.

, How We Understand Art, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987.

25.

Blank

Massey

Gardner

, and Winner

, Perceiving What Paintings Express, in Cognitive Processes in the Perception of Art, Crozier

W. R.

and Chapman

A. J.

(eds.), North-Holland, Oxford, pp. 127–143, 1984.

Meaningfulness and Hedonic Value of Paintings: Effects of Titles

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References