Contrary to Hekkert and Snelders' view, the published evidence clearly suggests that a straightforward preference-for-prototypes model of aesthetic preference will not do. It is argued that the model is incomplete in an essential respect, and an alternative approach to the study of aesthetic preferences is outlined.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoselieF., Against Prototypicality as a Central Concept in Aesthetics, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 9, pp. 65–73, 1991.
2.
HekkertP. and SneldersH., Prototypicality as an Explanatory Concept in Aesthetics: A Reply to Boselie (1991), Empirical Studies of the Arts, 13, pp. 149–160, 1995.
3.
PurcellA., Individual Differences in Aesthetic Experiences of Paintings, Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Empirical Aesthetics, Budapest, pp. 135–138, 1990.
4.
PurcellT. and NasarJ., Australian Architect and Non-Architect Students Experiences of American Houses, Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Empirical Aesthetics, Budapest, pp. 237–240, 1990.
5.
HekkertP. and van WieringenP., Complexity and Prototypicality as Determinants of the Appraisal of Cubist Paintings, British Journal of Psychology, 81, pp. 483–495, 1990.
6.
HekkertP. and van WieringenP., Expert's Appraisal of Cubist Paintings, Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Empirical Aesthetics, Budapest, pp. 118–121, 1990.
7.
ZajoncR., Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, pp. 1–27, 1968.
8.
MartindaleC.MooreK., and WestA., Relationship of Preference Judgments to Typicality, Novelty, and Mere Exposure, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 6, pp. 79–96, 1988.
9.
BarsalouL., Ideals, Central Tendency, and the Frequency of Instantiation as Determinants of Graded Structure in Categories, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, pp. 629–654, 1985.
10.
FrijdaN., The Emotions, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1986.
11.
BoselieF. and LeeuwenbergE., Birkhoff Revisited: Beauty as a Function of Effect and Means, American Journal of Psychology, 98, pp. 1–39, 1985.
