A sample of 240 college students was shown color slides of fifty paintings and asked to rate each on a Likert scale as to perceived attractiveness. Ten different categories of subject matter were presented, and each category was shown in five different degrees of realism ranging from highly realistic to abstract. An analysis of variance showed highly significant effects for subject matter. degree of realism and their interaction. The results are seen as being contrary to what would be expected from a “relativist” position with respect to art but consistent with that expected from a “universalist” position.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KettlewellN. M., An Examination of Preferences for Subject Matter in Painting, Empirical Studies of the Arts, 6, pp. 59–65, 1988.
2.
LindauerM. and LongD., The Criteria Used to Judge Art: Marketplace and Academic Comparisons, Empriical Studies of the Arts, 4, pp. 163–174, 1986.
3.
BestD., The Objectivity of Artistic Appreciation, British Journal of Aesthetics, 20, pp. 115–127, 1980.
4.
HospersJ., Understanding of the Arts, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1962.
5.
RosenbergH., Art on the Edge, Macmillan, New York, 1975.
6.
GombrichE. H., Art and Illusion, 2nd Edition, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1969.
7.
JansonH. W., History of Art, 2nd Edition, Harry N. Abrams, New York, pp. 9–18, 1982.
8.
ReitlingerG., The Economics of Taste, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1963.
9.
WinnerE., Invented Worlds: The Psychology of the Arts, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 66–77, 1982.
10.
SamuelsP. and SamuelsH., Contemporary Western Artists, Southwest Art Publishing, Houston, Texas, 1982.
11.
HaysW. L., Statistics, 4th Edition, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1988.
12.
CanadayJ., The Embattled Critic: Views on Modern Art, Ferrar, Straus and Cudahy, New York, 1962.
13.
BerlyneD. E. and OgilivieJ. C., Dimensions of Perception of Paintings. Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics, BerlyneD. E. (ed.), Hemisphere, Washington, D.C., 1974.
14.
KnappR. H., An Experimental Study of a Triadic Hypothesis Concerning the Sources of Aesthetic Imagery, Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment, 28, pp. 49–54, 1964.
15.
KnappR. H., Une Comparison Stylistique de Picasso et Cezanne, Sciences de L'Art, 6, pp. 6–11, 1969.
16.
GosselinM., Conventionalism versus Realism in Pictorial Arts: Is Perception Basically Particular or General?Communication and Cognition, 17, pp. 57–88, 1984.
17.
EdwardsA. L., Experimental Design in Psychological Research, 4th Edition, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 272–273, 1981.
