A 2 × 2 design was employed; 70 undergraduates from two classes were exposed to complexity-simplicity and symmetry-asymmetry. Each class showed an overwhelming preference for the complex-symmetrical shapes (p < .001). Because complexity was preferred only in conjunction with symmetry, the results are considered consistent, in a qualified way, with the notion that naive Ss tend to prefer simplicity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarronF.Creativity and psychological health.Princeton, N. J.: Van Nostrand, 1963.
2.
BerlyneD. E.The influence of complexity and novelty in visual figures on orienting responses. J. exp. Psychol., 1958, 55, 289–296.
3.
EisenmanR.Pleasing and interesting visual complexity: Support for Berlyne. Percept. mot. Skills, 1966, 23, 1167–1170.
4.
EisenmanR.Complexity-simplicity: I. Preference for symmetry and rejection of complexity. Psychon. Sci., 1967, 8, 169–170.
5.
EisenmanR.Personality and demography in complexity-simplicity. J. consult. clin. Psychol., 1968, 32, 140–143. (a)
6.
EisenmanR.The psychology of modern art. In PowersG. P.BaskinW. (Eds.), New vistas in psychology.New York: Philosophical Library, 1968. Pp. 381–404. (b)
7.
EisenmanR.JonesD.Complexity-simplicity: Random vs nonrandom arrangement of shapes. Percept. mot. Skills, 1968, 26, 682.
8.
EisenmanR.RappaportJ.Complexity preference and semantic differential ratings of complexity-simplicity and symmetry-asymmetry. Psychon. Sci., 1967, 7, 147–148.
9.
EisenmanR.RobinsonN.Complexity-simplicity, creativity, intelligence, and other correlates. J. Psychol., 1967, 67, 331–334.
