↓ Skip to main content

Visualizing the Impact of Art: An Update and Comparison of Current Psychological Models of Art Experience

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
157 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
291 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Visualizing the Impact of Art: An Update and Comparison of Current Psychological Models of Art Experience
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Pelowski, Patrick S. Markey, Jon O. Lauring, Helmut Leder

Abstract

The last decade has witnessed a renaissance of empirical and psychological approaches to art study, especially regarding cognitive models of art processing experience. This new emphasis on modeling has often become the basis for our theoretical understanding of human interaction with art. Models also often define areas of focus and hypotheses for new empirical research, and are increasingly important for connecting psychological theory to discussions of the brain. However, models are often made by different researchers, with quite different emphases or visual styles. Inputs and psychological outcomes may be differently considered, or can be under-reported with regards to key functional components. Thus, we may lose the major theoretical improvements and ability for comparison that can be had with models. To begin addressing this, this paper presents a theoretical assessment, comparison, and new articulation of a selection of key contemporary cognitive or information-processing-based approaches detailing the mechanisms underlying the viewing of art. We review six major models in contemporary psychological aesthetics. We in turn present redesigns of these models using a unified visual form, in some cases making additions or creating new models where none had previously existed. We also frame these approaches in respect to their targeted outputs (e.g., emotion, appraisal, physiological reaction) and their strengths within a more general framework of early, intermediate, and later processing stages. This is used as a basis for general comparison and discussion of implications and future directions for modeling, and for theoretically understanding our engagement with visual art.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 291 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Unknown 289 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 15%
Student > Bachelor 41 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 12%
Researcher 28 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 4%
Other 58 20%
Unknown 72 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 88 30%
Arts and Humanities 36 12%
Neuroscience 21 7%
Social Sciences 18 6%
Design 9 3%
Other 42 14%
Unknown 77 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 August 2023.
All research outputs
#7,527,488
of 26,453,397 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,836
of 7,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,192
of 314,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#61
of 170 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,453,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,837 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,311 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 170 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.