\"OLr~rE 47

'l"U\lL\EfI 1

Contents

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters: Substantive and Methodological Issues-Part II

Vladimir J. Konelni 1

Educating from Failure: Dewey's Aesthetics and the Case for Failure in Educational Theory

Aaron Stoller 22

Imaginatively Experiencing Paintings and Persons Damien Freeman

36

The Elements of Taste: How Many Are There? S. K. Wertz

46

Artistic Praxis and the Neoliberalization of the Educational Space

Pascal Gielen 58

ABBA: An Educational Appreciation Jannie P. H. Pretorius, D. Stephan du Toit, Colwyn Martin, and Glynnis Daries

72

North Korean Aesthetic Theory: Aesthetics, Beauty, and "Man"

Alzo David-West 104

Essay Review

Imitation and Education: A Philosophical Inquiry into Learning by Example, by Bryan R. Warnick

Jeremy R. Belarmino 111

Journal of Aesthetic Education,Vol.47,No.1,Spring2013© 2013BoardofTrusteesoftheUniversityofIllinois

EmpiricalPsycho-AestheticsandHerSisters:SubstantiveandMethodologicalIssues—PartII

VLADIMIRJ.KONECNI

Introduction

Several key substantive, methodological, and science-practice issues thatconcernthefielddesignatedasempirical psycho-aestheticswereexaminedinpartI(intheWinter2012issueofJAE)ofthistwo-partarticle.Alsopresent-edwasanoutlineofthediscipline’soriginanditsrelationshipwithelderandyounger“sisters”—philosophicalaesthetics,experimentalphilosophy,cognitive-science-and-art,(cognitive)neuroscienceofart,andneuroaesthet-ics.Thecomparativegoalwasinpartapproachedthroughtheanalysisofseveralrecentsignificantcontroversiesanddebates. Here,inthesixsectionsofpartIIofthearticle,empiricalworkonvariousproblemsthatarerelevanttothediscussioninitiatedinpartIisdescribedinsomedetail.Ireviewfivegroupsofresearchstudies—manyofthemfrommypsycho-aestheticlaboratory—thatinvolveavarietyofartisticdomains,researchmethods,andkindsofresearchparticipants.Inallcasestheissuessubjected toempirical scrutinyare relevant toaestheticandart theory. Insomeofthem,brain-imagingresearchisdiscussed;inotherssuchresearchwouldbepossible—andwelcomeifitprovidedtheopportunityforverticaltheoreticalintegration.Innocases,however,aresomefutureneuroaestheticfindingslikelytomakethebehavioral(includingaesthetic-choice)andver-bal(includingself-report)findingsredundant. Thefivegroupsof studiesareas follows: (1) empirical testsof signifi-cant (verifiable) claims made by aestheticians and artists; (2) portraiture:obtaininganempiricalhandleon thecreativeprocess; (3)empiricalwork

VladimirJ.KonecniisemeritusprofessorofexperimentalpsychologyattheUniver-sityofCalifornia,SanDiego.AGuggenheimFellowand the recipientofhonorarydegreesinseveralcountries,ProfessorKonecnihasdoneresearchinmanyareasofpsychologyandtherelateddisciplinesandhasgivencolloquiaatsome140univer-sitiesaroundtheworld.Withregardtopsychology, thearts,andaesthetics,hisre-search has focused on key methodological and substantive issues in music, visualarts,architecture,andtheater.

onthe“goldensection”;(4)researchon“thrills”(orshivers-down-the-spineor“chills”)inducedbymusic;and(5)researchontheconceptof“aestheticepisode.”Thearticleendswithbriefconcludingremarks(section6).

1. Empirical Tests of Significant Claims Made by Aestheticians and Artists1

Oneofthemostvaluablecontributionsthatempiricalpsycho-aestheticscanmaketotheanalysisandunderstandingofartisepistemological,bywhichImeananobjective,empiricalscrutinyofspeculativethoughtthatsurroundsart. Careful empirical tests of theoretical statements, manifestos, and as-sorted other pronouncements made by aestheticians, art theorists, critics,andartiststhemselvescanbringadditionalrigortoafieldthatissometimesopen to arbitrary speculation and occasionally, even if briefly, dominatedbydoctrinaireauthority.Thisassumptionseemsespecially truewhen theclaimsemanatingfromtheartworldconcernthenatureanddegreeofemo-tional,perceptual,cognitive,andsocial—inshort,psychological—impactonlisteners,viewers,readers,ortheatergoers.Anditisperhapsevenmoreval-idwhentheempiricaltestsexaminethegeneral(sometimesextravagantlygeneral)claimsabout“humanexperience”—regarding,forexample,apieceofmusicoranartisticstyle,andnotthemoremodestclaimsaboutthere-sponseofthecomposerandacoterieofadmirers. Withregardtoartists,althoughmanyofthemhavebeenreluctantorun-abletodiscusspubliclytheirworksandintentions,manyhavebeeneager.Moreover,evenintheabsenceofverbalstatements,artists implicitlygiveindicationsoftheirbeliefsabouthowtheworkofartaffectsorshouldaffecttheaudience,andaestheticiansandcriticstakethisintoaccount.Decisionsthatafterthefactseemobvioustothepublic—suchastohangapaintinginacertainorientation,presentthepartsofamusicalpieceinacertainsequence,useshortorlongparagraphs,orplacetheactorsinasceneinoneplaceonthestageasopposedtoanother—reflectthepainter’s,composer’s,writer’s,and theater director’s beliefs about their work’s optimal impact. Even intheextremecase,whenaworkofartconsistsofgenuinelyrandomevents,therearegoodreasons toconclude that, forexample, JohnCagebelievedthateithertheveryrandomnessofthework’scomponents,ortheparticularmethodofproducingtherandomevents,orboth,wouldhaveanimpactontheaudience. Some of the aesthetic analyses of works of art are of only literary orhistoricalvalue.However,manystatementsaremorepreciseandexplicitabouttherelativecontributionofindividualcomponentsto(a)theartist’sintended“message”(inthebroadestpossiblesense),(b)thework’soverallallegedimpact,and(c)theoverallstructurecreatedtoachieveaparticular

2 Konecni

effect.Suchstatementscanoftenbetranslatedintopropositionsthatareem-piricallyverifiable.Inadditiontothescholarlyvalueoftheirempiricalworkand their engagement with philosophical aesthetics, psycho-aestheticianscanonoccasionprovideaservicetoartistsbyinformingthemoftheextenttowhichtheintendedmessageisactually“gettingthrough”totheaudience.Inotherwords, is theaudienceperceptually,cognitively,andemotionallyrespondinginthewaythattheartist(oraestheticianorcritic)expects?Docertainpartsofaworkoritsoverallstructurehavetheintendedeffects? Insomethirtyexperimentsinmylaboratory,thesamestraightforwardandhighlyeffectiveresearchstrategywasusedinvariousartdomainstoevaluate the claims of experts in the artworld. The starting point was tochooseasignificantclaimmadebyarecognizedexpertorartistaboutthepurpose,impact,oreffectofaworkofart(orsomeofitscomponents)andtranslateitintoatestableform.Theoriginalversionofaworkwasalteredinseveralways,suchthatthesubstantiveaspectsofthe“doctoring”proce-duresreflectedthemainlineoftheargumentexpressedbytheartexpertsaswellas thevariousdegreesofnegationof thatargument.Theoriginalandthesystematicallyalteredversionswerethenpresentedtoresearchpar-ticipantsin(within-orbetween-subjects)experimentaldesigns(dependingonthetopicandfeasibility).Researchparticipantsvariedfromreasonablyeducatedlaypeopletoconnoisseursandexperts; therecruitment,withre-gardtotheparticipants’degreeofexpertise,wasguidedbythegeneralityoftheclaimbeingtested.Participantswereaskedtoratetheoriginalandthealteredversionsonvariousdimensions,alwayskeepinginmindthemainelementsofexperts’orartists’claims,aswellasthepsychologicalandaes-theticmeaningfulnessandtheoreticalinterest.Ratingscalesaddressedthedifferent versions’ respective pleasingness, interestingness, emotional im-pact,structuralintegrity,meaningfulness,stylisticpurity,originality,andsoon.Participants’desiretoownareproductionoftheworksandtheeaseofthe works’ details being remembered were also investigated. These mea-surementprocedureswereaccompaniedbyinterviewswithsubsetsofpar-ticipants.Statisticalanalysesoftheresultsallowedtheaccuracyofexperts’variousclaimstobesystematicallyevaluated. Thefirstfivegroupsofstudiesofthistype(describedindetailinmyar-ticleslistedinnote1)examined:(a)theeffectsofvariousspatialorientationsofrepresentationalandabstractpaintings;(b)thecomprehensionofthemean-ingofsongs(withwell-articulatedlyrics)fromvariouspopulargenres;(c)theeffectsofdrasticstylisticalterationsinthewritingsofauthorsrangingfromRolandBarthesto(early)SamuelBecketttoGertrudeStein;(d)theeffectsofarearrangementoftheorderofmovementsinBeethoven’sstringquartetsandsonatas;and(e)theinfluenceofvaryingcertainfeatures(typeofstage,prox-imityofaudience,aspectsofchoreography)ofatheatricalperformance.

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 3

Theresultswerehighlyinformativeandtoonumeroustobesummarizedhere.Sufficeittosaythatinmanycasesthevariousexperts’andartists’pre-dictionswereconclusivelydisconfirmed,suchthatdrasticalterationsofart-worksproducedminimaleffectsontheresponsesof“appreciators”(thisinthecontextofconsiderablegeneralenjoymentoftheworks,includingmanyof thedoctoredversions—whichwas in itself informative). Inothercasestheeffectpredictedbytheexpertorartistoccurredonlyinthepresenceofotherfactorsthathadbeenignoredorminimizedbyexperts.Someofthemoststrikingandcounterintuitiveeffectswereobservedwithregardtotherelativelyminorimportanceofbothglobalandlocalmusicalstructureun-dercertainconditions.(Macro-structureisrelatedtoorganization,form,andstyle,andmicro-structuretoahostofmusicalelements).Therefore,amongthe subsequent studies in my laboratory that used this research strategy,experimentsontheeffectsofinterferinginvariouswayswithmusicalstruc-turepredominated(seenote1). NotethatM.Livingstone’swork(inScience2000)ontheMonaLisasmile(whichIdiscussedinsection6ofpartIofthisarticle)isactuallyanexampleofthesamepsycho-aestheticresearchstrategydescribedabove(whichhadbeenusedinmylaboratoryforadecadeafter1982).2Livingstonestartedwithapopularnotion(“themysterioussmile”)andtheopinionofanes-teemedauthority,E.H.Gombrich,whohadsuggestedasolutionofsortsby reference to sfumato (“gone up in smoke”), one of four, according tosomeexperts,canonicalRenaissancepaintingmodes.Shethenfilteredtheimagetoexaggerateselectivelythelowandhighspatialfrequencies.Theclearsmilewasmoreapparentinthelowspatialfrequencyimagethaninthehighspatialfrequencyone.Sincefovealvisionisdominatedbyconsid-erablyhigherspatialfrequenciesthanisperipheralvision,theupshotwasthatMonaLisa’smouthwassmilingwhenLivingstonelookedat,say,thehands,butthesmiledisappearedwhenshefocusedonMonaLisa’smouth(“likeadimstarthatdisappearswhenyoulookdirectlyatit,”asLiving-stoneput it;p.1299).Tothebestofmyknowledge,Livingstonehasnotusedresearchparticipantstoconfirmherobservations;sheprobablyusedcolleaguesassubjects,acommonpracticeinpsychophysicslaboratories. Ananalogous,essentiallypsycho-aesthetic,researchprocedurewasuti-lizedintheresearch(alsoinvolvinghighandlowspatialfrequencies)byL.Bonnar,F.Gosselin,andP.G.SchynsonDali’sambiguous(bi-stable)Slave Market with the Disappearing Bust of Voltaire.3Theauthorsfilteredareproduc-tionintodifferentspatialscalesand,intheirExperiment2,used(thepsy-chophysical) frequency-specific adaptation procedure before testing theirpredictionon,inthiscase,ten“naive”researchparticipants,inabetween-subjectsdesign.

4 Konecni

2. Portraiture: Obtaining an Empirical Handle on the Creative Process4

Unlike the work on artistic creativity—usually conceived as a long-termpersonalitytrait,ability,ordispositionthat ismeasurablebyvariousgen-eralandspecializedtestsandhasbeenextensivelystudiedbypsychometric,psychoanalytic,andothermeans—theempiricalstudyoftheexecutivephase (or“production”phase,asopposedto thepreparatoryone)of theprocess ofcreationofartworkshasbeenstymiedbytheseeminglyinsurmountabledifficultyofobtainingadequateaccessandempiricalcontrol.5Theobserva-tionandmeasurementoftheexactgoings-onintheexecutivephase,despitethe great intrinsic interest these events hold for the aesthetician, are usu-allythwartedbytheprivateand,insomeartmedia,entirelyunobservableaspectsofthecreativeprocess.Evenstudyingthechangesanartistmakesinawork,orobtainingandanalyzing thevideotape,film,orspeeded-upfilm record, does not provide an adequate opportunity for manipulationandcontrol.6Notethatmuchmorethanthedifficultyofrecruitmentofthedesired top-echelonresearchparticipants is inquestionhere: there isalsothe crucial problem of the researcher’s very presence. When the creativeprocess is closelyobserved,measured,andrecorded, there is, inmostartmedia,an interferencewith theauthenticityof theprocess,which in turnaffects both the essential nature and the quality of the resulting work. Inotherwords,ananalogueofthe“Heisenbergprinciple”inparticlephysicsmaybeoperative.7

Workingwithportraitureisasolid,ifpartialandmodest,solutiontotheformidableproblemsofstudyingtheongoingcreativeprocessinvisualartinacontrolledmanner.Inthe“realworld,”portraitureisrelativelyuniqueamongart-creatingsituationsinthatitmayinvolvecommissioninganartisttorenderaspecific,oftenpreviouslyunknown,model,whetherasaquicksidewalksketchorasanelaboratestudioportrait.Inatleastsomecases,anexpectationfromtheartisttorendera“likeness”alsoexists.Inotherwords,portraitureofteninvolves“artoncommand”withregardtothesubject,thetimeofexecution,andeventheformofthework.Thedrawingofportraitsthusprovidesanopportunity tomaintainsomeexperimentalcontrolandmanipulatevariablesofpsychological,aesthetic,andartisticinterestwith-outsacrificingtheauthenticityoftheartisticendeavor.Thebehavioroftheartistwhilecreatingandthesequenceofchangesintheworkbeingcreatedcanbestudiedsimultaneouslyandindetail.Moreover,becausequickpor-traitsketchingissoubiquitousamongartists,itispossibletocarryoutanobjectivemicroanalysisoftheexecutivephaseofthecreativeprocessinthecontextofanartisticallymeaningfulactivitywithoutbeingoverwhelmedbydata,ashasbeenthecaseinsomeoftheearlierstudiesusingvideorecords.

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 5

Inaseriesofstudiesinmylaboratory,anewempiricalmethodologywasapplied to authentic portraiture as the creative process unfolded in vivo.Professionalportraitistsandskilledamateurseachdrewportraitsofseverallivemodelsinsuccession(peoplepreviouslyunknowntothem)eitherinthemodel’spresenceorfrommemory.Thelengthoftimeavailableforexecu-tionwassystematicallyvaried. Links among memory task characteristics, artists’ mental representa-tions,andperformancetimeconstraintsareallimportantincognitivepsy-chology and in psycho-aesthetics as well as in theories of drawing. Theissueofrepresentationisatleastimplicitlypresentinmostdiscussionsofbothfigurativeandabstractart,anditisintimatelyrelatedtoquestionsofartisticstyle.Theexperimentalproceduresthatwereusedmadeitpossibletoaddresssomeclassicquestionsinarttheory,suchasthetransformationof motifs through abstraction and distortion, the problem of “likeness,”andartists’applicationof face schemataand theadjustments theymadeforparticularmodels.8

Inaddition,themechanicsofdrawing(thenumberofglancespermin-ute,frequencyofstrokes,andpresenceofoutliningandshading)couldbeempiricallyinvestigated,aswellasartists’focusandthetemporalfactsofthe execution (e.g., the order in which artists drew twenty-two differentpartsoffaces,whetherornottheyreturnedtothem,etc.).Inadditiontotheavailabilityofsuchdata,allofthefinishedportraits(144inonemajorstudy)were subsequentlyevaluatedby tenpreviouslyuninvolved judgesondi-mensions of aesthetic appeal, interestingness, and—having been shownphotographsofthemodels’faces—thedegreeofabstraction(“Howstylizedandlackingindetails isthisportrait?”)anddistortion(“Howclosetotheactualfacialproportionsisthisportrait?”). Becausetheprimarypurposeofthissectionistodemonstratetheutilityofempiricalpsycho-aestheticsinstudyingthecreativeprocess,onlyafewsentencesaredevotedtothecomplexandnumerousfindings.Contrarytostandardmemoryresearch,drawingfrommemorydidnotresult inmoredistortionthandiddrawinginthepresenceofthemodel,evenwithveryshort execution times. (Portrait artists are remarkably good at memoriz-ingandaccuratelyrenderingfacialproportions.)Theresults—significantlyhigherratingsofaestheticappealgivenbyjudgestoportraitsthathadbeendrawninthemodels’presence—werethereforecausednotbylessdistor-tion,butratherbymoreabstraction.Theideathatartistspreferasomewhatabstractrenditionandparadoxicallyneedamodelinordertorenderitsub-tlyisimportantinrelationtothenatureofabstractioninartandthelong-standing debate about the significance of external stimuli in art creation.Artistsmayprofitfromexposuretoexternalstimuliwhilecreatingnotforthepurposeofachievingveridicality,but ratherbecausesuchstimulicantriggerschematathatwouldnototherwisebeactivated.

6 Konecni

3. Methodological Issues in the Empirical Work on the “Golden Section”

IntheexchangethatW.P.SeeleyhadwithRogerSeamon(criticallymen-tionedinsection3ofpartIofthisarticle),hemadeanumberofobserva-tionsthatmisrepresentthemethodologicalcapabilitiesofpsycho-aestheticsandthecarewithwhichcertaincomplexproblemshavebeenempiricallyaddressedinthisfield.9InthissectionIdescribeaprogramofresearchonthe “golden proportion” as an illustration of psycho-aesthetic reliance onamultiprongedmethodologicalapproachthatwasusedinteasingoutthefactsofaclassicalandelusiveresearchissue. Thegoldensection(henceforth,GS;f'@0.618... ;fisforPhidias)isaproportionthatfortwenty-sixhundredyearshasinvariousartistic,math-ematical,andbiomorphologicalcontextsfascinatedsomeofthefinestmindsinEuropeanphilosophy,science,andthearts.Ithasbeencalled“divine”byJohannesKeplerandconsideredtheepitomeofbeautybymanyscholars,in-cludingAlexanderBaumgarten,thefatherofphilosophicalaesthetics(withmajorworksinthemid-eighteenthcentury),AdolfZeising,whostudiedGSinsomedetail inthehumanbodyacenturylater,and,ofcourse,Fechnerhimself.10Inthetwentiethcentury,M.Borissavlievitch,amongothers,dis-cussed thepervasive roleofGS inaesthetic theory;CharlesBouleauana-lyzeditasoneofthekeystoWesternpainters’“secretgeometry”;andLeCorbusiermadeitthebuildingblockofhisModulor—theproposalforafu-sionofthefunctionalandtheaestheticinarchitecture.11

Following Fechner, who performed the first experiments on ordinarypeople’spreferencesforrectanglesofvariousdimensions(the“golden”onewasfavored)inthe1860s,manyresearchers,mostlypsychologists,haveex-aminedGSempirically.Theproblemisthatmuchofthisresearchhasbeenunnecessarilyrestrictedto(1)nonartisticstimuli(usuallygeometricshapes),(2) objects presented without an aesthetic context, and (3) nonartists andnon–artconnoisseursas researchparticipants.Suchself-imposedresearchlimitationscanperhapsbeattributedtothemistakenbeliefthatGSisacon-cept(andresearch“factor,”inthetechnicalsense)sopowerfulthatitcanbecapturedwithalmostanyresearchstimuli,setting,andtypeofparticipant;andifitcannot,thenitisnotworthbotheringwithit.12Theresultsappearedinconclusive:whenanentireissueofajournalofempiricalaestheticswasdevotedtoGSin1997(Empirical Studies of the Arts15,no.2),skepticismwaswidespread.ThisstateofaffairsmotivatedthecontinuationofmyresearchprogramonGSthatbeganin1995.13

Thefirstgroupofstudies(“VaseontheMantelpiece”)wasanattempttoaestheticizeandcontextualizeGSwhilecontinuingtousepsychologystu-dentsasparticipants.Inthreeclassroomandlaboratoryexperiments,usinga total of 260 participants, GS was investigated, for comparative reasons,

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 7

bymeansofboth traditional research tasks (linebi-section,productionofrectangles),andnovelstimuli(contoursandcutoutsofvasesconstructedbyGSandnon-GSrules)andtasks(theplacementof“vases”onanimaginary,as well as on a laboratory, purpose-built, mantelpiece). In the latter case,participants were to imagine the vase as precious (Greek, Ming) and the“fireplace” as the focal place of one’s home: “The exact placement of thevaseonthemantelpiecewould[allegedly]becomeasalientvisualelementofone’sdailylife.” Severalconclusionscouldbereached.First,usingtraditionaltasksandstimuli, GS did not emerge as a notable proportion. Second, there weremanycomplexbut interpretable statistical interactions involving the typeofstimuli,typeoftask,andtypeofresearchsetting.Third,theuseofGSinquasi-aestheticobjectsproducednoadvantageoftheirplacementontheGSpointsofeithertheentirelyimaginaryorthealmost-real(laboratory-built)mantelpieces.Yettheparticipants’consistentuseofbalanceprinciples(thelarger thevase, thecloser to thecenterof themantelpiece itwasplaced),showsthattheytookthetaskseriously:Theperceptionofabigvaseclosetotheendofthemantelpieceisuncomfortable,evenifthevaseisacutoutandthemantelpiecemadeofsolidwood.Fourth,whenparticipantswereaskedtochooseonefromamongelevensimultaneouslypresented“vases”—fivefromtheGSseriesandsixfromthenon-GSseries(butwithotherinterestingproportions,suchas0.50,0.67,and0.75,alsopresent)—almost50percentoftherespondentschosethesame,GS,vase.ForthesignificanceofGStobedemonstrated,itisnotsufficientthatthestimuliaresomewhataestheticizedandcontextualized.ThesehalfstepscannotoffsetthedisadvantageofGSwhenitispittedagainstapowerfulaestheticneed—forbalance.YetoneofthevasesfromtheGSserieswastheoverwhelmingfavorite.GSmaybeim-portant,butonlyinconjunctionwithotherfactorsandkindsofparticipants. These ideas were explored in the next part of my program (“Painters’AccuracyinCapturingGS”),inwhichanewunobtrusivemethodology,themodifiedFechnerian“methodofproduction,”wasused.Fourteenprofes-sionalpainters sketchedundercontrolled laboratoryconditions—with in-structionstodoso“accuratelyandrealistically”—manycomplexstimulipre-sentedasslides:(1)keyvasesfromthepreviousexperimentsphotographedatfourpointsofthemantelpiece(0.50,0.62,0.70=“control,”0.75);(2)colorslidesoforiginalabstractandsemiabstractpaintingsbyalocalpainter,whohad incorporatedGSandotherproportionsbothunintentionally,prior tohavingaformalknowledgeoftheconcept,andlaterintentionally;and(3)colorslidesofpaintingscontainingvariousproportionsbyartistsknowntohaveusedGSintentionally(e.g.,Mondrian)andbythoseaboutwhomthisisnotknown(e.g.,Whistler).GSandothersignificantandcontrolpropor-tionswereidentifiedbeforehandinthestimuli.The378sketchesproducedbythepaintersweremeasuredtodeterminetheaccuracywithwhichthe

8 Konecni

variousproportions(agrandtotalof1,680instances)hadbeenreproducedbythem. Hypotheses were derived from psychological notions concerning atten-tion,cognitiveprocessing,andthe“prestigeeffect,”andfromextensiveinter-viewswithprofessionalpainters(otherthanthoseusedasparticipants),whowerethustreatedasresearch“informants.”Itwaspredictedthatthesketch-ingaccuracywoulddependontheamountofattentiondevotedtothestimuliandthatthepainterswouldexperiencemoreofawelcomechallengewhenconfrontedwithauthenticpaintings—especiallybywell-knownpainters—incomparisontothevasestimuli.ItwasalsoexpectedthatGSwouldbedifferen-tiallymoreaccuratelysketchedthanwouldotherproportionsbut only when the stimuli were famous paintings.Finally,thegreatestaccuracyofsketchingandthegreatestadvantageofGSwerepredictedtooccurintheworksbyMondrian—becauseofthechallengehewouldposetoparticipantsasthemodernmasterofproportionsandrelationaldetailsofgeometricforms. The findings confirmed most of the predictions. The highest accuracyin capturing proportions occurred for works by famous painters (thoughnotespeciallyMondrian),42percentoverall.Moreover,theaccuracyforGS(61 percent) and 1.00 (57 percent) was significantly higher than for otherproportionsinthesepaintings(28–43percentrange;themeanaccuracyforthevasesandtheunknownpainter’sworkswas20percentand22percent,respectively).SincethesquareandthecirclewereconsideredintheGestaltperceptionandaestheticstheoryasstrong,perfectformsbyauthoritiessuchasRudolfArnheimandKurtKoffka,theveryaccuraterenderingof1.00inthepaintingscertainlydoesnotdecreasethesignificanceofGS.14Theresultsalsovalidatedthenewresearchmethod.ExtensiveexitinterviewswiththeparticipatingpaintersrevealedthattheyhadnotfoundtherequesttosketchaccuratelyoddandthattheyhadbeenunawarethroughoutthatGSwasthespecialobjectofinvestigation;hencethemethodologydeservestobecalled“unobtrusive.”15

ThesefindingsshowthatGS is considerablymore important thanonewouldhaveconcludedonthebasisoftheresearchwithvasesandunder-graduates.Itissubtle,butitselusivenesscanbeconsiderablydecreasedbyusingauthentic,first-ratepaintingsasresearchstimuli,professionalpaintersasmethodologicalinformantsandresearchparticipants,andanappropriatenewmethodologywithwhichtoteaseoutunobtrusivelysuchparticipants’selectiveviewingandrespondingtodifferentcriticalproportions. ThetwentiethcenturyisofinterestwithregardtoGS,becauseitiscon-spicuous,ononehand,fortherelativerejectionoftraditionalaestheticandartisticideas,and,ontheother,forgeometricityandabstraction.Thenextstep inmyresearchprogram,“GSin theStructureof20th-CenturyPaint-ings,”wastoaskwhetherandinwhichwayGSwasusedandalsowhichother proportions were typically represented in the works that contained

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 9

GS.Theintentionofthisresearchwasobviouslynottoobtaintheaccurateincidenceandprevalencevalues(inepidemiologicalterms)ofGSintheto-talpopulationoftwentieth-centurypaintings—animpossibletaskofinduc-tion—oreven inagenuinerandomsample (becausevarious insurmount-ablelogisticalproblemsprecludedsuchsampling).Rather,thegoalwastoscrutinize closely—with regard to GS and other significant proportions—eachofthepaintingsinasizablesampleofaboutonehundredworks(se-lectedsothateachcontainedatleastoneGS). Theprecisemeasurement(bytwoskilledcodersworkingindependently)andthemeasurementtargetswithinpaintingsconstitutedanovelpsycho-aesthetic methodological approach that had not previously been used toexplore problems of interest to art theory. The approach made possible acomplex investigationofcompositionandperceptualweights thatare in-tertwinedwithartists’useofproportions,especiallyGS.Aninitialpoolof250twentieth-centurypaintingswassufficientforthedetectionof95paint-ings,eachofwhichcontainedatleastoneGS;theseworkswerebyfifty-twopaintersfromallthedecades.Theselectioncriterionwasthatonlythemostprominentstructuralandcompositionalelements,onwhichtherewasgen-eralagreementamongtheartauthorities,author,andhiscolleagues,weremeasuredincandidatepaintings. Thefollowingelementsweremeasuredineachofthe95works:(1)overalldimensions(“picturesize”);(2)verticalbi-section,whichaddressedtheis-sueofleft-rightbalanceorthehorizontaldistributionofperceptualweights;and (3) horizontal bi-section, which addressed top-bottom balance or theverticaldistributionofweights.Finally,(4)variousproportions, includingGS,wereidentifiedandmeasuredinvariousgeometricshapesthatoccurredinpaintingseitheraspureforms(e.g.,theGSrectangle,wherea/b = 0.62)orincorporatedintothedepictedobjects.Forexample,thefacialandbodilyproportionsofkeyhumanfigureswereidentifiedandmeasured,aswellasthedimensionsofvariousstructurallyprominentobjects, suchashouses,bridges, crosses, windows, and vases. Voluminous results were obtained,statisticallyanalyzed,andpresentedinthefollowingcategories(amongoth-ers):SymmetryandBalance;VerticalBi-Section;HorizontalBi-Section;Ver-ticalandHorizontalBi-SectionsConsideredJointly;andProportionsWithinPaintings.Onlyoneaspectoftheseresultswillbementioned. Whatartjudgmenttestsandpsycho-aestheticiansalikemeanby“imbal-ance”isthesituationwheretheweightswithinapaintingdeviatefromtheharmoniousdistributionaroundthecentral(verticaland,toalesserextent,horizontal)axis.16However,almosteverypaintingthusunbalancedcanbeconsideredbalanced,butwith reference toan imaginaryvertical (and/orhorizontal)axisthatisshifted from the center.Thisresearchdocumentedinadetailedmannertheexistenceandthedegreeofsuchshifts.

10 Konecni

Forexample,whenartistsavoidedthe(tooboring?)centrallyplacedverti-calbi-section,theyalsoavoidedthe(fuzzyandirritating?)adjoiningregionoftheperceptible,buttoosmall,shiftfromthecentralaxis.GS(0.62)wasthejust-rightregionbetweenthemidpointandtwo-thirds.However,left-rightimbalance greater than the placement of the vertical axis in the GS regionwascompletelyunacceptabletoartistsinthissample.Inaddition,withregardtothecentrallyplacedhorizontal axis,therewasahighdegree(74percent)of“safe”top-bottombalance(at0.50).Forpaintersrepresentedinthesample,the top-bottomdirectionwas thusa lessattractiveone for thepurposeofexperimentationwithbalance,anaestheticallylesshospitablemedium. Whentheverticalandhorizontalbi-sectionsareconsideredjointly,overhalfofthepaintingsinthesample(49)arefoundinthecelldefinedbybothbi-sections being at, or very close to, 0.50. However, the pattern of shiftsaway from the double central balance is highly instructive. The most in-terestingcellisundoubtedlytheonewiththepaintings(therewereseven)displayingthegreatestdisplacementfrombothcentralaxes, that is, thoseshiftedintotheGSregionwithregardtobothkindsofbi-section.Adetailedanalysiswas conductedon thesepaintings. In sixof the seven, the double displacement to the GS regionwasusedhighlyeffectivelytomaximize both in-terest and focus on thedesired feature(s).Thesekey structuralor thematicattributeswouldhavebeentoopredictableorawkwardhadtheybeenmorecentrallyplacedwithregardtoeitheraxis.Painterssoughtviewers’interestmorethanpleasure. Finally,afewwordsareinorderaboutanotherdirectionthatmyGSre-searchprogramtook(“The‘GoldenWoman’:WesternArtandEvolution”).BecauseofbothancientclaimsofbeautybeingassociatedwithGS in thehumanfaceandbodyandcontemporaryevolutionaryideasaboutthere-lationbetweenphysicalhealthand(layjudgmentsof)beauty,twenty-fourpaintings in the sample,by sixteenpainters,were subjected toadditionalanalysis.Ineachoftheseworks,femalefacesandbodieswerevisibleandmeasurable.Twofacialmeasurementswereobtained(bothregardingGS).Additionally,twomeasurementspertainingtothebodywereobtained:oneregardingGS,theotherthewaist-to-hipratio.(Thelatter,whenintherange0.67–0.73, has been associated with healthy childbearing.)17 In addition,eighty-onerespondents(fiftyofthemwomen)estimatedtheageandphysi-calattractivenessofthepaintedfigures. Whenthesepaintersdepictedyoungfemalefigures,theytendedalsotoimpart physical attractiveness to them. The most attractive figures differfrom the restof the subsample in threeof the fourproportions thatweremeasured;andtwoofthesethreeproportions—“facialcross”(theratioofthedistancebetweenthecheekbonesandfacelength)andbodybi-sectionatthenavel—areGS.TwothousandyearsafterGreekthoughtaboutGSand

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 11

beauty,paintersinthesubsample(Europeanmen),despiteworkinginava-rietyofstyles,collectivelyconveyedtheaccumulatedbeliefsregardingtherelationshipoffemaleproportionsand“reproductivefitness”—mediatedbyattributessuchasage(i.e.,health)andattractiveness.Moreover,theirmean-ingwascorrectlycommunicatedmanydecadeslatertoyoungCalifornianviewersofbothsexes,mostlyunschooledinthearts. SomegeneralconclusionsonthebasisofmyGSresearchare:(1)theuseofGSissubtlebutdetectable,anditskeypurposeincompositionseemstobetheintroductionofanoptimaldegreeoftension;(2)itispossiblethatthestatusof this“epitomeofbeauty”misdirectedmanypsycho-aestheticiansintoafutilesearchforGSasapowerfulsinglefactor;and(3)thereappearstobeamarkednonlinearityandcontextualityofGS’sapplication,oneim-plicationbeingthatdifferencesbetweenWesternandFarEasternaestheticideals may have been needlessly exaggerated in many accounts. Had GSbeenmoreappropriatelyinvestigatedbyempiricalaestheticians,theresultsmighthavemutedsomerecentdescriptionsofWesternartas“linear”and“hierarchical”—attributesthatarethencontrastedwiththoseinFarEasternaesthetics, such as, for example, Zeami Motokiyo’s fourteenth-/fifteenth-century yūgen. Intriguingly, all seven attributes of Zen aesthetics that aredescribedbythetwentieth-centuryphilosopherandZenBuddhistscholarShin’ichiHisamatsu, including thefifth, theaforementionedyūgen (“pro-foundsubtlety”),areshared,inmyopinion,byGS.18

4. Thrills (or Shivers-Down-the-Spine or Chills) Induced by Music

Itseemsindisputablethatanimportanttaskofbothphilosophicalandpsy-chological aestheticsought tobe thedelineationof aesthetic responsesofdifferentqualityandintensity,withparticularcarereservedforpeak aesthetic experiences.Foranumberofyears,Ihavebeengraduallydevelopingatheo-reticalposition(theAestheticTrinityTheory,orATT)thatdealswithsuchexperiences.19 ATT involves three conceptually, phenomenologically, andempiricallyseparablesubjectivestatesinahierarchicarrangement:Aesthetic Awe(therarestandmostprofound);Being-Moved;andphysiologicalThrillsorchillsorshivers-down-the-spine(henceforth,Thrills;themostfrequent,andtheleastpronouncedandmemorablestate). InthisarticleIshall limitmyselftoThrills—specificallythosethathavebeeninducedbymusic—andfurtherconstrainthediscussionbyaddressingasingleproblemofaestheticimportance:domusic-inducedThrillsconstituteagenuine,full-fledgedemotionalstate?Intheprocess,Ihopetodemonstratethepitfallsof appealing tobrain-imagingfindingswhenattempting to re-solveaestheticissuesframedintermsofsubjective experience andof emotion.Toaccomplishthis,Ineedtoreturntosomeoftheissuesintheneuroscience

12 Konecni

ofartthatwerediscussedinpartIofthisarticle,or,morespecificallyinthiscase,tothoseintheneuroaestheticsofmusic.Therefore,Ishallfocus,ononehand,ontheneuroscientificfindings(muchcited—andoverinterpreted—bythemusic-emotionenthusiasts) thatwereobtained in2001byAnneBloodandRobertZatorre(henceforth,BZ);20and,ontheotherhand,onthebehav-ioral/observational/self-report experiments reported in 2007 by VladimirKonecni,RebekahWanic,andAmberBrown(henceforth,KWB).21

Thrillsareanarchaicphysiologicalresponseofshortdurationtoaesthetic(andother)stimuli,usuallyconsistingofpiloerectiononthebackoftheneckandshiversdownthespine.Theresponsecanbereportedbyparticipantswithahighdegreeofreliability(validatedbyperipheralphysiologicalmea-surementandobservation).22SinceGoldstein’ssurveyandpharmacologicalstudy,therehasbeenaconsiderableamountofworkonThrillsinducedbymusic;23inaddition(intheworkbyKWB),stories,paintings,andarchitec-turalobjectsincombinationwithmusic(includinginstrumentalversionsofnationalanthems)havebeenexaminedaspossibleinductionstimuli. IntheKWBexperiments,itwasdemonstratedthatThrillscouldbereli-ably and predictably induced in U.S. college students by music carefullychosen by the experimenters: in 40 percent of the participants by, for ex-ample,thefinalportionofRachmaninoff’sPianoConcertono.2inCminor,op.18,andbytheU.S.nationalanthem(asignificantlygreaterproportionthan in the various control conditions, including theAustralian anthem).However,ThrillstomusiccouldnotbeprimedbypriorThrillsthathadbeeninducedbyothermusic(andstories).Inaddition,theexperienceofThrillshadnoimpactonanumberofmeasures(mood,altruisticinclinations)thatshouldhavebeenaffectediftheThrillsexperiencewaspsychologicallyandemotionallysignificant.Therefore,onecouldconcludethatalthoughThrillsmayoftenserveasthe physiological platformforprofoundaestheticexperi-ences,theyarefleetingeventsandcanhardly—in and of themselves—becon-sidered agenuine emotional response. Thequestionthenarises:howcanthisconclusionbereconciledwithBZ,who refer to Thrills as “intensely pleasurable responses to music” in theverytitleof theirarticle?Myproposedanswer,whichtheargumentsandmethodological considerations that followaremeant to justify, involvesacausalpaththatleadsfromphysiologicaleffects(thatincludeThrills)totheemotional state of Being-Moved—viatheassociativenetworksandotherme-diators,suchasimagery,thatareuniquetoindividuallisteners.Myconten-tionisthatBZ’sparticipantswerenotexperiencingmerelyThrills(aswasthecaseintheKWBstudy),butwerealsomovedbythemusic. AcloseinspectionofproceduraldetailsintheBZandKWBstudiessup-portssuchaconclusion.WhereasKWBintentionallydrewparticipantsfromthegeneral (student)population,BZusedmusicians,whowere“selectedonthebasisoftheirreportsoffrequent,reproducibleexperiencesofchills

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 13

in response to certain pieces of music” (BZ, 11818). Whereas KWB reliedonpretestingand“imposed”musicselectionsontheirparticipants,theBZparticipantsthemselves“selectedonepieceofmusic[instrumental,classi-calgenre]thatconsistentlyelicitedintenselypleasantemotionalresponses,includingchills[inthem]”(11818;inotherwords,more than chills).Foreachparticipant,BZusedauniqueninety-secondexcerpt,“includingthesectionthat[hadpreviouslyreliably]elicitedchills[inthatparticipant]”(11819)intheimagingstudy(positronemissiontomography,orPET,wasemployed).ItisthereforelikelythatBZ’sparticipantssubjectivelyexperiencedthemore profound and consequential Being-Moved state—in addition to Thrills. ThenotionthatBZ’sparticipantsreachedthestateofBeing-Movedbyvir-tueofindividualassociationswithpastemotionaleventsissupportedbythefact that in theBZexperiment,eachparticipant’spowerful,Thrill-inducingmusic selection served as another participant’s neutral control piece, and that“chillswereneverreported forcontrol [pieces]” (11820).24Furthermore,BZstatethattheyhavestatisticallyverifiedthattheeffectsofThrillsinducedbyeachparticipant’sownpieceontheincreasesincerebralbloodflow(CBF)intheleftventralstriatumanddorsomedialmidbrainanddecreasesinCBFintherightamygdalawere“notsimplyduetodifferencesinattention,familiar-ity,oracousticfeaturesbetweensubject-selectedandcontrolmusic”(11821). TheBZstatementthatacousticfeaturesofthepiecesandanydifferentialfamiliaritywiththemcouldnotaccountfortheeffectssupportstheconclu-sionthatparticipants’privateandindividualizedmentalassociationsmusthavebeenresponsible.However,surprisingly,BZexplicitlystate:“Subjectsreported that their emotional responses were intrinsic to the music itself,producingminimalpersonalassociationsand/ormemories” (11819).ThisBZcontention,basedapparentlyonunverifiedreports,isinsharpdisagree-ment not only with the previous methodological analysis but also withAvramGoldstein’sandNikkiRickard’sempiricalfindings.25Moreover,iftheacoustic features, familiarity, and personal associations are all eliminated,onemustwonderwhatpreciselyBZhadinmindwhentheywroteofThrillsas“responses...intrinsictothemusicitself”(11819). Onlytwopossibilitiesremain.Oneisthatthereexistedasetofinterac-tionsbetweenthesubjectivepreferencesandstructuralfeatures(untappedbytheacousticanalysis)inone’sownversusothers’pieces.Thisexplanationisweakenedbythefactthatallparticipantsweremusicians,butitcannotbeeliminatedaltogether.Thesecond,amorelikelyalternative,andtheoreti-callyquiteaninterestingone,isthatintheBZexperiment,thefirstchordsoftheparticipants’often-heardpieceactedasapowerfulclassicallycondi-tionedstimulus for the inductionof“uniquely theirown”Thrills.KWB’sdatashowthat formanypeople theirnationalanthemhaspreciselysuchaneffect.Inotherwords,theentirepersonalassociativecontextofthemusi-

14 Konecni

calpiecemaybecondensedasaclassicallyconditionedstimulusforThrillsinduction. Insummary,

(1) AsshownbyKWB,Thrillsmaybeelicitedinpeoplebymusicnotoftheirchoice,butinorderforparticipantstoreachthemoreprofoundstateofBeing-Moved,onemustresort,asBZandRickarddid,tospe-cialpopulationsandprocedures.

(2) ItseemslikelythatBZparticipants’Being-Movedstate(notmerelyThrills)correlatedwithCBFchanges“inbrainregionsimplicatedinrewardandemotion” (11818).Otherevidence indicates thatBeing-Movedhassomecharacteristicsofemotionsbutcanbedistinguishedphenomenologically from the basic emotions, such as joy, sadness,anger,andfear.

(3) Indeed,thereexistsnoevidenceintheBZexperimentforthebasic emotionstohavebeeninduced.ThecorrelationoftheoccurrenceofThrillswithincreasedCBFinbrainregions“thoughttobeinvolvedinreward/motivation,emotion,andarousal,includingventralstria-tum,midbrain[and]amygdala”(11818)doesnotpointeithertothebasicemotionsasacategorynortoaparticularbasicemotion.

(4) In fact, BZ do not provide any evidence of what their participantssubjectivelyexperiencedwhilelisteningtomusicintheexperiment.Anyevenremotelyrelevantinformationaboutmusicenjoymentwaslimitedtothatobtainedintherecruitmentprocedure.Butthisseemstoo informaland indirect to justify the insertionof thephrase“in-tenselypleasurableresponses”intothetitleofBZ’sarticle.Priortotheexperiment,theparticipantsknewwhichmusicwaslikelytoin-duceThrillsinthem,butthatmusicmayhavebeenassociatedwithnumerous important nonmusical events on the previous listeningoccasions—andthiswasunfortunatelyleftunexploredbyBZ.

Asfortheexperimentitself,thereisalow-probabilityalternativetotheBeing-Movedexplanation:itispossiblethatThrillsandthecorrelatedCBFfluctuationswereinfactproducedbytheclassical-conditioningeffects(de-scribed above), with participants’ actual experience during brain imagingrelativelyfree of aesthetic enjoyment. Inconclusion,althoughimagingresultscansupplycertaingeneralinfor-mation on brain-area involvement, they cannot replace introspection andcarefully obtained reports of participants’ aesthetic experience.26 Moreover,the unjustifiably assured or sweeping tone of some neuroscientific state-mentscontributestotheirbeingerroneouslyrepresentedinbothphilosophyandpsychologyasfavoringoneoranothertheoreticalpositionwheninfactmostimagingfindingsarefartoocrudetoberelevantintheresolutionofsubtledisputesamongpositionsandarguments(forexample,intheareasofemotionandaestheticexperience).

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 15

5. The Concept of “Aesthetic Episode”

Empiricalpsycho-aestheticiansdonotdifferfromphilosophersofartinrec-ognizingtheimportanceofstudyingthepinnaclesofachievementinvariousartformsandtheireffectsonknowledgeableconnoisseurswhoconsistentlyapproachartinacanonicalmanner.Inadditiontothisapproach,however,psycho-aestheticianswish to contextualizeaesthetic experienceanddelveintomyriadcontemporaryaestheticencountersinvolvingpeoplewithdif-ferentbackgroundsandfromvariouswalksoflife,whohaveaverybroadrangeofstronglyheldaestheticpreferences. Inthisendeavorbothworksofartandaestheticexperienceneedtobegenerously defined. The study of mundane aesthetic encounters recognizesthatforaverylargeproportionofpeople,thefrequencyofengagementwiththepinnaclesofartinanytraditionalsenseisexceedinglylowandthatinmanycontemporarycontexts, thenewappreciationmodesmaybevastlydifferentfromthecanonicalornormative.27

Especiallyinthedomainofmusic,themore-or-lessactivelisteninghasbe-comefullyembeddedinthestreamofdailylifeofordinaryappreciators—andyetaestheticpreferenceandchoiceareoftentreatedinconceptualstatementsasifthey,andtheprocessofappreciation,occurinasocial,emotional,andcognitivevacuum.Incontrast,onecanproposethatathoroughunderstand-ingofaestheticbehaviorcannotbeachievedwithoutexamininghowitchang-esasafunctionofitsimmediatesocialandnonsocialantecedents,concurrentcognitiveactivity,andresultantemotionalstates.28

Inordertoacknowledgetheseideasexplicitlyandstimulateabroaderapproachtopsycho-aestheticresearch,oneneedstoexpandtheconceptofaestheticexperience into thatofacontextualized aesthetic episode. Suchepi-sodesareconceivedasoftenmundane,butaestheticallyrelevant,sequencesthatoccurtoordinarypeoplewithconsiderablefrequency.Theyaresocio-emotionalunits,withbehavioralimplications,inwhichthecentralplaceisoccupiedbyaperson’s(appreciator’s)aesthetic choice—anobservablebehav-iorbywhichapersonselectsoneoftheavailableaestheticoptions. Inpsycho-aestheticexperimentsthealternativesareusuallyarrangedtodifferontheoreticallysignificantdimensions,suchasnovelty,complexity,meaningfulness,incongruity,distortion,abstraction,andother,relativelystraightforwarddimensions.However,theoptionsthataremadeavailabletoresearchparticipantscanalsobeconsiderablymoresophisticatedanddesignedspecificallytoaccommodatetheintricaciesoftheresearchprob-leminquestion. Themodelofaprototypicalaestheticepisodeispresentedinfigure1.29Inthemodel,aestheticepisodesareregardedasrecursiveeventsthattakeplacewhileappreciatorsparticipate inacontinuousexchangewith their

16 Konecni

socialandnonsocialenvironment,ofwhichaestheticstimuliareasignifi-cant part. The social behavior of others—I am referring to the ordinary,everydaybehaviorsthatareunambiguouslyinterpretedasindicatingsup-port, love, or antagonism—is assumed to have an important effect on aperson’semotionalstate,whichinturnaffectsaestheticchoicesthataper-sonwillmakeinagivensituation.Theclearestexamplesofthiscomefrommusic,inwhichonecanalsoobservetheinfluenceonaestheticchoiceoftheprecedingandconcurrentcognitivefactors,suchasattentionandtheavailableprocessingcapacity.30

Thedegreeofenjoymentofthechosenalternativepresumablytosomeextent varies as a function of the concurrent social and nonsocial micro-environmentalconditions,whichmayaffecttheprobabilityofaparticularartworkbeingchosenagaininthefuture.Exposuretoartworksisfurtheras-sumedtoproducechangesinappreciators’emotionalstatesandtherebyaf-fecttheirbehaviortowardothers.Andsincesocialbehaviorisbydefinitioninteractive, it is safe to assume that others’ behavior toward appreciatorswill,inturn,alsochange—leadingtoafurthermodificationinappreciators’emotional states and possibly to new and different aesthetic choices. Themodel in figure 1 therefore contains a feedback-loop feature representing

Figure1.Modelofaprototypicalaestheticepisode.LettersB1,B2...BNindicatedif-ferent available behavioral alternatives (including those that are aesthetically rel-evant).Notethesocioemotionallymediatedfeedbackloopsuggestingthepossibilityofrecursiveaestheticepisodes.

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 17

theongoingnatureofaperson’s interactionwith the social andaestheticenvironmentandtherecursivenessofaestheticepisodes. The context (conceptual and phenomenological) in which the choiceamongaestheticalternativeshasbeenplacedinthemodelinfigure1issuf-ficientlymultifacetedforthemodeltohaveheuristicvalue,inthesensethataconsiderableamountofresearchonthevariouslinksamongthemodel’scomponents has already been stimulated, especially in the area of music.However,adiscussionofsuchstudiesexceedsthescopeofthisarticle.

6. Concluding Remarks

Empiricalpsycho-aesthetics,aninterdisciplinaryfieldwithalongtradition,wasapproachedinthisarticlefromtwodirections.Oneisdefinitionalandorganizational(partIofthearticle,intheWinter2012issueofJAE),whiletheother(partII,here)isconcernedwiththevarietyandscopeofresearchareasandtechniques.Throughoutbothpartsof thearticle,substantiveaswellasmethodologicalissueswereaddressed. Part I contained a discussion of the problematic relations of empiricalpsycho-aestheticswithher“sisters”—theneighboringfieldsofresearchandscholarship,includingseveralemergingones.Theseareproblemsthathavebeencompoundedbythedisorderlynomenclatureofthevariousdomainsofexpertise(oftenimprecise,sometimesillogical).Atpresent, threeofthekeyinterdisciplinaryissuesseemtobethese:

(1) Thereisanawkwardrelationshipbetweenempiricalpsycho-aesthet-icsandphilosophicalaesthetics,withrootsinmutualdistrustandoc-casionaldisrespect,whicharebasedoninadequatelydetailedknowl-edgebyeachsideoftheotheranddrivenbypractices,someofwhichcanbedescribedaslessthanrigorous,alsoonthepartofbothsides.31

(2) Relations between philosophical aesthetics and the neuroscienceofartarealsostrained;theyareadverselyaffectedbythegrowingpainsandexcessesofneuroaestheticsandbythemixtureof(amod-icumof)panicand (inordinate) enthusiasmonphilosophy’spart.And,finally:

(3) Asacumulativeresultoftheprecedingpoints,thereisacertainde-greeofambivalencethatisdisplayedbyphilosophicalaestheticianswithregardtohowtopositionthemselvestowardempiricalwork—someofwhichisnolongeronlyante portas butinsidethegates(forexample,as“experimentalphilosophy”)—whichisaccompaniedbythesescholars’occasionalpuzzlingerrorsconcerningthetruemeth-odologicaloriginsofsomeoftheempiricalresearchtheymostpraise.Thedetailedandhopefullyevenhandeddiscussion(inpartIofthisarticle)ofvariouscontroversiesanddebates,includingseveralveryrecentones,attemptstocontributeconstructivelytotheresolutionofsomeoftheproblems.

18 Konecni

ThecontentofpartIIisoneofmanypossibleillustrationsoftheimpres-sivebreadthofempiricalpsycho-aestheticswithregardtoartdomains,top-ics,methods,experimentalprocedures,kindsofresearchparticipants,andtechniquesofstimulusmanipulationandmeasurement.Inordertodescribethe insandoutsofpsycho-aesthetic research in somedetail,muchof theresearchchosenforinclusionwascarriedoutinonelaboratory:theintentionwastoenrichthedescriptionbycapitalizingonclose-range,hands-on,fa-miliarity.Acomplementarygoalwastoshowthevarietyoftopicsinaesthet-icsthatcanbeaddressedbymultiplemethods,agreatvarietyofmethods,infact.Finally,theresearchtopicsthatwerechosenforpresentationallowedthatthedialoguewithphilosophicalaestheticsandneuroaesthetics,beguninpartI,befruitfullycontinuedinthevarioussectionsofpartII. Itisdifficulttocharttheoptimalcourseininterdisciplinaryfields.Em-piricalpsycho-aestheticsissometimesdescribedas“fragmented,”butthisisanindictmentmadebyscholarswhohave(insufficientlythought-through)visionsofaunifyingtheorythatothers(myselfincluded)believeisamirageinaesthetics.Empiricalpsycho-aesthetics canbesthelpadvance thecom-monfieldofaestheticsbyexploringawiderangeofappreciators,aestheticobjects,andlocales;bydevelopingprecise,medium-scaletheoreticalmod-els;andbyfurtherincreasingitsmethodologicalsophistication.

Notes

1. Thissectiondrawsonthefollowing(andother)papers:VladimirJ.Konecni,“Elu-siveEffectsofArtists’‘Messages,’”inCognitive Processes in the Perception of Art,ed.W.R.CrozierandA.J.Chapman(Amsterdam:Elsevier,1984);HeidiGotliebandVladimirJ.Konecni,“TheEffectsofInstrumentation,PlayingStyle,andStructureintheGoldberg VariationsbyJohannSebastianBach,”Music Perception3(1985):87–102;MitchellKarnoandVladimirJ.Konecni,“TheEffectsofStructuralInterven-tionsintheFirstMovementofMozart’sSymphonyinGMinorK.550onAestheticPreference,”Music Perception10(1992):63–72;Vladimir J.KonecniandMitchellKarno,“EmpiricalInvestigationsoftheHedonicandEmotionalEffectsofMusicalStructure,”Musikpsychologie11(1994):119–37.

2. MargaretLivingstone,“IsItWarm?IsItReal?OrJustLowSpatialFrequency?”Science 290(2000):1299.AlsoseeM.Livingstone,Vision and Art: The Biology of Seeing(NewYork:H.N.Abrams,2002),71–73.

3. LizannBonnar,FrédéricGosselin,andPhilippeG.Schyns,“UnderstandingDa-li’sSlave Market with the Disappearing Bust of Voltaire:ACaseStudyintheScaleInformationDrivingPerception,”Perception 31(2002):683–91.

4. ThissectiondrawsonVladimirJ.Konecni,“Portraiture:AnExperimentalStudyof theCreativeProcess,”Leonardo 24 (1991):325–28.Seealso IrvingA.Taylor,“TheNatureoftheCreativeProcess,”inCreativity: An Evaluation of the Creative Process, ed.P.Smith (NewYork:HastingsHouse, 1959); andCharlesA.Tijus,“CognitiveProcessesinArtisticCreation:TowardtheRealizationofaCreativeMachine,”Leonardo 21(1988):167–72.

5. Foradiscussionofthepreparatoryphaseinmusiccomposition,thedistinctionbetweeninspirationandinsight,andtherecentrelevantneuroscientificfindings

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 19

regardingproblemsolving,seeVladimirJ.Konecni,“Composers’CreativePro-cess: The Role of Life-Events, Emotion, and Reason,” in Musical Imaginations: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Creativity, Performance, and Perception, ed. Da-vid J.Hargreaves,DorothyE.Miell,andRaymondA.R.MacDonald(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2012).

6. ExamplesofmanyoftheproblemscanbeseeninRoe’sstudyoftwentylivingpainters;seeAnneRoe,“PaintersandPainting,”inPerspectives in Creativity,ed.J.A.TaylorandJ.W.Getzels(Chicago:Aldine,1975).

7. There isat leastoneexceptionto thisgeneralization—theseventy-five-minutefilmLe Mystère Picasso(1956),directedbyH.-G.Clouzot,withcinematographyby Claude Renoir. In the film, Picasso, at seventy-five, created some twentyblack-and-whitesketchesandcolorpaintingsinrealtime.

8. ManyofthesetheoreticalissueswereaddressedbyE.H.GombrichinArt and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation (Princeton,NJ:Prince-tonUniversityPress,1960).

9. W.P.Seeley,“TheScienceofArtIsasRelevanttothePhilosophyofArtasArtis-ticRepresentationsAretoScience:AReplytoRogerSeamon,”Newsletter of the American Society for Aesthetics 31,no.3(2011):6–7.

10. AlexanderG.Baumgarten,Aesthetica(FrankfurtanderOder:J.Ch.Kleyb,1750–1758; also Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1961);Adolf Zeising, Neue Lehre von den Pro-portionen des menschlichen Körpers[A New Theory of the Proportions of the Human Body](Leipzig:R.Weigel,1854);A.Zeising,Der goldne Schnitt[The Golden Section](Halle: Leopoldinisch-CarolinischeAkademie, 1884); G. T. Fechner, “Über dieFragedesgoldnenSchnitts”[“OntheQuestionoftheGoldenSection”],Archiv für die zeichnenden Künste 11(1865):100–12.

11. M.Borissavlievitch,The Golden Number and the Scientific Aesthetics of Architecture (London:AlecTiranti,1958);CharlesBouleau,The Painter’s Secret Geometry: The Study of Composition in Art(London:ThamesandHudson,1963);LeCorbusier[C.E.Jeanneret-Gris],Modulor(London:FaberandFaber,1954).

12. Foranearly review, seeC.D.Green,“AllThatGlitters:AReviewofPsycho-logicalResearchontheAestheticsoftheGoldenSection,”Perception24(1995):937–68;andforarecentmathematicaltreatmentofGSandtherelatedpropor-tions,seeDavidNavon,“TheSistersoftheGoldenSection,”Perception 40(2011):705–24.

13. ThearticledrawsonthefollowingpapersbyVladimirJ.Konecni:“TheVaseonthe Mantelpiece: The Golden Section in Context,” Empirical Studies of the Arts15(1997):177–208;“TheGoldenSectionin20th-CenturyPaintings,”Proceedings of the International Conference “20th-Century Art: Traditions, Achievements, Innova-tions,”heldattheErmitageMuseum,Sankt-Peterburg,RussianFederation,1999;“TheGoldenSectionintheStructureof20th-CenturyPaintings,”Rivista di Psico-logia dell’Arte(NuovaSerie)22(2001):27–42;(withLaneyE.Cline)“The‘GoldenWoman’:An Exploratory Study of Women’s Proportions in Paintings,” Visual Arts Research, 27 (2001):69–78;“TheGoldenSection:Elusive,butDetectable,”Creativity Research Journal 15(2003):267–76;and“Onthe‘GoldenSection,’”Vi-sual Arts Research31(2005):76–87.

14. Rudolf Arnheim, Art and Visual Perception (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress,1974);KurtKoffka,Principles of Gestalt Psychology (NewYork:Harcourt,BraceandWorld,1935).

15. E.J.Webb,D.T.Campbell,R.D.Schwartz,andL.Sechrest,Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Research in the Social Sciences(Chicago:RandMcNally,1966).

16. P.J.LocherandY.Nagy,“VisionSpontaneouslyEstablishesthePerceptofPicto-rialBalance,”Empirical Studies of the Arts14(1996):17–31;I.C.McManus,D. Ed-mondson,and J.Rodger,“Balance inPictures,” British Journal of Psychology 76(1985):311–24.

17. V.S.Johnston,“FemaleFacialBeauty:TheFertilityHypothesis,”Pragmatics and

20 Konecni

Cognition8(2000):107–22;D.Singh,“AdaptiveSignificanceofFemalePhysicalAttractiveness:RoleofWaist-to-HipRatio,”Journal of Personality and Social Psy-chology65(1993):293–307.

18. Shin’ichiHisamatsu,Zen and the Fine Arts[trans.fromJapanesebyG.Tokiwa](Tokyo:KodanshaInternational,1958/1971).

19. Vladimir J.Konecni, “TheAestheticTrinity:Awe,BeingMoved,Thrills,” Bul-letin of Psychology and the Arts 5(2005):27–44;V.J.Konecni,“DoesMusicInduceEmotion?ATheoreticalandMethodologicalAnalysis,”Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 2(2008):115–29;V.J.Konecni,“AestheticTrinityTheoryandtheSublime,”Proceedings of the European Society for Aesthetics 2(2010):244–64,withtherevisedversioninV.J.Konecni,“AestheticTrinityTheoryandtheSublime,”Philosophy Today55(2011):64–73.

20. AnneJ.BloodandRobertJ.Zatorre,“IntenselyPleasurableResponsestoMusicCorrelatewithActivityinBrainRegionsImplicatedinRewardandEmotion,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 98 (2001): 11818–23; incidentally,theseneuroscientistsdonotusetheterm“neuroaesthetics.”

21. Vladimir J. Konecni, Rebekah A. Wanic, and Amber Brown, “Emotional andAestheticAntecedentsandConsequencesofMusic-InducedThrills,”American Journal of Psychology 120(2007):619–43.

22. SeeKonecni,“AestheticTrinity,”36,andKWB(innote21).23. ForsomeexamplesofresearchonThrills,seeAvramGoldstein,“ThrillsinRe-

sponse to Music and Other Stimuli,” Physiological Psychology 8 (1980): 126–29;JaakPanksepp,“TheEmotionalSourceof‘Chills’InducedbyMusic,”Music Per-ception 13(1995):171–207;andNikkiS.Rickard,“IntenseEmotionalResponsestoMusic:ATestofthePhysiologicalArousalHypothesis,”Psychology of Music 32(2004):371–88.

24. ThefindingreportedbyBZ(seenote20)thatnotoneoftheirparticipantsexpe-riencedThrillstotheobjectivelypowerfulpieceschosenbyotherparticipantsisnotinagreementwiththeliterature;cf.Panksepp’sstudies(seenote23).

25. Goldstein,“ThrillsinResponsetoMusic,”127;Rickard,“IntenseResponsestoMusic,”384.

26. Onthispoint,seeVladimirJ.Konecni,“Music,Affect,Method,Data:ReflectionsontheCarrollversusKivyDebate(forthcominginAmerican Journal of Psychology).

27. Foranearlytreatmentoftheseissues,seeVladimirJ.Konecni,“DeterminantsofAestheticPreferenceandEffectsofExposuretoAestheticStimuli:Social,Emo-tional, and Cognitive Factors,” in Progress in Experimental Personality Research, vol.9,ed.BrendanA.Maher(NewYork:AcademicPress,1979).

28. VladimirJ.Konecni,“SocialInteractionandMusicalPreference,”inThe Psychol-ogy of Music, ed.DianaDeutsch(NewYork:AcademicPress,1982).

29. The diagram is from Vladimir J. Konecni, “Interactive Effects of Music andVisualArt inDifferentEmotionalStates,”Proceedings of the 3rd Congress of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music, 22–25, Université de Liège,Belgium,1994.

30. Vladimir J.Konecni,“The InfluenceofAffectonMusicChoice,” inMusic and Emotion: Theory, Research, Applications,ed.PatrikN.JuslinandJohnA.Sloboda(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2010).

31. SeeKonecni,“Music,Affect,Method,Data.”

Empirical Psycho-Aesthetics and Her Sisters—Part II 21