Accounting for taste: Individual differences in preference for harmony

Abstract

Although empirical research on aesthetics has had some success in explaining the average preferences of groups of observers, relatively little is known about individual differences in preference, and especially about how such differences might covary across different domains. In this study, we identified a new factor underlying aesthetic response-preference for harmonious stimuli-and examined how it varies over four domains (color, shape, spatial location, and music) across individuals with different levels of training in art and music. We found that individual preferences for harmony are strongly correlated across all four dimensions tested and decrease consistently with training in the relevant aesthetic domains. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that cross-domain preference for harmony is wellrepresented as a single, unified factor, with effects separate from those of training and of common personality measures.Keywords Perceptual organization . Visual perception . Music cognition . Good gestalt . Aesthetic preference Do individuals differ systematically in their aesthetic preferences, and, if so, how? The well-known adage, "There's no accounting for taste," suggests that individual differences (IDs) in aesthetic preference are either completely arbitrary or otherwise inexplicable (e.g., Chandler 1928;Woodworth, 1938). However, modern behavioral research on empirical aesthetics has shown that scientifically meaningful statements can be made about average preferences among colors (see, e.g., Ling & Hurlbert, 2009;Ou, Luo, Woodcock, & Wright, 2004;Palmer & Schloss, 2010), shapes (e.g., Amir, Biederman, & Hayworth, 2011;Bar & Neta, 2006;Silvia & Barona, 2009), spatial compositions (e.g., McManus & Kitson, 1995Palmer, Gardner, & Wickens, 2008), and music (e.g., Smith & Melara, 1990;Trainor & Heinmiller, 1998). It therefore seems reasonable that similar techniques could be used to characterize (and thereby "account for") IDs in aesthetic preference.Some headway has been made in this direction already. For example, Jacobsen (2004) modeled IDs in the preference for simple spatial compositions and isolated specific cues that seemed to drive the preference decisions in different individuals. McManus (1980) showed that preference for the shapes of triangles and rectangles varies widely across individuals and yet is consistent within an individual over a time span of more than 2 years. More recently, McManus, Cook, and Hunt (2010) tried to tie these differences to particular personality scales-including the Big Five personality traits as well as need for cognition, tolerance of ambiguity, schizotypy, vocational types, and aesthetic activities-but found no significant correlations.An older body of research, by Eysenck (1940) on IDs in aesthetic preference, is still more closely related to the present research. Using widely varying domains (e.g., black-and-white photographs, colors, polygons, and odors), Eysenck had participants order stimuli within a given domain from most to least preferred. He then correl...

Cross preferences for colors and shapes

“…The basis of these associations may lie in semantic information associated with colors and shapes. The results are consistent with the idea that common semantic information might lead to intertwined preferences for colors and shapes . We can see that the cross preferences between colors and shapes in the present study were not particularly strong; however, the present study is the first to combine color preference and shape preference in order to examine the relationship between them.…”

“…The results are consistent with the idea that common semantic information might lead to intertwined preferences for colors and shapes. 20 We can see that the cross preferences between colors and shapes in the present study were not particularly strong; however, the present study is the first to combine color preference and shape preference in order to examine the relationship between them. Future studies may examine color preference in terms of hue, chroma, and lightness, to reveal their effects on color semantics, color preference, and the cross preference with shapes.…”

“…Correlated preferences were found between different domains; individuals who preferred particular features in one domain tended to prefer specific features in other domains. Most recently, Palmer and Griscom suggested that a preference for “harmony” could underlie this general factor (the “good taste” factor) for cross preferences in Eysenck's study. They found that individual preferences for four different domains (i.e., color, shape, volumetric location, and music) were correlated with individuals' own “harmony” judgments for these same stimuli; that is, some individuals preferred harmonious stimuli while others did not.…”

A User‐Oriented Method for Preferential Color Scheme Generation

“…Schloss and Palmer examined preference, harmony, and similarity of pair colors, and discussed the differences between the observers' opinions . Palmer and Griscom also studied individual taste factors for harmonious preference, and found that individual preferences for harmony are correlated across four domains of color, shape, spatial location, and music . Nemcsics did a systematic study on multicolor combination preference .…”

“…28 Palmer and Griscom also studied individual taste factors for harmonious preference, and found that individual preferences for harmony are correlated across four domains of color, shape, spatial location, and music. 29 Nemcsics did a systematic study on multicolor combination preference. 15 Nemcsics' project focused on general preference, which he defined as color harmony content considering factors of gender, age, and so forth.…”