Individual and group modelling of aesthetic judgment strategies

Abstract

Individual differences in aesthetic judgments were investigated by comparing quantitative group and individual performance models of the judgment processes. Aesthetic judgments of beauty over novel, formal, graphic patterns were collected from 34 non-artist college students using a two-step ranking-rating procedure. Their judgment processes were individually modelled using Judgment Analysis. The participants showed noted individual differences. Certain features of the stimulus material, which were considered to contribute to the picture's beauty by one participant, were used in an opposing fashion by another. A group model was derived based on the average ratings of the patterns' beauty. It was concluded that the group model was not an adequate representation of the present data, whereas the data revealed systematic judgment processes at the individual subject level.

Descriptive and evaluative judgment processes: Behavioral and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics

“…These were considered to be perceptual cues that could be used by the participants in deriving their judgments. Accordingly the features were employed in the judgment analysis (i.e., they were introduced as predictors in the multiple regression analysis; Jacobsen, 2004). See the Appendix for the intercorrelation matrix of all 20 features.…”

“…Also, it was predicted that group models and individual case models replicate previous reports of symmetry and complexity as determinants of aesthetic judgments. In addition, on the basis of reports of individual differences in aesthetic judgment (e.g., Fechner, 1876;Jacobsen, 2002Jacobsen, , 2004Whitfield, 1984) individual judgmental variation was predicted.…”

Towards a sensorimotor aesthetics of performing art

“…These theories often relied on psychophysical studies aiming to identify particular stimulus properties that induce aesthetic experience. Studies of the so-called 'golden section' in abstract geometrical figures provide one example (McManus & Weatherby, 1997), but similar approaches have been used with paintings (Jacobsen & Hofel 2002;Jacobsen, 2004;Jacobsen, Buchta, Kohler & Schroger, 2004;Whissell, 1980;McManus, 1980). Such studies generally suggest that aesthetic experience depends on compositional arrangement between parts of the stimulus, and between individual parts and the whole.…”

Accounting for taste: Individual differences in preference for harmony

“…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.…”