The art of influence: When and why deviant artists gain impact.

Abstract

Some artists rise to fame, while others sink into oblivion. What determines whether artists make an impact? Considering deviance in its sociohistorical context, we propose that artists whose work deviates from their own previous style (intrapersonal deviance) and other artists' styles (interpersonal deviance) gain greater impact than nondeviant artists, as long as deviance is directed toward a progressive style. A preliminary study showed that in western cultures nonrealistic styles are considered more progressive than realistic styles (Study 1). Five more studies provide evidence for the effects of the two types of artistic deviance on several aspects of impact (i.e., perceived influence of the artist, valuation of the artwork, and visual attention to the artwork). First, individuals considered artists who deviated from their previous style more impactful than artists who consistently followed a single style (Study 2), effects that were stronger when artists transitioned from a retrogressive style to a progressive one (Study 3). Second, artists who deviated from their contemporaries' style were considered more impactful than artists who followed the predominant style, effects that were stronger when artists strayed from a predominant retrogressive style by using progressive means of expression (Studies 4 and 5). When the historical context prevented observers from inferring the progressiveness of the deviant artists' expressive means, artistic deviance enhanced perceived impact regardless of the means by which the artists deviated (Study 6). Supporting our theoretical model, the effects of intrapersonal and interpersonal deviance on impact were mediated by perceived will-power (Studies 3, 5, and 6). (PsycINFO Database Record

The signalling effects of nonconforming dress style in personnel selection contexts: do applicants’ qualifications matter?

“…Fourth, we are the first to examine the power-signalling effects of nonconformity among actual recruiters. In contrast to previous studies (Van Kleef et al, 2011;Bellezza et al, 2014;Stamkou et al, 2018), we did not find a direct effect of nonconformity on power perceptions. In fact, our results revealed that nonconformity led to lower (rather than higher) perceptions of power for low-qualified applicants.…”

“…In a series of experiments, Van Kleef et al (2011) showed that people who violated a variety of social norms (e.g., by dropping cigarette ashes or putting their feet on the table) were perceived by others as powerful, and were in some cases preferred as leaders (Van Kleef et al, 2012). Research by Stamkou et al (2018) showed that deviant artists are accorded greater influence than artists who conform to prevailing artistic styles. Finally, Bellezza et al (2014) showed that customers dressed in a nonconforming style when entering an elegant boutique, and professors wearing nonconforming attire during a lecture were perceived as more competent than those dressed in a more conforming manner.…”

“…As nonconformity, by virtue of its independence, signals confidence (Moscovici & Nemeth, 1974), nonconformity should be subject to the same boundary condition. That is, signals of confidence and volitional capacity emitted by nonconformity may undermine a person's social attractiveness, unless such signals are backed by credible information regarding the person's actual qualifications (Stamkou et al, 2018).…”

“…According to a second, more recent perspective, however, job applicants may actually benefit from a nonconforming dress style. A growing body of research indicates that norm violations and other forms of nonconformity signal that people can afford to follow their own volition in spite of situational constraints, an affordance that is associated with power (Van Kleef et al, 2011;Bellezza et al, 2014;Stamkou et al, 2018). Finally, a long-standing third perspective highlights the importance of applicants' qualifications in shaping responses to nonconformity.…”

The dynamic nature of social norms: New perspectives on norm development, impact, violation, and enforcement

“…Other work indicates that norm violators are perceived as powerful (Van Kleef, Homan, Finkenauer, Gündemir, & Stamkou, 2011) and high status (Bellezza, Gino, & Keinan, 2014), and are granted influence when their violations benefit others (i.e., a "Robin Hood effect"; Van Kleef, Homan, Finkenauer, Blaker, & Heerdink, 2012). Furthermore, norm violations may be condoned or even rewarded when norms are relatively unimportant (Brauer & Chekroun;Popa, Phillips, & Robertson, 2014) and their violation is therefore non-threatening, such as in the domain of art (Stamkou, Van Kleef, & Homan, 2018).…”