Several previous studies in which a concept learning task has been used to investigate the acquisition of the concept of artistic style, have noted a wide range of individual differences in performance. Tighe (1968) has proposed that these may reflect differential sensitivity to the relevant dimensions of stylistic variation. The INDSCAL technique of multidimensional scaling, which has previously been used to determine the predominant dimensions of variation in responses to visual art was used here to determine the salience of such dimensions for different individuals. These scores were then used to predict individual differences in performance on a concept formation task. The results offer support for a differential cue salience explanation for individual differences in learning about artistic style. Implications for aesthetic education are discussed.Recent research in experimental aesthetics can be characterized both by an increasing methodological sophistication, and by a growing concern with one or two topics of central importance rather than a scattered interest in a variety of disparate areas. One such topic is that of sensitivity to artistic style. The ability to recognize similarities and differences between the works of different painters has been investigated from a number of different viewpoints. Two of these, the developmental approach (e.g. Gardner, 1972) and the multidimensional scaling approach (e.g. O'Hare, 1976) have been outlined separately (O'Hare, 1978). The present article will be chiefly concerned with a third approach involving the concept learning of artistic style. the criteria that define the concept are hard to identify. Since two works of art may vary on an indefinite number of dimensions, an artist's style can only be defined with reference to positive instances. In Walk's experiment, subjects were presented with positive instances of an artistic style, and the ability of the subject to extend this to new instances was measured. Using this simple transfer technique, Walk was able to demonstrate concept learning of the styles of six Impressionist painters.Tighe (1968) modified the basic procedure to permit measures of the subject's concept formation after the presentation of each instance. Slides of samples of five Cubist painters' works were divided into sets so that each set contained one painting by each artist. Each set was then presented three times. On the first occasion the subject was required to guess the name of each artist. The second presentation, or training trial, consisted of the pairing of each painting with the appropriate artist's name. The final trial was the same as the first, except that after the subject had made a choice, the correct artist's name was provided.Once again, clear evidence of concept learning was obtained. The percentage of correct classifications improved from near-chance (17 per cent) on the first test trial to 60 per cent correct on the final test trial. These figures are all the more impressive in view of the fact that the slides of these closel...