The Experience of Art in Museums

Brieber, David; Leder, Helmut; Nadal, Marcos

doi:10.1177/0276237415570000

Cited by 35 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When separately manipulating physical contexts (museum vs laboratory) and genuineness (genuine vs reproduction), the museum enhancement effect was not revealed when assessing conceptual artworks related to the medium of photography (Brieber et al 2015a), but was shown in the case of canvas paintings (Grüner et al 2019): figurative and abstract painted art was liked more and rated as more interesting in the museum than in the laboratory. It is likely that Brieber and colleagues (Brieber et al 2015a) did not reveal the effect of the physical context because of the use of photographyan art medium that may not benefit from an Bin person^viewing context. Therefore, the argument can be made that tangible formal aspects must be seen Bin personŝ o that the gallery's context can be revealed (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…However, in our study genuine installations were shown in the gallery, while in the classroom participants viewed videos presenting installation artworks. This way of examining the effect of the physical context of the art reception on aesthetic experiences became the subject of criticism of researchers who designed an experiment in which they dissociated the physical context and genuineness factors (Brieber et al 2015a)and did not show the influence of any of these factors. Interpreting the obtained results, these researchers argue in favour of the possibility of the occurrence of an inverse white cube effect, which they explain as follows:…”

Section: The Physical Context and Appreciation Of The Exhibitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Individuals who viewed the paintings in the context of a gallery appreciated them more than the viewers who were shown reproductions of paintings, art photographs and collages outside the gallery (Brieber et al 2015b;Brieber et al 2014;Locher and Dolese 2004;Locher et al 1999Locher et al , 2001Specker et al 2017). When separately manipulating physical contexts (museum vs laboratory) and genuineness (genuine vs reproduction), the museum enhancement effect was not revealed when assessing conceptual artworks related to the medium of photography (Brieber et al 2015a), but was shown in the case of canvas paintings (Grüner et al 2019): figurative and abstract painted art was liked more and rated as more interesting in the museum than in the laboratory. It is likely that Brieber and colleagues (Brieber et al 2015a) did not reveal the effect of the physical context because of the use of photographyan art medium that may not benefit from an Bin person^viewing context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Therefore, the argument can be made that tangible formal aspects must be seen Bin personŝ o that the gallery's context can be revealed (cf. Brieber et al 2015avs Grüner et al 2019. Viewers are likely especially focused on these aspects during the reception of the art of installation due to its interactive nature (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The influence of the physical context and knowledge of artworks on the aesthetic experience of interactive installations

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current study, the influence of the physical context and the knowledge of artworks on the aesthetic experience of installation art is tested for the first time. We assessed non-experts in the field of art (N = 158) who viewed interactive installations in either the art gallery context or the classroom. Some participants knew both the artworks' titles and the curator descriptions, some knew only the titles, and some had no contextual information. We tested both the aesthetic emotions and the aesthetic judgments. For the measurement of aesthetic emotions, we used the Self-Assessment Manikin approach including the traditional dimensions of affect and the measurement of recently-proposed dimensions such as origin or subjective significance. The study replicated previous findings that the gallery context enhances the aesthetic experienceboth of art appreciation and aesthetic emotions. Moreover, our results showed that the emotions caused by viewing the installation in the gallery had more of an automatic source (metaphorically coming Bfrom the heart^) and were more subjectively significant than aesthetic emotions experienced in the classroom context. Curatorial information increased the understanding and appreciation of the works of installation art, and also caused the aesthetic emotion to be more positive and more intensive; while having knowledge about the titles did not influence the aesthetic experience.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: The Physical Context and Appreciation Of The Exhibitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The influence of the physical context and knowledge of artworks on the aesthetic experience of interactive installations

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using standardized physiological measures (heart rate, skin conductance, etc.) may be a good strategy to assess the visitor's aesthetic experience in an art museum, as they could help, more than self-reports, to control for the subjective variability linked to individual preferences or cultural differences in the appreciation of museum experiences (Brieber, Leder, & Nadal, 2015;Tschacher et al, 2011). Clow and Fredhoi (2006) aimed to study possible stress reduction of a group of visitors to the Guildhall Art Gallery, London.…”

Section: Art Museums As Restorative Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visits to figurative art museums may lower blood pressure and stress

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The research aimed to assess, through physiological measurements such as blood pressure and heart rate, whether exposure to art museums and to different art styles (figurative vs. modern art) was able to enhance visitors' well-being in terms of relaxing and stress reduction. Method: Participants (n = 77) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions, on the basis of the typology of the art style they were exposed to in the museum visit: (1) figurative art, (2) modern art and (3) museum office (as a control condition). Blood pressure and heart rate were measured before and after the visits. Results: Diastolic values of the participants were quite stable, as expected in people who do not suffer hypertension; we therefore considered only variations in systolic blood pressure. The majority of the participants exposed to figurative art significantly decreased systolic blood pressure compared to those exposed to modern art and museum office. No differences were found in the heart rate before and after the visit for the three groups. Conclusion: Findings suggest that museum visits can have health benefits, and figurative art may decrease systolic blood pressure.

show abstract

Aristotle's dream: Evolutionary and neural aspects of aesthetic communication in the arts

Sütterlin

2021

PsyCh Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Art in general perception is something that transcends our notion of reality. In view of the earliest findings in Paleolithic sites, their abstract appearance and sometimes ceremonial context increased their status of a secret language. Even the first figurative cave paintings remained in a context of an encoded semantic whole. The highly symbolic value of art seemed invulnerable. It was just the claim for "mimesis" in Greek antiquity (Plato) that urged artists to "realistically" depict what can be seen-as to stay in track of eternal messages behind. This devaluated the artistic oeuvre to a purely imitating craft and had to overcome at once several inherent obstacles. First, that reality (the phenomenal world) is in general only a pale reflection of what lays behind (Platonic ideas) and second, that the human eye, unlike the human mind, cannot penetrate to more than ephemeral impressions. Moreover, it mixed up reality with what we are able to see (i.e. visual perception), thus supposing a pinpoint representation of the world by our senses. Aristotle was the first to qualify art as picturing more than we usually are meant to see, filling the gap between the sensual and the spiritual world. Aristotelian aesthetics includes concepts of reduction and selection of composition and emotion, thus a summarized view within any performance of poetics or painting.And it took centuries to close the gap between natural and aesthetic perception or art. Life sciences in the 20th century discovered the evolutionary basis of sensory perception as being highly biased and organized, concept as emotion-driven and thus, mentally equipped as well. This sets a new approach in our understanding of perception, art, and aesthetics as an ongoing communication in process on common bases. Art may cooperate or disagree, but never can cut the nexus with its perceptual prejudices and substrate.

show abstract

The Experience of Art in Museums

Cited by 35 publications

References 21 publications

The influence of the physical context and knowledge of artworks on the aesthetic experience of interactive installations

The influence of the physical context and knowledge of artworks on the aesthetic experience of interactive installations

Visits to figurative art museums may lower blood pressure and stress

Aristotle's dream: Evolutionary and neural aspects of aesthetic communication in the arts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About