Beauty and creativity in a simple choice experiment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18381/eq.v14i2.7098Keywords:
Aesthetic choice experiment, preferences for art, creativity, beauty indexAbstract
This paper presents the results of a simple choice experiment on two abstract objects, one angular and the other curved, to study the factors that determine the aesthetic decisions of individuals. I test the hypothesis that the level of creativity appreciated in an art work does not influence the agent´s preferences. The evidence supports that claim and that a beauty index may represent the public’s preferences.Downloads
References
Aitken, P. P. (1974). Judgments of pleasingness and interestingness as functions of visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 203-244.
Bar, M. & Neta, M. (2006). Humans prefer curved visual objects. Psychologycal Science, 17, 645-648.
Bardsley, N. R., Cubitt, R., Loomes, G., Moffatt, P., Starmer, C. & Sugden, R. (2010). Experimental economics: rethinking the rules. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Barlow, H. B. & Reeves, B. C. (1979). The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays. Vision Research, 19, 783-793.
Berlyne, D. E. (1970). Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Perception and Psychophysics, 8, 279-286.
Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Bertamini, M., Palubo, L., Gheorghes, N. T. & Galatsidas, M. (2016). Do observers like curvature or dislike angularity? British Journal of Psychology, 107, 154-178.
Birkhoff, G. D. (1932). Aesthetic Measure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bryant, W. D. A. & Throsby, D. (2006). Creativity and the behavior of artists. In V. A.
Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (Eds.). Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture. Vol. 1. North Holland: Elsevier, B. V., pp. 507-529.
Cameron, A. C. & Trivedi, P. K. (2005). Microeconometrics. Cambridge, UK y New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Caplin, A. & Dean, M. (2015). Enhanced choice experiments. In G. R. Fréchette & A. Schotter Handbook of experimental economic methodology (pp. 86-103). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Caplin, A. & Dean, M. (2008). Dopamine, reward prediction error, and economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123 (2), 663-701.
Clottes, J. (2003). Chauvet cave: the art of earliest times. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.
Croson, R. & Gächter, S. (2010). The science of experimental economics. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 73, 122-131.
Eysenck, H. J. (1941). The empirical determination of an aesthetic formula. Psychologycal Review, 48, 83-92.
Fréchette, G. R. & Schotter, A. (2015). Handbook of experimental economic methodology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gómez Puerto, G., Munar, E. Acedo, C. & Gomila, A. (2013). Is the human initial preference for rounded shapes universal? Preliminary results of an ongoing crosscultural research. Perception, 42, ECVP Abstract Supplement, 102.
Gould, S. J. (1980). The panda´s thumb. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Hogarth, W. (1753). The analysis of beauty. London, UK: Reeves.
Jacobsen, T. (2006). Bridging the arts and sciences: a framework for the psychology of aesthetics. Leonardo, 39, 155-162.
Jadva, V., Hines, M. & Golombok, S. (2010). Infants preferences for toys, colors and shapes: Sex differences and similarities. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1261-1273.
Katz, B. F. (2002). What makes a polygon pleasing? Empirical Studies of the Arts, 20,1-19.
Kennedy, P. (2008). A guide to econometrics. Sixth edition. USA, MA: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
Köhler, W. (1947). Gestalt psychology. 2nd edition. New York, NY: Liveright.
Kreps, D. M. (2012). Microeconomic foundations I: Choice and competitive markets. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Locher, I. (2014). Contemporary experimental aesthetic: procedures and findings. In V. A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (Eds.). Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture. North Holland: Elsevier, B. V., 2, 49-79.
Lundhom, H. (1921). The affective tone of lines. Experimental researches. Psychologycal Review, 28, 43-60.
Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Makin, A. D. J., Wilton, M. Pecchinenda, A. & Bertanini, M. (2012). Symmetry perception and affective responses: a combined EEG/EMG Study. Neuropsychologia, 50, 3250-3261.
Makin, A. D. J., Pecchinenda, A. & Bertamini, M. (2012a). Implicit affective evaluation of visual symmetry. Emotion, 12, 1021-1030.
Makin, A. D. J., Pecchinenda, A. & Bertamini, M. (2012b). Grouping by closure influences subjective regularity and implicit preference. Iperception, 3, 519-527.
Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D. & Green, J. R. (1995). Microeconomic theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Nadal, M., Munar, E., Marty, G. & Cela-Conde, C. J. (2010). Visual complexity and beauty appreciation: Explaining the divergence of results. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 28 (2), 173-191.
Penton-Voak, I. S., Jacobson, A. & Trivers, R. (2004). Populational differences in attractiveness judgments of male and female faces: comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evolution and Humand Behavior, 25, 355-370.
Perret, D. I., Lee, K. J., Penton-Voak, I. Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., Burt, D. M. & Akamatsu, S. (1998). Effects of sexual diphormism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884-887.
Poffenberger, A. T. & Barrows, B. E. (1924). The feeling value of lines. Journal of Applied Psychology, 8, 187-205.
Quinn, P. C., Brown, C. R. & Streppa, M. L. (1997). Perceptual organization of complex visual configurations by young infants. Infant Behavior and Development, 20, pp 35-46.
Roth, A. E. (2015). Is experimental economics living up to its promise? In G. R. Fréchette & A. Schotter. Handbook of experimental economic methodology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Rosser, J. B., Jr. & Eckel, C. (2010). Introduction to JEBO Special Issue on ‘Issues in the Methodology of Experimental Economics’. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 73, 1-2.
Russell, P. A. (1973). Relationships between exploratory behaviour and fear: a review. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 417-433.
Simon, H. (2001). Creativity in the arts and the sciences. The Kenyon Review, 23 (2), 203-221.
Silvia, P. J. & Barona, C. M. (2009). Do people prefer curved objects? Angularity, expertise, and aesthetic preference. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27 (1), 25-42.
Sluckin, W. (1972). Imprinting and early learning. London: Methuen.
Sluckin, W., Colman, A. M. & Hargreaves, D. J. (1980). Liking words as a function of the experienced frequency of their occurrence. British Journal of Psychology, 71, 163-169.
Smith, V. L. (2010). Theory and experiment: what are the questions? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 73, pp. 3-15.
Vitz, P. C. (1966). Preference for different amounts of visual complexity. Behavioral Science, 11, 105-114.
Wagemans, J., Elder, J. H., Kubovy, M., Palmer, S. E., Peterson, M. A., Singh, M. & Heydt, R. von der (2012). A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. Psychological Bulletin, I38, 1172-1217.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. 2nd edition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Exposure, Monograph Supplement, 9 (2), Part (2), 9, 1-27.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
El contenido publicado en EconoQuantum se encuentra bajo una Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
