Abstract

Videos of moving faces are more flattering than static images of the same face, a phenomenon dubbed the Frozen Face Effect. This may reflect an aesthetic preference for faces viewed in a more ecological context than still photographs. In the current set of experiments, we sought to determine whether this effect is unique to facial processing, or if motion confers an aesthetic benefit to other stimulus categories as well, such as bodies and objects—that is, a more generalized ‘Frozen Effect’ (FE). If motion were the critical factor in the FE, we would expect the video of a body or object in motion to be significantly more appealing than when seen in individual, static frames. To examine this, we asked participants to rate sets of videos of bodies and objects in motion along with the still frames constituting each video. Extending the original FFE, we found that participants rated videos as significantly more flattering than each video’s corresponding still images, regardless of stimulus domain, suggesting that the FFE generalizes well beyond face perception. Interestingly, the magnitude of the FE increased with the predictability of stimulus movement. Our results suggest that observers prefer bodies and objects in motion over the same information presented in static form, and the more predictable the motion, the stronger the preference. Motion imbues objects and bodies with greater aesthetic appeal, which has implications for how one might choose to portray oneself in various social media platforms.

Highlights

  • Visual experience is one of change, wherein people and objects constantly move about their environments

  • Video ratings were significantly higher than the average rating of each video’s corresponding still images (t(15) = 6.34; p < 0.0001; d = 1.58; Fig 2A) suggesting flattery ratings were positively affected by the presence of continuous motion

  • These results indicate bodies engaged in motion are preferable to the same information displayed in static form

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Visual experience is one of change, wherein people and objects constantly move about their environments. Given the ubiquity of motion in our visual experience, it is no surprise that the role of motion in object perception has been extensively explored (e.g., [4, 5]). For example, there is general consensus that motion confers a benefit to the recognition of familiar faces, a phenomenon referred to as the ‘motion advantage’ (e.g.,[6,7,8]). It most prominently manifests itself when viewing degraded images (e.g., negatives; [6]), ostensibly because under.

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call