Abstract
The idea that simple visual elements such as colors and lines have specific, universal associations—for example red being warm—appears rather intuitive. Such associations have formed a basis for the description of artworks since the 18th century and are still fundamental to discourses on art today. Art historians might describe a painting where red is dominant as “warm,” “aggressive,” or “lively,” with the tacit assumption that beholders would universally associate the works’ certain key forms with specific qualities, or “aesthetic effects”. However, is this actually the case? Do we actually share similar responses to the same line or color? In this paper, we tested whether and to what extent this assumption of universality (sharing of perceived qualities) is justified. We employed—for the first time—abstract artworks as well as single elements (lines and colors) extracted from these artworks in an experiment in which participants rated the stimuli on 14 “aesthetic effect” scales derived from art literature and empirical aesthetics. To test the validity of the assumption of universality, we examined on which of the dimensions there was agreement, and investigated the influence of art expertise, comparing art historians with lay people. In one study and its replication, we found significantly lower agreement than expected. For the whole artworks, participants agreed on the effects of warm-cold, heavy-light, and happy-sad, but not on 11 other dimensions. Further, we found that the image type (artwork or its constituting elements) was a major factor influencing agreement; people agreed more on the whole artwork than on single elements. Art expertise did not play a significant role and agreement was especially low on dimensions usually of interest in empirical aesthetics (e.g., like-dislike). Our results challenge the practice of interpreting artworks based on their aesthetic effects, as these effects may not be as universal as previously thought.
Highlights
In Goethe’s seminal treatise about colors, first published in 1810, he wrote: “The colours on the plus side are yellow, red-yellow, yellow-red
Part of what is discussed as an aesthetic effect in art literature is reminiscent of what in modern psychology is known as cross-modal correspondence
This study is—to the best of our knowledge—the first attempt to test the universality of aesthetic effects by using original material and rating scales based on the terms most common in art discourses
Summary
In Goethe’s seminal treatise about colors, first published in 1810, he wrote: “The colours on the plus side are yellow, red-yellow (orange), yellow-red (minium, cinnabar) The feelings they excite are quick, lively, aspiring” [1, p.306]. Goethe examined the effects of colors on perceivers, in which he stated that “red-yellow gives an impression of warmth and gladness” [1, p.309] Because of such effects, he considered color a central aspect of visual art: “colour considered as an element of art, may be made subservient to the highest aesthetical ends” [1, p.309]. This is the aim of the present study, in which we test and quantify this notion of universality in aesthetic effects among both lays and art experts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
