When viewing variations in paintings by Mondrian, aesthetic preferences correlate with pupil size.

Abstract

Observers consciously prefer Mondrian’s paintings in their original orientation compared with a rotated position—the “oblique effect” (Latto, Brain, & Kelly, 2000). However, this finding’s premise, that all vertical–horizontal orientations of the thick black lines in Mondrian’s oeuvre are preferred, overlooks the fact that the overall balance of these images is also altered when they are reoriented. Thus, balance may regulate the oblique effect, which might influence conscious aesthetic preferences. To address this issue, we explore Hess’s (1965, 1972) claim that observers will unconsciously increase their pupil diameter to pleasing images and constrict it to unpleasant images. We overcame Hess’s methodological limitation of not keeping his images’ luminances and contrast constant across conditions by presenting eight Mondrian paintings (1921–1944) to 30 observers on a CRT for 20 s each in either their original or seven rotated positions. Simultaneously, we measured their pupil size while asking them to report how (dis)pleasing they found each image. We found both evidence for the oblique effect (where image rotation hampers preference) and a correlation between this consciously reported aesthetic preference and unconsciously derived pupil size.