↓ Skip to main content

Enhancing aesthetic appreciation by priming canvases with actions that match the artist's painting style

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Enhancing aesthetic appreciation by priming canvases with actions that match the artist's painting style
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00391
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca F. Ticini, Laura Rachman, Jerome Pelletier, Stephanie Dubal

Abstract

The creation of an artwork requires motor activity. To what extent is art appreciation divorced from that activity and to what extent is it linked to it? That is the question which we set out to answer. We presented participants with pointillist-style paintings featuring discernible brushstrokes and asked them to rate their liking of each canvas when it was preceded by images priming a motor act either compatible or incompatible with the simulation of the artist's movements. We show that action priming, when congruent with the artist's painting style, enhanced aesthetic preference. These results support the hypothesis that involuntary covert painting simulation contributes to aesthetic appreciation during passive observation of artwork.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Turkey 1 1%
France 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 89 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 20%
Student > Master 14 15%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 6%
Other 26 28%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 32%
Neuroscience 15 16%
Arts and Humanities 12 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 17 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 October 2019.
All research outputs
#2,115,674
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,049
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,499
of 227,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#52
of 242 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 242 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.