↓ Skip to main content

Aesthetic Responses to Exact Fractals Driven by Physical Complexity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Aesthetic Responses to Exact Fractals Driven by Physical Complexity
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00210
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander J. Bies, Daryn R. Blanc-Goldhammer, Cooper R. Boydston, Richard P. Taylor, Margaret E. Sereno

Abstract

Fractals are physically complex due to their repetition of patterns at multiple size scales. Whereas the statistical characteristics of the patterns repeat for fractals found in natural objects, computers can generate patterns that repeat exactly. Are these exact fractals processed differently, visually and aesthetically, than their statistical counterparts? We investigated the human aesthetic response to the complexity of exact fractals by manipulating fractal dimensionality, symmetry, recursion, and the number of segments in the generator. Across two studies, a variety of fractal patterns were visually presented to human participants to determine the typical response to exact fractals. In the first study, we found that preference ratings for exact midpoint displacement fractals can be described by a linear trend with preference increasing as fractal dimension increases. For the majority of individuals, preference increased with dimension. We replicated these results for other exact fractal patterns in a second study. In the second study, we also tested the effects of symmetry and recursion by presenting asymmetric dragon fractals, symmetric dragon fractals, and Sierpinski carpets and Koch snowflakes, which have radial and mirror symmetry. We found a strong interaction among recursion, symmetry and fractal dimension. Specifically, at low levels of recursion, the presence of symmetry was enough to drive high preference ratings for patterns with moderate to high levels of fractal dimension. Most individuals required a much higher level of recursion to recover this level of preference in a pattern that lacked mirror or radial symmetry, while others were less discriminating. This suggests that exact fractals are processed differently than their statistical counterparts. We propose a set of four factors that influence complexity and preference judgments in fractals that may extend to other patterns: fractal dimension, recursion, symmetry and the number of segments in a pattern. Conceptualizations such as Berlyne's and Redies' theories of aesthetics also provide a suitable framework for interpretation of our data with respect to the individual differences that we detect. Future studies that incorporate physiological methods to measure the human aesthetic response to exact fractal patterns would further elucidate our responses to such timeless patterns.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 80 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 20%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Researcher 10 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 20%
Design 12 15%
Arts and Humanities 7 9%
Neuroscience 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 19 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 July 2019.
All research outputs
#4,445,868
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,981
of 7,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,723
of 339,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#42
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 339,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.