↓ Skip to main content

How Stable Are Human Aesthetic Preferences Across the Lifespan?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2017
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users

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
How Stable Are Human Aesthetic Preferences Across the Lifespan?
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00289
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cameron Pugach, Helmut Leder, Daniel J. Graham

Abstract

How stable are human aesthetic preferences, and how does stability change over the lifespan? Here we investigate the stability of aesthetic taste in a cross-sectional study. We employed a simple rank-order preference task using paintings and photographs of faces and landscapes. In each of the four stimulus classes, we find that aesthetic stability generally follows an inverted U-shaped function, with the greatest degree of stability appearing in early to middle adulthood. We propose that one possible interpretation of this result is that it indicates a role for cognitive control (i.e., the ability to adapt cognition to current situations) in the construction of aesthetic taste, since cognitive control performance follows a generally similar trajectory across the lifespan. However, human aesthetic stability is on the whole rather low: even the most stable age groups show ranking changes of at least 1 rank per item over a 2-week span. We discuss possible implications for these findings in terms of existing theories of visual aesthetics and in terms of methodological considerations, though we acknowledge that other interpretations of our results are possible.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 23%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Researcher 11 12%
Other 5 5%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 14 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 41%
Neuroscience 11 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 18 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 02 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,882,620
of 25,401,784 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#880
of 7,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,660
of 330,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#30
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,401,784 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,693 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 done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 330,317 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.