Perceptualand Mafor Skills, 1992, 75, 1023-1026. O Perceprual and Motor Skills 1992
NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL CORRELATES FOR REALISM-ABSTRACTION, A DIMENSION O F AESTHETICS ' NEIL KETTLEWELL AND SARA LIPSCOMB University of Montana Summary.-240 undergraduates were shown 50 color slides of paintings representing ten areas of subject matter and five levels of realism. The subjects rated from 1 to 9 their liking of each painting and then took the Cognitive Laterality Battery. Individuals with clear preference for realism formed one group and those showing dear preference for abstraction formed a second. A multivariate analysis of variance for subjects' Cognitive Laterality Battery scores showed a significant interaction, which may be interpreted as supporting the idea that there is a possible neuropsychological basis for the realism-abstraction preference dimension in aesthetics.
In empirical aesthetics there has long been interest in a possible biological basis for aesthetic preferences. Researchers (12) have speculated o n the neural basis for some aesthetical effects, and Gosselin ( 5 ) has suggested that a preference for realism in painting might be biologically based. McLaughlin (10) presented evidence that handedness predicts a significant proportion of the variance in preference for original versus mirror-image presentations of painting. Other research (1, 3, 6) suggests that gender may be important. Given these findings, it seemed unlikely that the many dimensions of aesthetics could be adequately explained by dichotomous variables such as gender and handedness. We approached the question using the Cognitive Laterality Battery (4) which permits differential assessment of left- and right-hemispheric operation based on studies of brain damage and subsequent dysfunction. If there is a neuropsychological basis for the realism-abstraction dimension in aesthetics, it would seem more likely to be reflected in data gathered with tools developed to assess left-right differences in cortical function than in electroencephalograms or evoked potentials. Current research suggests that sequential processing, verbal, and analytic functions are attributable to the left hemisphere whereas the right is often seen as underlying synthetic processes, the tonal elements of language, music perception, spatial perception, simultaneous processing, and spatial orientation. These lists represent only a portion of the functions differentially attributed to the two hemispheres. Kolb and Wishaw (9) and Springer and Deutsch (13) have provided excellent reviews of differential hemispheric functioning. 'This work is published posthumously as Dr. Kettlewell died on January 31, 1991. Completion of this manuscript for publication was made possible through the efforts of Sara Lipscomb, a student of Professor Kettlewell. Address correspondence to the journal, POB 9229, Missoula, MT 59807. The Editors.
1024
N. KETTLEWELL & S. LIPSCOMB
METHOD Subjects were 240 students in an introductory psychology course. Smdents were required to participate for ten hours per one quarter in various studies within the Department of Psychology, although they could choose the studies in which they participated. Each student was povided an envelope of testing materials on which the student wrote his name. Inside was a questionnaire for evaluation of the slides, materials relevant to the Cognitive Laterality Battery, and a questionnaire on which items requested name, I D number, sex, and birth date. Students were tested in groups as they were avadable. All subjects were shown, in a randomized order, the 50 color slides of paintings which were projected on a screen using a Kodak Carousel projector. They were asked to mark on a scale from 1 (do not like at all) to 9 (like very much) reactions to each slide. The number of the slide was announced by a voice on a prerecorded tape and rhe carousel was sound-synchronized. A new slide was presented every 15 sec. The ten subject areas for paintings were landscape, seascape, wildlife, flowers, human subjects, still life, religious, genre, Western art, and city-scape. Each area was represented five times by paintings which varied from very realistic to abstract. The category 'abstract' meant that the subject matter of the painting was on the border of being unidentifiable. One of the authors and an independent judge had to agree on the subject-matter classification and the level of realism for each of the 50 slides. A list of the slides was previously published (7). After rating the slides, subjects completed the Cognitive Laterality Battery (4), composed of eight tesrs: four to measure Functions associated with the left hemisphere and four designed to measure functions typically associated with the right. Gordon (4) gives a description of the scoring procedures and an extended discussion of the test. Lefr-hemisphere Tests 1. Serial sounds test.-For a series of 2 to 7 familiar sounds (dog, baby, trumpet, doorbell, cuckoo, telephone, bird, rooster, horse) at the rate of about Z/sec. each subject wrote the identities of the sounds in the order of their presentation. Scoring favored the number o l correct sounds reported in sequence whether or not the whole sequence was correct. 2. Serial numbers test.-A series of 3 to 9 digits were played on prerecorded tapes at a rate of 1 digit per second. At the end of the series, the subject wrote the sequence of numbers as played. Again, scoring favored the number of digits in the correct order whether or not the whole sequence was correct. 3 . Word production (fluency) test.-The subject wrote as many words as possible that started with a given letter of the alphabet, excepting proper names and multiple word forms (plurals, tenses, etc.). This test was repeated three times, each one with a different letter. 4. Word production (category) test.-The subjects were instructed to write as many words as possible that corresponded to a particular category. This test was repeated twice, each time with a different category. Right-hemisphere Tests
5. Orientation test.-A slide with an image of three stacks of cubes in a 3-dimensional arrangement was projected for 15 sec. Two arrangements were identical but rotated in space and so were pictured from different viewing angles; the third was the mirror image of the other two and rotated to yet a different angle. The subject specified the two identical arrangements. 6 . Localization test.-An 'X' was marked within a large black frame projected on a slide for 3 sec. The subject had to mark the location of 'X' within a similar but blank frame on an answer sheet. The linear error constituted the score. 7. Form completion (closure) test.-Silhouette pictures of common objecrs or scenes in which random parts of the picture had been erased were shown to the subject who was instructed to imagine how the completed picture of the object should look and identified it. Four slides each contained six silhouettes and were shown for 45 sec. each.
NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL CORRELATES: REALISM-ABSTRACTION
1025
8. Touching blocks test.-The subject was shown a slide of a cube constructed of 7 to 10 rectangular blocks. Blocks were stacked so that 2 to 8 blocks might be adjacent to (touching) any one block. For each stimulus slide, 5 rectangular blocks were numbered; in 45 sec. the subject counted all blocks touching each of the numbered ones. The subject wrote these amounts on an answer sheet. Six slides gave a total of 30 items. Procedure The tests were presented using a carousel projector to show the slides and a sound-synchronized audiotape which gave instructions over a speaker and advanced the slides as appropriate. Research assistants were available to answer questions although questions were rare. The eight tests were presented one after the other with brief rests in between. Left-hemisphere tests were alternated with right-hemisphere tests to balance bias from attention or fatigue. Tests took from 5 to 15 minutes each; the total time required was about 95 minutes. Two groups were formed using rated preference for realism or abstraction by each student. To do this, we formed two data subsets. One subset was based on the sum of the row scaling for only the most realistic rating category across the ten subject areas, and rhe other subset was based on the sum of the scaling in the least realistic rating category. Only 28 of the 240 subjects showed average ratmgs greater than five for the least realistic category rating across subject areas. Another sample of 28 were selected who had high ratings on realism, based on the findings of W g a n , Wong, a n d Thompson (11). No subject appeared in both groups. Group means on each of the eight tests of the Cognitive Laterality Battery were then compared. The tests have been previously described as Propositional-Average verbosequential performance (PI,typically conceived as left-hemisphere function, or Appositional(A)-Average visuospatial performance, usually thought of as a measure of right-hemisphere function.
A multivariate analysis of variance (14) indicated an F for the interaction of 2.2 ( p c . 0 3 3 ) . Scheffk's test (2) was used to compare means of individual tests for the two groups. Only two tests showed significant differences between the two groups ( p < .05); those preferring realism to abstraction had higher scores on the 'Serial Numbers' test, but lower scores on the 'Form Completion' test.
-
0.8 1.0
~coZres 0.4 0.2 0.0 -
Prefer Abstract Prefer Realism
0.6
-0.2 0
I
I
1
2
I
I
I
I
I
i
3
4
5
6
7
8
Cognitive Laterality Battery: Subtests
FIG. 1. z scores for 28 subjects preferring abstract slides and 212 preferrin realistic slides plotted by their 8 separate subtest means on the Cognitive Laterality Battery. suitest names appear in the Method section.
1026
N. KETTLEWELL & S. LIPSCOMB
Fig. 1 shows the z scores across the eight tests for the two groups. I n calculating z scores the values for the population standard deviation and mean are based on the research of Gordon (4). The interconnection of the points does not imply an underlying continuity of the tests but is only used to facilitate interpretation of the graph. As the Cognitive Laterality Battery is not based on direct observations of neuronal function, we cannot directly demonstrate a biological basis for realism-abstraction preferences, although neuropsychological correlates were found. Those strongly preferring realism may be more left-brain dominant, those strongly r referring abstraction more right-brain dominant. Assessment of this interesting hypothesis was curtailed by the death of the first author. Gosselin (5) may have been correct to argue that a preference for realism is biologically based; the present results suggest so too is a preference for abstraction. Realism in paintings, however, is preferred by many more people than is abstraction (7, 8) so the present results only provide general support for Gosselin's conclusion. REFERENCES 1. BERNARD, Y. Sex influences in aesthetic behavior. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1972, 34, 663-666. research. (4th ed.) New York: Holt, 2. EDWARDS. A. E. Ex~erimentaldesien in .orvcholoaical , ~ i n e h k& t winston, 1971. 3. FRUMKIN, R. M. Sex, familiarity and dogmatism as factors in painting preferences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963, 17, 12. 4. GORDON. H. W. The Cognitive Lateralitv Batcerv: tests of s~eciabzedcognjtive functioning. fnternational four& of ~euroscienLe,1984: 29, 223-24;. 5. GOSSELIN, M. Conventionalism versus realism in pictorial art: is perception basically particular or general? Communication and Cognition, 1984, 98, 57-88. 6. TOHNSON. 0.. & KNAPP. R. H. Sex differences in aesthetic preferences. Journal of Social ' ~ s ~ c b o l &1963, ~ , 61, 279-301. 7. KETTLEWELL, N. M. An examination of references for subject matter in painting. Empirical Study ofthe Arts, 1988, 6, 59-65. 8. KETTLEWELL,N. M., LIFSCOMB,S., EVANS,L., & ROSSTON, K. The effect of subject matter and degree of reahsrn on aesthetic preferences for paintings. Empirical Study of the Arts, 1990, 8, 85-93. 9. KOLB, B., & WHISHAW, I. Fundamentnls of human neuropsychology. (2nd ed.) New York: Freeman, 1985. 10. MCLAUGMLIN, J. P. Aesthetic preferences and lateral preferences. Neuropsychologia, 1986, 24, 587-590. 11. MILLIGAN,G. W., WONG,D. S., & TCIOMI>SON, P. A. Robustness properties of nonorthogonal analvsis of variance. Psvcholo~icalBulletin. 1987. 101. 464-470. 12. RENSCH, B. '[The probable neironalYbasis of visial aes;hetic'al effects.] Rychologische Beihage, 1984, 26, 608-615. 13. SPRINGER, S. P., & DEUTSCH, G. Lefr brain, righi brain. (3rd ed.) New York: Freeman, 1989. 14. TATSUOKA, M. M. Multivariate analysis. New York: Wiley, 1971.
-
.
-
Accepted September 29, 1992.
NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL CORRELATES FOR REALISM-ABSTRACTION, A DIMENSION O F AESTHETICS ' NEIL KETTLEWELL AND SARA LIPSCOMB University of Montana Summary.-240 undergraduates were shown 50 color slides of paintings representing ten areas of subject matter and five levels of realism. The subjects rated from 1 to 9 their liking of each painting and then took the Cognitive Laterality Battery. Individuals with clear preference for realism formed one group and those showing dear preference for abstraction formed a second. A multivariate analysis of variance for subjects' Cognitive Laterality Battery scores showed a significant interaction, which may be interpreted as supporting the idea that there is a possible neuropsychological basis for the realism-abstraction preference dimension in aesthetics.
In empirical aesthetics there has long been interest in a possible biological basis for aesthetic preferences. Researchers (12) have speculated o n the neural basis for some aesthetical effects, and Gosselin ( 5 ) has suggested that a preference for realism in painting might be biologically based. McLaughlin (10) presented evidence that handedness predicts a significant proportion of the variance in preference for original versus mirror-image presentations of painting. Other research (1, 3, 6) suggests that gender may be important. Given these findings, it seemed unlikely that the many dimensions of aesthetics could be adequately explained by dichotomous variables such as gender and handedness. We approached the question using the Cognitive Laterality Battery (4) which permits differential assessment of left- and right-hemispheric operation based on studies of brain damage and subsequent dysfunction. If there is a neuropsychological basis for the realism-abstraction dimension in aesthetics, it would seem more likely to be reflected in data gathered with tools developed to assess left-right differences in cortical function than in electroencephalograms or evoked potentials. Current research suggests that sequential processing, verbal, and analytic functions are attributable to the left hemisphere whereas the right is often seen as underlying synthetic processes, the tonal elements of language, music perception, spatial perception, simultaneous processing, and spatial orientation. These lists represent only a portion of the functions differentially attributed to the two hemispheres. Kolb and Wishaw (9) and Springer and Deutsch (13) have provided excellent reviews of differential hemispheric functioning. 'This work is published posthumously as Dr. Kettlewell died on January 31, 1991. Completion of this manuscript for publication was made possible through the efforts of Sara Lipscomb, a student of Professor Kettlewell. Address correspondence to the journal, POB 9229, Missoula, MT 59807. The Editors.
1024
N. KETTLEWELL & S. LIPSCOMB
METHOD Subjects were 240 students in an introductory psychology course. Smdents were required to participate for ten hours per one quarter in various studies within the Department of Psychology, although they could choose the studies in which they participated. Each student was povided an envelope of testing materials on which the student wrote his name. Inside was a questionnaire for evaluation of the slides, materials relevant to the Cognitive Laterality Battery, and a questionnaire on which items requested name, I D number, sex, and birth date. Students were tested in groups as they were avadable. All subjects were shown, in a randomized order, the 50 color slides of paintings which were projected on a screen using a Kodak Carousel projector. They were asked to mark on a scale from 1 (do not like at all) to 9 (like very much) reactions to each slide. The number of the slide was announced by a voice on a prerecorded tape and rhe carousel was sound-synchronized. A new slide was presented every 15 sec. The ten subject areas for paintings were landscape, seascape, wildlife, flowers, human subjects, still life, religious, genre, Western art, and city-scape. Each area was represented five times by paintings which varied from very realistic to abstract. The category 'abstract' meant that the subject matter of the painting was on the border of being unidentifiable. One of the authors and an independent judge had to agree on the subject-matter classification and the level of realism for each of the 50 slides. A list of the slides was previously published (7). After rating the slides, subjects completed the Cognitive Laterality Battery (4), composed of eight tesrs: four to measure Functions associated with the left hemisphere and four designed to measure functions typically associated with the right. Gordon (4) gives a description of the scoring procedures and an extended discussion of the test. Lefr-hemisphere Tests 1. Serial sounds test.-For a series of 2 to 7 familiar sounds (dog, baby, trumpet, doorbell, cuckoo, telephone, bird, rooster, horse) at the rate of about Z/sec. each subject wrote the identities of the sounds in the order of their presentation. Scoring favored the number o l correct sounds reported in sequence whether or not the whole sequence was correct. 2. Serial numbers test.-A series of 3 to 9 digits were played on prerecorded tapes at a rate of 1 digit per second. At the end of the series, the subject wrote the sequence of numbers as played. Again, scoring favored the number of digits in the correct order whether or not the whole sequence was correct. 3 . Word production (fluency) test.-The subject wrote as many words as possible that started with a given letter of the alphabet, excepting proper names and multiple word forms (plurals, tenses, etc.). This test was repeated three times, each one with a different letter. 4. Word production (category) test.-The subjects were instructed to write as many words as possible that corresponded to a particular category. This test was repeated twice, each time with a different category. Right-hemisphere Tests
5. Orientation test.-A slide with an image of three stacks of cubes in a 3-dimensional arrangement was projected for 15 sec. Two arrangements were identical but rotated in space and so were pictured from different viewing angles; the third was the mirror image of the other two and rotated to yet a different angle. The subject specified the two identical arrangements. 6 . Localization test.-An 'X' was marked within a large black frame projected on a slide for 3 sec. The subject had to mark the location of 'X' within a similar but blank frame on an answer sheet. The linear error constituted the score. 7. Form completion (closure) test.-Silhouette pictures of common objecrs or scenes in which random parts of the picture had been erased were shown to the subject who was instructed to imagine how the completed picture of the object should look and identified it. Four slides each contained six silhouettes and were shown for 45 sec. each.
NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL CORRELATES: REALISM-ABSTRACTION
1025
8. Touching blocks test.-The subject was shown a slide of a cube constructed of 7 to 10 rectangular blocks. Blocks were stacked so that 2 to 8 blocks might be adjacent to (touching) any one block. For each stimulus slide, 5 rectangular blocks were numbered; in 45 sec. the subject counted all blocks touching each of the numbered ones. The subject wrote these amounts on an answer sheet. Six slides gave a total of 30 items. Procedure The tests were presented using a carousel projector to show the slides and a sound-synchronized audiotape which gave instructions over a speaker and advanced the slides as appropriate. Research assistants were available to answer questions although questions were rare. The eight tests were presented one after the other with brief rests in between. Left-hemisphere tests were alternated with right-hemisphere tests to balance bias from attention or fatigue. Tests took from 5 to 15 minutes each; the total time required was about 95 minutes. Two groups were formed using rated preference for realism or abstraction by each student. To do this, we formed two data subsets. One subset was based on the sum of the row scaling for only the most realistic rating category across the ten subject areas, and rhe other subset was based on the sum of the scaling in the least realistic rating category. Only 28 of the 240 subjects showed average ratmgs greater than five for the least realistic category rating across subject areas. Another sample of 28 were selected who had high ratings on realism, based on the findings of W g a n , Wong, a n d Thompson (11). No subject appeared in both groups. Group means on each of the eight tests of the Cognitive Laterality Battery were then compared. The tests have been previously described as Propositional-Average verbosequential performance (PI,typically conceived as left-hemisphere function, or Appositional(A)-Average visuospatial performance, usually thought of as a measure of right-hemisphere function.
A multivariate analysis of variance (14) indicated an F for the interaction of 2.2 ( p c . 0 3 3 ) . Scheffk's test (2) was used to compare means of individual tests for the two groups. Only two tests showed significant differences between the two groups ( p < .05); those preferring realism to abstraction had higher scores on the 'Serial Numbers' test, but lower scores on the 'Form Completion' test.
-
0.8 1.0
~coZres 0.4 0.2 0.0 -
Prefer Abstract Prefer Realism
0.6
-0.2 0
I
I
1
2
I
I
I
I
I
i
3
4
5
6
7
8
Cognitive Laterality Battery: Subtests
FIG. 1. z scores for 28 subjects preferring abstract slides and 212 preferrin realistic slides plotted by their 8 separate subtest means on the Cognitive Laterality Battery. suitest names appear in the Method section.
1026
N. KETTLEWELL & S. LIPSCOMB
Fig. 1 shows the z scores across the eight tests for the two groups. I n calculating z scores the values for the population standard deviation and mean are based on the research of Gordon (4). The interconnection of the points does not imply an underlying continuity of the tests but is only used to facilitate interpretation of the graph. As the Cognitive Laterality Battery is not based on direct observations of neuronal function, we cannot directly demonstrate a biological basis for realism-abstraction preferences, although neuropsychological correlates were found. Those strongly preferring realism may be more left-brain dominant, those strongly r referring abstraction more right-brain dominant. Assessment of this interesting hypothesis was curtailed by the death of the first author. Gosselin (5) may have been correct to argue that a preference for realism is biologically based; the present results suggest so too is a preference for abstraction. Realism in paintings, however, is preferred by many more people than is abstraction (7, 8) so the present results only provide general support for Gosselin's conclusion. REFERENCES 1. BERNARD, Y. Sex influences in aesthetic behavior. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1972, 34, 663-666. research. (4th ed.) New York: Holt, 2. EDWARDS. A. E. Ex~erimentaldesien in .orvcholoaical , ~ i n e h k& t winston, 1971. 3. FRUMKIN, R. M. Sex, familiarity and dogmatism as factors in painting preferences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963, 17, 12. 4. GORDON. H. W. The Cognitive Lateralitv Batcerv: tests of s~eciabzedcognjtive functioning. fnternational four& of ~euroscienLe,1984: 29, 223-24;. 5. GOSSELIN, M. Conventionalism versus realism in pictorial art: is perception basically particular or general? Communication and Cognition, 1984, 98, 57-88. 6. TOHNSON. 0.. & KNAPP. R. H. Sex differences in aesthetic preferences. Journal of Social ' ~ s ~ c b o l &1963, ~ , 61, 279-301. 7. KETTLEWELL, N. M. An examination of references for subject matter in painting. Empirical Study ofthe Arts, 1988, 6, 59-65. 8. KETTLEWELL,N. M., LIFSCOMB,S., EVANS,L., & ROSSTON, K. The effect of subject matter and degree of reahsrn on aesthetic preferences for paintings. Empirical Study of the Arts, 1990, 8, 85-93. 9. KOLB, B., & WHISHAW, I. Fundamentnls of human neuropsychology. (2nd ed.) New York: Freeman, 1985. 10. MCLAUGMLIN, J. P. Aesthetic preferences and lateral preferences. Neuropsychologia, 1986, 24, 587-590. 11. MILLIGAN,G. W., WONG,D. S., & TCIOMI>SON, P. A. Robustness properties of nonorthogonal analvsis of variance. Psvcholo~icalBulletin. 1987. 101. 464-470. 12. RENSCH, B. '[The probable neironalYbasis of visial aes;hetic'al effects.] Rychologische Beihage, 1984, 26, 608-615. 13. SPRINGER, S. P., & DEUTSCH, G. Lefr brain, righi brain. (3rd ed.) New York: Freeman, 1989. 14. TATSUOKA, M. M. Multivariate analysis. New York: Wiley, 1971.
-
.
-
Accepted September 29, 1992.
