Third, we test whether the aspects of Openness and Intellect differentially predict within-person appraisal processes underlying these three emotional states. This extends previous research by considering the two different aspects of Openness/Intellect, rather than the broad domain only. Second, we test whether the aspects of Openness and Intellect differentially predict these three emotional states. This extends previous research by considering three distinct emotions rather than pleasure only. First, we model the appraisal processes underlying the emotions of interest, pleasure, and confusion. In the current study, we extend previous research investigating the relationship between Openness/Intellect and aesthetic appreciation in three ways. This is problematic because the nature of the personality/art appreciation relationship could seem circular, given that personality items directly mention aesthetic engagement when measuring Openness/Intellect. Further, little work has gone into understanding the processes underlying the relationship between aesthetics and Openness/Intellect. Aesthetics associations with personality-primarily Openness/Intellect-have focused almost exclusively on individual differences in liking different types of art. Psychological aesthetics has primarily focused on one aspect of the aesthetic experience in the form of liking, pleasure and preference. However, in psychological aesthetics there are still gaps in what is known about both the beauty and the beholder. Divergent opinions about the importance of art and experiences with art make the study of individual differences a crucial part of aesthetic science-after all, it is said that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Making and appreciating art is a quintessentially human behavior, but not everyone would agree with the sentiment expressed by Henry James above. and I know of no substitute whatever for the force and beauty of its process.” “ It is art that makes life, makes interest, makes importance. This research supports the utility of studying Openness and Intellect as separate aspects of the broad domain and clarifies the relationship between Openness and aesthetic states in terms of within-person appraisal processes. The appraisal of novelty is part of the experience of pleasure for those high in Openness, but not those low in Openness. For pleasure this relationship suggested a different qualitative structure of appraisals. Those higher in Openness were particularly influenced by novelty in artworks. Differences in Openness were associated with within-person emotion appraisal contingencies, particularly greater novelty-interest and novelty-pleasure relationships. The results suggest that Openness, as opposed to Intellect, was predictive of greater arousal, interest and pleasure, while both aspects explained less confusion. Two studies looked at the between- and within-person differences in arousal and the emotions of interest, pleasure and confusion in response to visual art. This research sought to clarify the relationship by evaluating the influence of the Openness and Intellect aspects on several different aesthetic emotions. However, neither of these are simple constructs and while the relationship exists, process based evidence explaining the relationship is still lacking. There is a stable relationship between the Openness/Intellect domain of personality and aesthetic engagement. 2Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.1School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.Kirill Fayn 1* Carolyn MacCann 1 Niko Tiliopoulos 1 Paul J.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |