1. Slobodan Marković THE AESTHETIC DIMENSION OF THE PERCEPTION OF PAINTINGS Laboratory of Experimental Psychology University of Belgrade, Serbia

2. Beautiful = PleasantUgly = Unpleasant AESTHETIC PREFERENCE Continuous dimension

3. Renoir Dubuffet Modigliani AESTHETIC PREFERENCE Continuous dimension Beautiful = PleasantUgly = Unpleasant

4. AESTHETIC PREFERENCEEXPERIENCE Exceptional state of mind Aesthetic experienceNo aesthetic experience

5. Czikszentmihalyi (1990): Flow Telegan i Atkinson (1974): Absorption Kabat-Zinn (1998): Mindfulness Kubovy (1999): Pleasures of the mind FASCINATION: Focus on object TRANCENDENCE: Virtual reality MENTAL PLEASURE: Extraordinary experience Exceptional state of mind AESTHETIC PREFERENCEEXPERIENCE

6. Botticelli Aesthetic objects All objects can be aesthetic: artistic pieces, natural scenes … AESTHETIC PREFERENCEEXPERIENCE

7. Aesthetic objects All objects can be aesthetic: artistic pieces, natural scenes … AESTHETIC PREFERENCEEXPERIENCE

8. Aesthetic experience is invariant in the different emotional states LeonardoDurervan Dongen Aesthetic objects AESTHETIC PREFERENCEEXPERIENCE

9. CorinthLempicka RousseauKlimt GogiGvido ReniGizaStuck AESTHETIC PREFERENCEEXPERIENCE

10. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This study investigated 1.the structure of aesthetic experience 2.the relationship of this structure and other dimensions of the subjective judgements of paintings.

11. REGULARITY regular arranged precise AROUSAL impressive strong interesting HEDONIC TONE pleasant beautiful healthy RELAXATION calming warm serene SUBJECTIVE JUDGEMENTS OF PAINTINGS Marković, S. & Radonjić, A. (2008). Implicit and explicit features of paintings. Spatial Vision, 21 (3-5), 229-259.

12. Descriptors of aesthetic experience EXPERIMENT FASCINATING IRRESISTIBLE UNIQUE ETERNAL PROFOUND EXCEPTIONAL UNIVERSAL UNSPEAKABLE I would like to have this painting

13. METHOD Subjects: 26 students of Dept. of Psychology, Univ. of Belgrade Stimuli: 24 paintings used in previous study (Marković & Radonjić, 2008) Procedure: Paintings were judged on 9 unipolar scales (1-7) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FASCINATING IRRESISTIBLE UNIQUE ETERNAL PROFOUND EXCEPTIONAL UNIVERSAL UNSPEAKABLE I would like to have this painting

14. AncientFigural AbstractStylized

15. RESULTS Principle component analysis String out matrix (Osgood, May & Miron, 1975)

16. RESULTS Principle component analysis Principle component (60,88%) 1.EXCEPTIONAL.876 2.FASCINATING.849 3.IRRESISTIBLE.849 4.I would like to have this painting.807 5.ETERNAL.779 6.PROFOUND.773 7.UNIQUE.737 8.UNSPEAKABLE.686 9.UNIVERSAL.632

17. AE: Average judgments on 9 scales (exceptional, fascinating, irresistible …) Predictors: Four dimensions of subjective judgments RESULTS Regression analysis REGULARITY regular arranged precise AROUSAL impressive strong interesting HEDONIC TONE pleasant beautiful healthy RELAXATION calming warm serene

18. Multiple regression coefficient: r 2 = 391 not significant Partial contributions: RESULTS Regression analysis HEDONIC TONE AROUSAL REGULARITY RELAXATION

19. Multiple regression coefficient: r 2 = 391 not significant Partial contributions: r 2 =.227, p <.05 RESULTS Regression analysis  t p.5362.218.045 HEDONIC TONE AROUSAL REGULARITY RELAXATION

20. AROUSAL impressive strong interesting HEDONIC TONE pleasant beautiful healthy AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE exceptional fascinating irresistible RESULTS

21. CONCLUSIONS 1.The aesthetic experience is a unique and relatively independent phenomenon: a)Internally, it is not dividable into components b)Externally, it is weakly correlated with the other subjective dimensions of paintings perception. 2.The aesthetic experience is closer to the Arousal, than to the Hedonic tone and the other subjective dimensions of paintings

22. AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE AESTHETIC FASCINATION

23. Escher AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE AESTHETIC FASCINATION

25. Witkin AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE AESTHETIC FASCINATION

26. Witkin AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE AESTHETIC FASCINATION

27. AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE AESTHETIC FASCINATION

28. Selection of representative paintings AncientFiguralStylizedAbstract 21 paintings Paired similarity-dissimilarity ratings of paintings within each given category Multi-dimensional Scaling of ratings Marković, S. & Radonjić, A. (2008). Implicit and explicit features of paintings. Spatial Vision, 21 (3-5), 229-259.

29. 2,0 1,5 1,0 0,5 0,0 - 0,5 - 1,0 - 2,0- 1,00,01,02,03,0 - 1,5 Marković, S. & Radonjić, A. (2008). Implicit and explicit features of paintings. Spatial Vision, 21 (3-5), 229-259. Selection of representative paintings

30. MDS: 3-D space Marković, S. & Radonjić, A. (2008). Implicit and explicit features of paintings. Spatial Vision, 21 (3-5), 229-259. Selection of representative paintings

31. A3 A1 A6 A4 A2 A5 X Y Z + - B3 B1 B6 B4 B2 B5 X Y Z + - C3 C1 C6 C4 C2 C5 X Y Z + - D3 D1 D6 D4 D2 D5 X Y Z +-