Author
Listed:
- Blanca T M Spee
- Helmut Leder
- Jan Mikuni
- Frank Scharnowski
- Matthew Pelowski
- David Steyrl
Abstract
Art research has long aimed to unravel the complex associations between specific attributes, such as color, complexity, and emotional expressiveness, and art judgments, including beauty, creativity, and liking. However, the fundamental distinction between attributes as inherent characteristics or features of the artwork and judgments as subjective evaluations remains an exciting topic. This paper reviews the literature of the last half century, to identify key attributes, and employs machine learning, specifically Gradient Boosted Decision Trees (GBDT), to predict 13 art judgments along 17 attributes. Ratings from 78 art novice participants were collected for 54 Western artworks. Our GBDT models successfully predicted 13 judgments significantly. Notably, judged creativity and disturbing/irritating judgments showed the highest predictability, with the models explaining 31% and 32% of the variance, respectively. The attributes emotional expressiveness, valence, symbolism, as well as complexity emerged as consistent and significant contributors to the models’ performance. Content-representational attributes played a more prominent role than formal-perceptual attributes. Moreover, we found in some cases non-linear relationships between attributes and judgments with sudden inclines or declines around medium levels of the rating scales. By uncovering these underlying patterns and dynamics in art judgment behavior, our research provides valuable insights to advance the understanding of aesthetic experiences considering visual art, inform cultural practices, and inspire future research in the field of art appreciation.
Suggested Citation
Blanca T M Spee & Helmut Leder & Jan Mikuni & Frank Scharnowski & Matthew Pelowski & David Steyrl, 2024.
"Using machine learning to predict judgments on Western visual art along content-representational and formal-perceptual attributes,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(9), pages 1-28, September.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0304285
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304285
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0304285. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.