ReviewPloS one2017
Measuring aesthetic emotions: A review of the literature and a new assessment tool.
Review in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
94 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 355 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding the evolution of epistemic emotions research: a bibliometric review from 2005 to 2024.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Pooled it
- Climate data sonification and visualization: An analysis of topics, aesthetics, and characteristics in 32 recent projects.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- The impact of wearing a heart rate monitoring wristband on museum visitors' memory and emotions: a randomized controlled trial.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Trial
- The influence of a walk in nature on human resting brain activity: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Audience Gaze and Felt Social Connection With Individual Performers During Live Dance.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Expressing emotions through music.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026Review
- StreetArt4Sustainability dataset: Mapping aesthetic emotions to street art.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Aesthetic experience is supported by spontaneous autobiographical memory recollection.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Advanced Sensitive Feature Machine Learning for Aesthetic Evaluation Prediction of Industrial Products.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Thickness Is More Than Affective Valence: Evaluative Language Through the Lenses of Psycholinguistics.Cognitive science · 2026Article
- Does Conflictual Dialogue Improve a Story?Europe's journal of psychology · 2026Article
- The element of surprise distinguishes beauty from pleasure and interest in visuo-tactile perception of art.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Listener-level aesthetic appraisal in personalized music-listening interventions for older adults: a closed-loop framework.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Multimodal art intervention for flourishing in lonely university students: psychological and exploratory neurophysiological outcomes.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Psychological mechanisms through which classical tang and song poetry moves contemporary readers: a qualitative study based on the aesthetics of reception.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- An EEG Dataset on Aesthetic and Creative Judgments of Brief Structured Poetry.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Do Children's Attachment Security and Empathy Facilitate Story Appreciation?Affective science · 2025Article
- A systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis of the relationship between boredom and arousal.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Beyond Psyche: Aesthetic Attunement and Alternative Psychological Care Through the Heart.Review of general psychology : journal of Division 1, of the American Psychological Association · 2025Article
34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aesthetic perception and judgement are not merely cognitive processes, but also involve feelings. Therefore, the empirical study of these experiences requires conceptualization and measurement of aesthetic emotions. Despite the long-standing interest in such emotions, we still lack an assessment tool to capture the broad range of emotions that occur in response to the perceived aesthetic appeal of stimuli. Elicitors of aesthetic emotions are not limited to the arts in the strict sense, but extend to design, built environments, and nature. In this article, we describe the development of a questionnaire that is applicable across many of these domains: the Aesthetic Emotions Scale (Aesthemos). Drawing on theoretical accounts of aesthetic emotions and an extensive review of extant measures of aesthetic emotions within specific domains such as music, literature, film, painting, advertisements, design, and architecture, we propose a framework for studying aesthetic emotions. The Aesthemos, which is based on this framework, contains 21 subscales with two items each, that are designed to assess the emotional signature of responses to stimuli's perceived aesthetic appeal in a highly differentiated manner. These scales cover prototypical aesthetic emotions (e.g., the feeling of beauty, being moved, fascination, and awe), epistemic emotions (e.g., interest and insight), and emotions indicative of amusement (humor and joy). In addition, the Aesthemos subscales capture both the activating (energy and vitality) and the calming (relaxation) effects of aesthetic experiences, as well as negative emotions that may contribute to aesthetic displeasure (e.g., the feeling of ugliness, boredom, and confusion).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.