ArticlePsychological research2021
Loss and beauty: how experts and novices judge paintings with lacunae.
Article in Psychological research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lacunae are the voids left by missing or damaged pieces of artwork, and their presence constitutes a central problem in the aesthetic experience of viewing artwork. However, we hypothesize that experience and knowledge of art might differentially modify viewer reactions to degraded artwork. Here, we investigated the implicit and explicit attitudes of art experts and non-experts towards the aesthetics of perfectly intact and lacunar artwork. Sections of Flemish oil paintings were displayed with or without a degradation mask, which mimics lacunae. Three groups differing in their interaction with art were assessed: art restorers, art historians, and art viewers lacking any art-related professional expertise. We found that (1) professional experience/expertise in art restoration affected implicit, but not explicit, attitudes among restorers, (2) art historians had positive explicit, but not implicit, attitudes toward intact artwork, and (3) it was difficult for non-specialist viewers to understand or appreciate artwork that was not perfectly intact. We further discuss the implications of these results to other forms of aesthetic evaluation and expertise. Modified preferences in experts may improve knowledge of the plastic changes that occur in the cognition of aesthetics and may thus be of significant relevance to enhance the effectiveness of art conservation programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32506246What 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.