ArticleJournal of vision2023
Statistical image properties and aesthetic judgments on abstract paintings by Robert Pepperell.
Article in Journal of vision, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this exploratory study, we asked whether objective statistical image properties can predict subjective aesthetic ratings for a set of 48 abstract paintings created by the artist Robert Pepperell. Ruta and colleagues (2021) used the artworks previously to study the effect of curved/angular contour on liking and wanting decisions. We related a predefined set of statistical image properties to the eight different dimensions of aesthetic judgments from their study. Our results show that the statistical image properties can predict a large portion of the variance in the different aesthetic judgments by Ruta and colleagues. For example, adjusted R2 values for liking, attractiveness, visual comfort, and approachability range between 0.52 and 0.60 in multiple linear regression models with four predictors each. For wanting judgments in an (imagined) gallery context, the explained variance is even higher (adjusted R2 of 0.78). To explain these findings, we hypothesize that differences in cognitive processing of Pepperell's abstract paintings are minimized because this set of stimuli has no apparent content and is of uniform artistic style and cultural context. Under this condition, the aesthetic ratings by Ruta and colleagues are largely based on perceptual processing that systematically varies along a relatively small set of objective image properties.
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.