ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
A hole in a piece of cardboard and predictive brain: the incomprehension of modern art in the light of the predictive coding paradigm.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The predictive embodied mind: a case-based encounter with film aesthetics.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Order and change in art: towards an active inference account of aesthetic experience.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Review
- Aesthetics and predictive processing: grounds and prospects of a fruitful encounter.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Metaphors or mechanism? Predictive coding and a (brief) history of empirical study of the arts.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Incomprehension of and resistance to contemporaneous art have been constant features in the development of modern art. The predictive coding framework can be used to analyse this response by outlining the difference between the misunderstanding of (i) contemporary conceptual/minimalist art and (ii) early modern avant-garde art and by elucidating their underlying cognitive mechanisms. In both of these cases, incomprehension and its behavioural consequences are tied to the failure of the optimal prediction error (PE) minimization that is involved in the perception of such art works. In the case of contemporary conceptual/minimalist art the failure stems from the fact that the encounter results in non-salient visual sensations and generates no PE. In early modern avant-garde art, the occasional inability of viewers to recognize pictorial content using new pictorial conventions reflected the absence of suitable priors to explain away ambiguous sensory data. The capacity to recognize pictorial content in modernist painting, as a prerequisite for a satisfying encounter with such works and ultimately a wider acceptance of new artistic styles, required an updating of a number of expectations in order to optimize the fit between priors and sensations, from low-level perceptual priors to the development of higher-level, culturally determined expectations. This article is part of the theme issue 'Art, aesthetics and predictive processing: theoretical and empirical perspectives'.
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.