ArticleScience advances2024
Integrative processing in artificial and biological vision predicts the perceived beauty of natural images.
Article in Science advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual features explain dynamic aesthetic experiences across distinct movie content.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Tracing aesthetic experience from perception and conception to appraisal using deep convolutional neural networks.iScience · 2026Article
- Dynamic neural representations of scene beauty are relatively unaffected by stimulus timing and task.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The temporal and spatial properties of memorability reveal insights into the art creation process.Cognition · 2026Article
- Less is more: Aesthetic liking is inversely related to metabolic expense by the visual system.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- The perceptual primacy of feeling: Affectless visual machines explain a majority of variance in human visually evoked affect.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
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
Previous research shows that the beauty of natural images is already determined during perceptual analysis. However, it is unclear which perceptual computations give rise to the perception of beauty. Here, we tested whether perceived beauty is predicted by spatial integration across an image, a perceptual computation that reduces processing demands by aggregating image parts into more efficient representations of the whole. We quantified integrative processing in an artificial deep neural network model, where the degree of integration was determined by the amount of deviation between activations for the whole image and its constituent parts. This quantification of integration predicted beauty ratings for natural images across four studies with different stimuli and designs. In a complementary functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we show that integrative processing in human visual cortex similarly predicts perceived beauty. Together, our results establish integration as a computational principle that facilitates perceptual analysis and thereby mediates the perception of beauty.
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.