ArticlePloS one2024
Effects of tattoos on the aesthetic appreciation of human stimuli as influenced by expertise, tattoo status, and age reflecting internalized social norms.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- The Illusion of Disapproval: Pluralistic Ignorance and Attitudes Toward Tattooed Teachers.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific interest in body modifications continues to grow, and tattoos have recently become a subject of empirical aesthetics. While conceptual structures of tattoo aesthetics have been studied, the question of how tattoos are aesthetically appreciated has not yet been studied. In this study, we examined how tattoos influence the aesthetic appreciation of human stimuli and uncovered differences in beauty perceived by individuals older and younger than 50, which we consider indicative of different internalized social norms, experts (tattoo artists) and nonexperts, and tattooed and nontattooed individuals. Images of a male and a female model were manipulated to vary in the amount of tattoo coverage across six manipulation conditions: Baseline (none), Light, Moderate, Heavy, Extreme, and Extreme + Face. N = 487 participants rated the beauty of these stimuli. The results suggest overall group differences (experts vs. nonexperts; tattooed vs. nontattooed; older vs. younger). The perceived beauty of the stimuli decreased as the extent of tattoos increased, with the Extreme + Face condition standing out as the lowest rated condition. These findings confirm that tattoos influence aesthetic appreciation, which is highly dependent on expertise and social norms as indicated by age. We also discuss the generalizability and implications of the findings.
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.