ArticleTopics in cognitive science2026
Traces of Intentionality: Balance, Complexity, and Organization in Artworks by Humans and Apes.
Article in Topics in cognitive science, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Are people able to tell apart a random configuration of lines and dots from a work of art? Previous studies have shown that untrained viewers can distinguish between abstract art made by professional artists, children, or apes. Pieces made by artists were perceived as more intentionally made and organized than the rest. However, these studies used paintings by prominent abstract artists (e.g., Mark Rothko) as stimuli, which in any case showed that people were able to recognize high-quality paintings made by trained artists, not "any" human. In this study, we presented participants with artworks by untrained human artists versus artworks made by captive chimpanzees in a visual discrimination task. In Study 1, participants viewed sets of human- and non-human-made paintings and were asked to identify the artist as human or ape. In Study 2, they rated the paintings on several criteria: intentionality, organization, balance, and complexity. We found that participants: (1) successfully distinguished between human-made and non-human-made paintings; (2) reported perceiving more balance, organization, and intentionality in human-made paintings; (3) preferred stimuli, which ranked higher in intentionality. We also identified balance, complexity, and organization as key features that influence preference for abstract artworks. Overall, our results show that even non-figurative paintings made by adults untrained in the visual arts are perceived as intentionally made, suggesting people spontaneously produce and perceive cues of intentionality, generating an implicit human signature in visual art.
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.