Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42099711›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Phases of aesthetic judgment in art perception.

Yuka Nojo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yuka NojoGraduate School of Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Aesthetic judgment in visual art has often been treated as a final evaluative outcome, but the temporal process through which such judgment emerges during viewing remains insufficiently understood. Although gaze behaviour has been associated with aesthetic evaluation, it is still unclear when and how perceptual exploration becomes linked to judgment formation. Methods: We examined gaze dynamics during self-paced viewing of 12 Japanese woodblock landscape prints (Ukiyo-e) in 35 participants. Participants observed each artwork until they felt able to make an aesthetic judgment, and then reported their rating. Gaze data from the first 30 s were analysed in successive 3-s time bins using EMHMM-based gaze-state representations and distributional indices, including Hnorm, MaxP, NeffNorm, TV, and Switch. Results: In the early phase of viewing, gaze behaviour was exploratory and spatially distributed regardless of whether subsequent evaluations were high or low. Clear group differences emerged locally during the middle phase (6-12 s): viewing episodes leading to higher evaluations showed earlier reduction of uncertainty and earlier convergence of gaze-state distributions, whereas lower-evaluation episodes remained more exploratory for longer. However, these effects should be interpreted as exploratory when multiple-comparison correction is taken into account. Conclusion: These findings suggest that aesthetic judgment is not completed immediately at stimulus onset, but becomes manifest within a temporally unfolding perceptual process. The study supports a framework in which aesthetic judgment is understood as a form of decision-making emerging through the transition from exploration to convergence in gaze dynamics.

Indexed as

aesthetic judgmentart perceptiondecision makingEDENeye trackinggaze dynamicsUkiyo-e

Identifiers

PMID42099711
PMCPMC13143710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.