Visual Ambiguity Priming Promotes Uniqueness in Art-Viewing Responses
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Visual Ambiguity Priming Promotes Uniqueness in Art-Viewing Responses. by Francesco V. Donato A Dissertation in Cognition & Cognitive Neuroscience Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved Dr. Michael Serra Chair of Committee Dr. Roman Taraban Dr. Tyler Davis Dr. Keith Jones Dr. Mark Sheridan Dean of the Graduate School December, 2019 Copyright 2019, Francesco V. Donato Texas Tech University, Francesco V. Donato, December 2019 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Gratitude is extended to my entire dissertation committee; Roman Taraban, Keith Jones, Tyler Davis and especially to my committee chair, Michael Serra. Their willingness and availability helped ensure that I finished in a timely manner. I also reflect warmly on the support I received from the close friends I gained during my time in Texas. These magnanimous people include John Schumacher, Elizabeth Briones, Serena Mangano, Elizabeth Green, Brittney Neilson, Ethan Dahl, and Sean O’bryan. Two of my oldest friends, Bobby Davidson and John J. Briggs were tirelessly available whenever I needed to vent frustration or share a small accomplishment. These two gentlemen provided constant encouragement and support throughout this endeavor. Finally, I am absolutely certain that this document would never have existed if it was not for the sacrifices of my mother, Concetta Donato; a seventeen-year-old farmgirl from Sicily who would eventually only graduate high school while still struggling with English. After flatlining and being resuscitated during my birth, she dedicated herself simply to making sure I had as many opportunities to grow, learn and express myself as possible. She has proudly spent her life as a seamstress and today, she is treasured not just by me, but also by the entirety of a small community in the Florida panhandle who would likely be walking around in baggy uniforms and poorly fitted prom dresses if it was not for her. ii Texas Tech University, Francesco V. Donato, December 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ..........................................................................................................ii Abstract ...........................................................................................................................iv List of Tables ..................................................................................................................v List of Figures .................................................................................................................vi 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................1 1.1 Locating divergent thinking within empirical aesthetics ...............................4 1.2 Incoming visual information in empirical aesthetics .....................................6 1.3 That which hinders creativity.........................................................................8 1.4 That which supports creativity .......................................................................11 1.4.1 Broad empirical support for shifting perceptual orientation ......12 1.4.2 Mechanisms behind the contemplative, perceptual orientation ..13 1.5 Current Study .................................................................................................17 2. Method and Results ...................................................................................................21 2.1 Study 1 ...........................................................................................................21 2.2 Study 2 ...........................................................................................................29 3. General Discussion .....................................................................................................41 References .......................................................................................................................51 Appendices ......................................................................................................................69 A. Extended Literature Review ..........................................................................69 B. Assumption testing (study 1) .........................................................................194 C. Assumption testing (study 2/time on task analysis) .......................................197 D. Assumption testing (study 2/uniqueness analysis) ........................................205 iii Texas Tech University, Francesco V. Donato, December 2019 ABSTRACT Generally speaking, we navigate most of our daily lives through a mode of visual perception that is externally directed with a bias towards object recognition. This orientation allows for the formation of early predictions within the brain’s visual processing system which leads to a narrowing focus of both semantic-associative processes as well as their resulting potential inferences that we derive from what we encounter visually. This approach is reinforced and cultivated across our lifespans because of its usefulness during our daily lives to help us correctly identify what we are looking at in an automatic and seemingly effortless manner. The problem with this mode of visual perception is that it is counterproductive during an aesthetic experience. Visual art—unlike similar experiences such as entertainment, decoration, or propaganda—is not intended to provide a single, correct interpretation. Nonetheless, most of us unknowingly apply our externally directed attention and its subsequent narrowing associative processes when encountering such aesthetic objects that were initially intended to provide us with the opportunity to explore our more imaginative faculties. Such novice art viewers consistently access only the most literal, superficial interpretations of an artwork’s semantic features—its knowable content—because they lack the experience of actively calling upon their more imaginative faculties when faced with the impenetrable ambiguity of an artwork’s stylistic features. With all this in mind, two studies were conducted using an innovative perceptual intervention capable of artificially shifting a utilitarian perceptual orientation towards a more aesthetically conducive, exploratory approach. The resulting short-lived effect promoted deeper, more imaginative engagements for art viewers across the spectrum of art-specific expertise. iv Texas Tech University, Francesco V. Donato, December 2019 LIST OF TABLES 1. Common Nouns & their Most Common Verb Responses & Frequencies ................26 2. Descriptive Statistics (MANOVA) ............................................................................28 3. Univariate Tests of Between-Subject Effects ............................................................29 4. Descriptive Statistics (MANCOVA) (in milliseconds) .............................................37 5. Descriptive Statistics for uniqueness and expertise by condition ..............................39 6. Final Model Summary: MLR Analysis......................................................................39 7. Pearson Correlations: Semantic distance, contemplation, typing time ......................194 8. Test of Multivariate Normality ..................................................................................196 9. Leven’s Test of Equality of Error Variance ...............................................................196 10. Test of Univariate normality on Full Data before Transformation ............................198 11. Test of Univariate Normality, Reduced Data before Transformation .......................198 12. Test of Univariate Normality, Reduced Data After Transformation .........................201 13. Test of Univariate Normality, Reduced Data After Transformation .........................202 14. Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices .........................................................204 15. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances ...........................................................204 16. Univariate Tests of Between-subject effects on time measures .................................204 17. Tolerance and VIF Values .........................................................................................205 v Texas Tech University, Francesco V. Donato, December 2019 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Examples of sharp and blurred images according to the methodology .....................22 2. Study 1 on-screen instructions ...................................................................................25 3. Study 1 Probing phase sequence ................................................................................27 4. Study 2 Painting examples .........................................................................................32 5. Aesthetic fluency scale ..............................................................................................33 6. Study 2 on-screen instructions ...................................................................................34 7. Study 2 Screen images of the probing phase presentation .........................................35 8. Sharp & Blur condition plots, uniqueness & expertise ..............................................40 9. Scatterplot matrices of DVs for participants in the Sharp condition .........................195 10. Scatterplot matrices of DVs for participants in the Blurry condition ........................195 11. Histogram of (untransformed) baseline