The Role of Aesthetic Judgments in Psychotherapy

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 283-295
Author(s):  
John S. Callender
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Richard H. A. H. Jacobs ◽  
Frans W. Cornelissen
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 1940
Author(s):  
Ionela Bara ◽  
Richard Binney ◽  
Richard Ramsey

Perception ◽  
10.1068/p5514 ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 615-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R Feinberg ◽  
Lisa M DeBruine ◽  
Benedict C Jones ◽  
David I Perrett

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ionela Bara ◽  
Richard J Binney ◽  
Richard Ramsey

Aesthetic judgments dominate much of daily life by guiding how we evaluate objects, people, and experiences in our environment. One key question that remains unanswered is the extent to which more specialised or largely general cognitive resources support aesthetic judgments. To investigate this question in the context of executive resources, we examined the extent to which a central working memory load produces similar or different reaction time interference on aesthetic compared to non-aesthetic judgments. Across three pre-registered experiments that used Bayesian multi-level modelling approaches (N>100 per experiment), we found clear evidence that a central working memory load produces similar reaction time interference on aesthetic judgments relative to non-aesthetic (motion) judgments. We also showed that this similarity in processing across aesthetic versus non-aesthetic judgments holds across variations in the form of art (people vs landscape; Exps. 1-3), medium type (artwork vs photographs; Exp. 2) and load content (art images vs letters; Exps. 1-3). These findings suggest that across a range of experimental contexts, as well as different processing streams in working memory (e.g., visual vs verbal), aesthetic and motion judgments commonly rely on a domain-general executive system, rather than a system that is more specifically tied to aesthetic judgments. In doing so, these findings shine new light on the cognitive architecture that supports aesthetic judgments, as well as how domain-general executive systems operate more generally in cognition.


Author(s):  
Gregor U. Hayn-Leichsenring ◽  
Oshin Vartanian ◽  
Anjan Chatterjee

AbstractThere is a notion that mathematical equations can be considered aesthetic objects. However, whereas some aesthetic experiences are triggered primarily by the sensory properties of objects, for mathematical equations aesthetic judgments extend beyond their sensory qualities and are also informed by semantics and knowledge. Therefore, to the extent that expertise in mathematics represents the accumulation of domain knowledge, it should influence aesthetic judgments of equations. In a between-groups study design involving university students who majored in mathematics (i.e., experts) or not (i.e., laypeople), we found support for the hypothesis that mathematics majors exhibit more agreement in their aesthetic judgments of equations—reflecting a greater degree of shared variance driven by formal training in the domain. Furthermore, their judgments were driven more strongly by familiarity and meaning than was the case for laypeople. These results suggest that expertise via advanced training in mathematics alters (and sharpens) aesthetic judgments of mathematical equations.


2012 ◽  
Vol 70 (11) ◽  
pp. 794-811 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre N. Tuch ◽  
Eva E. Presslaber ◽  
Markus Stöcklin ◽  
Klaus Opwis ◽  
Javier A. Bargas-Avila

JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 195 (12) ◽  
pp. 1005-1009 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. J. Fernbach
Keyword(s):  

JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 195 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. E. Van Metre

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winnifred R. Louis ◽  
Craig McGarty ◽  
Emma F. Thomas ◽  
Catherine E. Amiot ◽  
Fathali M. Moghaddam

AbstractWhitehouse adapts insights from evolutionary anthropology to interpret extreme self-sacrifice through the concept of identity fusion. The model neglects the role of normative systems in shaping behaviors, especially in relation to violent extremism. In peaceful groups, increasing fusion will actually decrease extremism. Groups collectively appraise threats and opportunities, actively debate action options, and rarely choose violence toward self or others.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document