When Aesthetics Meets Neuroscience: Neuroaesthetics

Seeing or hearing a beautiful creation — of art, design, or nature — usually makes us feel good, bringing in us a feeling of pleasure, elevation, calm or thrill. Often enough, the aesthetics of a scenery, artefact or person is realised almost instantly (i.e., astounding beauty). Neuroaesthetics, a young field of the neurosciences, is devoted to studying the underpinnings of aesthetic experiences, for unveiling the neural structures as well as processes that give rise to aesthetic responses, mainly judgements and emotions.

The aesthetics of artworks draws the greatest attention and interest in research on aesthetics and its relation to human behaviour. The attraction of beautiful artworks leads people to visit museums and art galleries. Viewing beautiful workpieces of the visual arts comes first to mind (e.g., paintings, photography, sculpture). However, listening to beautiful music should also be considered (e.g., classical concerts, jazz instrumentals, pop-rock songs). Beautiful creations as such can make viewers or listeners marvel at them and feel inspired. Nevertheless, aesthetics can be attributed to objects and places we encounter more frequently in our daily lives, evaluated in reference to the fields of design (e.g., objects, interior spaces) and architecture (e.g., public buildings). From a consumer perspective, consider product design or the interior design of stores and shopping centres, but in some cases the overall architecture of the building (e.g., a museum, a theatre or concert hall, the HQ of a company) may also be a relevant factor for consumers-visitors. Moreover, professionals and consumers often talk about ‘artful’ designs.

• Aesthetics can be found in creations of nature. Think, for example, of natural landscapes of mighty Alpine mountains (including woods, rivers and lakes), or birds and flowers in marvelous colours. In the United Kingdom, more than forty countryside areas in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Tourists, nationals and foreigners, are invited to walk through these areas and view their natural green landscapes and local villages (i.e., the experiences combine nature, architecture and culture). The focus of this post is human-made aesthetic creations, though the aesthetics of paintings (or photos) may arise from the landscapes they display as well as how they have been captured and expressed by the artists (e.g., impressionists in the late 19th to early 20th century).

The Penn Center for Neuroaesthetics (PCfN at the University of Pennsylvania, School of Medicine), engaged in research on the conjunction of aesthetics, neurosciences and psychology, offers the following informative and instructive definition of Neuroaesthetics:

• “A subdiscipline of cognitive neuroscience concerned with the neural basis of aesthetic experiences, which involve interactions with entities and events that evoke intense feelings, often of pleasure.”

Morten Pedersen, writing for iMotions (a research firm specialised in eye tracking, biometrics and neuroscientific methods, particularly EEG & EMG), explains the value of aesthetics and the contribution of neuroscience in revealing the neural bases of aesthetic experiences [1]. He addresses initially the role of neuroaesthetics with respect to the beauty of art, but then he extends to leveraging neuroaesthetics in the real world, regarding particularly advertising & commercials, and architecture. Pedersen considers features of display or appearance that underlie visual aesthetics (e.g., symmetry, order of arrangement, colours) in different contexts (i.e., forms of creations) — we will relate to them below. He names a range of techniques that are employed by researchers in neuroaesthetics to “map the activity patterns of the brain and body in response to various art forms”: electroencephalography (EEG), eye tracking, and galvanic skin response (GSR, biometric). It may be noted that additional neuroimaging methods have been utilised by researchers on aesthetics, including electromyography (EMG), positron emission tomography (PET), and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

A theoretical foundation of the field of neuroaesthetics is set out by a (brain) neural model of three systems: Emotion-Valuation, Sensory-Motor, and Meaning-Knowledge. Chatterjee and Vartanian (2016 [2]), originators of the model, argue that “at their core, aesthetic experiences are underpinned by a limited set of shared neural systems” as identified hereby (Anjan Chatterjee is the founding and present director of PCfN). These systems, the “aesthetic triad”, have different roles in response to aesthetics that are essentially complementary. Their key features and properties are:

• Emotion-valuation incorporates Emotion, Reward, and Wanting/liking. Brain areas that include the visual cortex, orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), tempofrontal junction, striatum, and nucleus accumbens have been found to be involved in evaluative (attraction) judgements of visual stimuli, activating the reward circuitry, and eliciting emotional responses. Ultimately, visual stimuli-objects (e.g., artworks, faces) that viewers find aesthetic and attractive are rewarding them with positive emotions that cause viewers to feel pleasure. When examining across four different sensory modalities (visual, auditory, gustatory and olfactory), the right interior insula is the region most consistently activated.
• Sensory-motor involves Sensation, Perception, and the Motor system. A distributed network of brain structures appears to be engaged in sensation and perception of visual stimuli such as paintings, particularly regions of the visual cortex. Each structure and specific region contribute a component to the overall experience of viewing artworks (e.g., orientation, shape, colour, grouping and categorizations, with faces especially recognised in the fusiform gyrus). Furthermore, a sense of motion triggers processing by the visual motion area MT+ of the visual cortex in dynamic paintings. Note that motion may be perceived by inferring the intended hand movements of the artist with a paintbrush or from the scenery painted (i.e., the consequence of movement). Findings in research performed with paintings in the pointillist style suggested, according to Chatterjee & Vartanian, that “involuntary covert painting simulation on behalf of perceivers contributes to aesthetic appreciation”.
• Meaning-knowledge is concerned with Expertise, Context, and Culture. The context in which art, painting for example, is viewed and processed influences the way its aesthetics is appreciated, by adding meaning and knowledge beyond the perceptual qualities of the artwork. A title that is semantically matching the painting can make its cognitive processing easier, according to fluency theory, and enhance liking of the painting by viewers (compared with non-matching or absent title conditions). Activation of the zygomaticus face muscle and higher aesthetic ratings further suggest positive emotions being evoked. (Note: this research gives greater emphasis to conceptual fluency, beyond perceptual fluency.) Aesthetic appreciation can be increased through memories of past experiences and knowledge of the originality or authenticity of artwork; human interactions with the artwork are affected by knowledge of stylistic conventions, compositional strategies and practices.

While aesthetic judgement and aesthetic emotion are often entangled, they are not constrained or conditioned to arise together. During aesthetic experiences, evaluation and judgement reflect cognitive interpretation of an object (i.e., understanding), yet emotion arises from greater subjective ease with which the object is processed (and mediated via the reward network). In other words, Chatterjee and Vartanian clarify that: “Specifically, aesthetic emotions, as by product of how we interact with objects, can lead to aesthetic experiences without the necessity of explicit judgment” (p. 178). The researchers point out that aesthetic experiences are likely to occur in different modalities (e.g., visual as well as auditory, gustatory and olfactory), and the aesthetic emotions can vary in intensity and valence (i.e., they may be positive and pleasant, such as excitement and joy, but also, conversely, negative and disturbing, e.g., horror and disgust).

Pedersen acknowledges in his article the importance of the system-triad framework to understanding of the field of neuroaesthetics, explaining their roles and significance in his own way. He highlights the special role of the brain’s reward circuitry (involving the orbitofrontal cortex {OFC} and striatum) and its connection to emotions when encountering aesthetic stimuli (among pleasurable stimuli more generally, e.g., food & drinks).

With respect to art, Pedersen refers to the investigation in neuroaesthetics of visual elements that affect aesthetic judgements — specific elements include symmetry, colour and composition. He cites research showing, for instance, that symmetrical patterns are often perceived as more attractive (likely for signaling order and predictability which the brain favours); also, colour and contrast correspond with aesthetic preferences and emotional responses.

Turning to commercials, Pedersen highlights the emotional impact that visual and auditory elements can have on consumers-viewers. From the perspective of neuroaesthetics, he notes that elements such as harmonious colours, symmetrical designs and soothing music can create feelings of calm and happiness, whereas other elements of dynamic contrasts and asymmetry can excite and interest consumers. Pedersen suggests that this “emotional resonance can lead to stronger brand recall and increased consumer action“. He refers additionally to the role of colour and composition in triggering different emotions, which can be used creatively by advertisers to produce more appealing and effective commercials.

There seems to be lack of evidence (yet) of the contribution of neuroeasthetics to the study of aesthetics in product design, how it impacts attraction and appeal to consumers in judgements and emotions. The literature does address, however, the aspect of aesthetics of product design with regard to consumer behaviour, suggesting that neuroaesthetics research would shed more light on the impact and significance of different visual elements, plausibly quite similar to other domains of visual objects. Hekkert (2006 [3]) identified three types of experience with products: aesthetic experience (related to senses and perception), experience of meaning, and emotional experience. The visual sense is reckoned as primary, but is accompanied by the auditory, taste, smell and touch senses, and an additional sense of mind that is informed by body-somatic sensations.

A critical issue in product aesthetics is a distinction needed between atomistic processing and holistic (relational) processing of visual displays or objects: while processing and evaluation of single visual elements is constructive, aesthetic appreciation would not be complete without holistic processing of the whole object (product), considering the relations between elements, their composition and fit between them (unity)(cf. Bloch, 1995 [4]. Veryzer & Hutchinson, 1998 [5]; the latter propose, in addition to unity, a criterion of prototypical distortion which indicates how a particular product differs from the characteristic prototype of the category). These researchers stress the importance of consideration of interactions between visual components, where Veryzer and Hutchinson argue that understanding perceived interactions (i.e., in the eyes and minds of consumers) could be more crucial than addressing physical interactions. Aesthetics is one of the aspects of product design together with function and communication (Veryzer, 1995 [6]): design has an important communicative role regarding the functions of the product, relevant for a utilitarian interest of consumers in the product vis-à-vis an aesthetic interest or attraction to the product (e.g., affective). There is a fertile body of research on aesthetics and aesthetic experiences with product design that neuroaesthetics can furthermore extend and corroborate.

In his article for iMotions, Pedersen provides an interesting overview of the contribution of neuroscience in the context of architecture (emerging as neuroarchitecture). He refers in particular to how architectural elements (including the built structure and its surroundings) can impact our emotions. For instance, he notes that “rooms with natural elements like windows and vegetation tend to induce relaxation, activating brain regions associated with calmness” (applicable especially to waiting rooms). These natural elements have been found to affect human neurophysiology and exert feelings of calm or stress (e.g., by altering levels of cortisol). Pedersen cautions, however, that it is not yet clear which specific architectural elements elicit feelings of calm or stress.

• See the appealing photo embedded in Pedersen’s article of a well-designed and crafted “villa” in a natural environ (woods) with trees, green plants and water pool — the concept of integration between the house and nature was primarily advanced by the architect Frank Lloyd Wright.
• In numerous impressionist paintings, particularly of the pointillist style, the exact, accurate details of the scene are less important than the impression that the whole composition endows on the viewer — a visitor in a museum exhibition can appreciate the technique from a close-by look but enjoy the whole (holistic) lively scenery only by observing the painting from a distance, with vivid colours, shapes and movements, and a feeling that nothing is missing. That is the wholesome impression talented artists of this style (e.g., Monet, Degas, Renoir, Pissarro, Seurat) successfully created.

Aesthetic experiences generally involve sensations and perceptions, judgements of beauty and attraction, and emotional responses (induced through the reward system). The ease of processing aesthetic objects (fluency) can be facilitated and increased by means of the visual composition and arrangement (e.g., colours, symmetry, contrast) of their display or design, made easier to perceive (friendly to the eye and mind), but not least with the aid of context or background that make their interpretation more meaningful. Neuroaesthetics can help in revealing and understanding the brain regions engaged and neural interactions underlying those cognitive and emotional processes with relevance to a variety of domains. But foremost, may we have more frequent opportunities for pleasant aesthetic experiences, wherein to appreciate and enjoy the beauty of art, design, architecture, and also natural creations.

Notes:

[1] “Neuroasthetics: Decoding the Brain’s Love for Art and Beauty”, Morten Pedersen in iMotions.com, published 3 June 2024 (viewed in November 2024).

[2] Neuroscience of Aesthetics; Anjan Chatterjee and Oshin Vartanian, 2016; Annals of New-York Academy of Sciences (1369): The Year in Cognitive Neuroscience, pp. 172-194.

[3] Design Aesthetics: Principles of Pleasure in Design; Paul Hekkert, 2006; Psychology Science, 48 (2), pp. 157-172.

[4] Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response; Peter H. Bloch, 1995; Journal of Marketing, 59 (3), pp. 16-29.

[5] The Influence of Unity and Prototypicality on Aesthetic Response to New Product Designs; Robert W. Veryzer and H. Wesley Hutchinson, 1998; Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (March), pp. 374-394.

[6] The Place of Product Design and Aesthetics in Consumer Research; Robert W. Veryzer, 1995; in NA-Advances in Consumer Research (F.R. Kardes & M. Sujan Editors), Vol. 22, pp. 641-645, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.