Cognitive Models of Visual Art Processing
Abstract
This article aims to describe current cognitive models of visual art processing, representative of different perspectives or lines of research; including the model of Locher et al. (2007), the aesthetic triad model (Chaterjee & Vartanian, 2014), the VIMAP model (Pelowski et al., 2017), the PIA model (Graf & Landwher, 2015) and the psychohistorical framework (Bullot & Reber, 2013). Discrepancies between them are pointed out, as well as their consensus regarding the coexistence of perceptual (largely automatic and based on superficial characteristics of the stimulus) and meaning-based processing (top-down, commonly associated with declarative knowledge and expertise), along with emotional processing.
Downloads
References
Baddeley, A. D. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755608
Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. Appleton Century-Crofts.
Bubić, A., Sušac, A., & Palmović, M. (2017). Observing individuals viewing art: The effects of titles on viewers’ eye-movement profiles. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 35(2), 194-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237416683499
Bullot, N. J., & Reber, R. (2013). The artful mind meets art history: Toward a psycho-historical framework for the science of art appreciation. Behavioral and brain sciences, 36(2), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12000489
Chatterjee, A., & Vartanian, O. (2014). Neuroaesthetics. Trends in cognitive sciences, 18(7), 370-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.003
Danto, A. C. (1981). The transfiguration of the commonplace: a philosophy of art. Harvard University Press.
Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2015). Cognitive Psychology: A Student’s Handbook (7th ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315778006
Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der ästhetik. Breitkopf & Härtel.
Gibson, J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Princeton Psychology Press.
Graf, L. K., & Landwehr, J. R. (2015). A dual-process perspective on fluency-based aesthetics: The pleasure-interest model of aesthetic liking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(4), 395-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868315574978
Landwehr J. R., Labroo A. A., Herrmann A. (2011). Gut liking for the ordinary: Incorporating design fluency improves automobile sales forecasts. Marketing Science, 30, 416-429. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1110.0633
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British journal of psychology, 95(4), 489-508. https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811
Lin, F., & Yao, M. (2017). The impact of accompanying text on visual processing and hedonic evaluation of art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 36(2), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237417719637
Locher, P., Krupinski, E. A., Mello-Thoms, C., & Nodine, C. F. (2007). Visual interest in pictorial art during an aesthetic experience. Spatial vision, 21(1-2), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856807782753868
Locher, P., Overbeeke, K., & Wensveen, S. (2010). Aesthetic interaction: A framework. Design Issues, 26(2), 70-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00017
Millis, K. (2001). Making meaning brings pleasure: The influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. Emotion, 1(3), 320-329. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.320
Mullennix, J. W. (2019). The role of attention, executive processes, and memory in aesthetic experience. In Nadal, M., & Vartanian, O. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Aesthetics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198824350.013.3
Mullennix, J. W., Pilot, K. M., Steeves, T. A., & Burns, J. C. (2018). The effects of cognitive load on judgments of titled visual art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(2), 166-176. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000128
Nadal, M., & Vartanian, O. (2021). Empirical Aesthetics: An overview. In M. Nadal & O. Vartanian (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Aesthetics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mydgw
Nadal, M., & Ureña, E. (2021). One hundred years of Empirical Aesthetics: Fechner to Berlyne (1876 – 1976). PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/c92y7
Pelowski, M., Markey, P. S., Forster, M., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2017). Move me, astonish me… delight my eyes and brain: The Vienna integrated model of top-down and bottom-up processes in art perception (VIMAP) and corresponding affective, evaluative, and neurophysiological correlates. Physics of Life Reviews, 21, 80-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2017.02.003
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364–382. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3
Schindler, I., Hosoya, G., Menninghaus, W., Beermann, U., Wagner, V., Eid, M., & Scherer, K. R. (2017). Measuring aesthetic emotions: A review of the literature and a new assessment tool. PloS one, 12(6), e0178899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178899
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848
Copyright (c) 2026 Psicodebate
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to grant Psicodebate copyright and right of publication and accept the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the authors and Psicodebate.
