Access to this full-text is provided by Frontiers.
Content available from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
This content is subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
published: 03 June 2014
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00391
Enhancing aesthetic appreciation by priming canvases with
actions that match the artist’s painting style
Luca F. Ticini 1,2,3,4,5,6*, Laura Rachman1,2,3,4 , Jerome Pelletier5and Stephanie Dubal 1,2,3,4
1Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle Épinière, ICM, Social and Affective Neuroscience (SAN) Laboratory, Paris, France
2Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR S 1127, Paris, France
3Inserm, U 1127, Paris, France
4CNRS, UMR 7225, Paris, France
5Institut Jean Nicod, CNRS-EHESS-ENS UMR 8129, Paris, France
6The Italian Society for Neuroaesthetics ‘Semir Zeki’, Trieste, Italy
Edited by:
Silvio Ionta, University Hospital
Center (CHUV) and University of
Lausanne (UNIL), Switzerland
Reviewed by:
Alissa Fourkas, National Institutes of
Health, USA
Luis Carlo Bulnes, Vrije Universiteit
Brussel, Belgium
*Correspondence:
Luca F. Ticini, School of
Psychological Sciences, The
University of Manchester, Zochonis
Building, Brunswick Street,
Manchester M13 9PL, UK
e-mail: luca.ticini@gmail.com
The creation of an artwork requires motor activity. To what extent is art appreciation
divorced from that activity and to what extent is it linked to it? That is the question
which we set out to answer. We presented participants with pointillist-style paintings
featuring discernible brushstrokes and asked them to rate their liking of each canvas when
it was preceded by images priming a motor act either compatible or incompatible with
the simulation of the artist’s movements. We show that action priming, when congruent
with the artist’s painting style, enhanced aesthetic preference. These results support the
hypothesis that involuntary covert painting simulation contributes to aesthetic appreciation
during passive observation of artwork.
Keywords: action, priming, simulation, aesthetic appreciation, art, mirror neurons
INTRODUCTION
Perceptual, cognitive, and affective evaluations contributes to
the aesthetic experience of a work of art (Cela-Conde et al.,
2004; Kawabata and Zeki, 2004; Vartanian and Goel, 2004).
Although much research has focused on reward-related brain
regions involved in artistic preference (above all the oribitofrontal
cortex; Jacobsen et al., 2006; Ishizu and Zeki, 2011, 2013;seealso
Ticini and Omigie, 2013), the role of other brain structures has
remained thus far poorly explored. Here, we investigate the con-
tribution of motor areas to aesthetic experience, a topic of very
wide interest (Freedberg and Gallese, 2007). Several neuroimag-
ing experiments have shown that the perception of artworks
elicits motor activity in the observers’ brain without fully clari-
fying its role in aesthetic experience (Kawabata and Zeki, 2004;
Cela-Conde et al., 2009; Cross et al., 2011; Ishizu and Zeki, 2011,
2013; Cross and Ticini, 2012; Umiltà et al., 2012; Sbriscia-Fioretti
et al., 2013). Indeed, on the one hand, motor activity may simply
be triggered by a covert approach or avoidance response related
to the emotional nature of the artwork, as it has been shown for
other types of stimuli (Hajcak et al., 2007). On the other, some
have hypothesized that it may represent the covert and involun-
tary simulation of the artist’s gestures when viewing a work of
art, signs of which may be present on the canvas in the form of
brushstrokes (Freedberg and Gallese, 2007). Whether the latter
interpretation is correct and whether motor activity contributes
to the aesthetic experience at all, is still unclear.
We recorded the preference of naïve individuals for 90 high
quality reproductions of pointillist-style paintings presented
under conditions specifically designed either to be compatible or
not with the actions required to produce them (as established
in associative training conducted beforehand, see Materials and
Methods). Each painting was preceded by a supraliminal prim-
ing consisting of a static image depicting a hand either holding
a paintbrush with a precision (Compatible) or a power grip
(Incompatible). A hand resting palm down on a table was used
as baseline (Control). We hypothesized that if action simulation
is causally involved in the affective response to art, subjects would
like the artwork in the Compatible condition more than in the
other two conditions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PARTICIPANTS
Twenty naïve healthy right-handed individuals (13 females;
mean =24 years) participated in the study. They were all naïve
to the purpose of the investigation and with normal or corrected-
to-normal vision.
STIMULI
Stimuli consisted of 90 high quality color images of pointillist-
style paintings (Ta bl e 1 ). Thirteen individuals (7 females; mean
age =27.9 years) who did not participate in the study pre-
selected them among 200 canvases according to their style:
pointillist-style, stroke-style, or otherwise. 90 images indi-
cated as pointillist-style paintings by at least 10 out of 13
subjects were chosen for the experiment. Furthermore, three
right gloved-hand images (holding a paintbrush with a power
or a precision grip, or rested palm down) were used in
the sensorimotor training (see Visuomotor Training) and as
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org June 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 391 |1
HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE
Ticini et al. Painting simulations affects aesthetic experience
Table 1 | List of the pointillist-style paintings used in the experiment.
Surname Name Title Surname Name Title
Marevna Signac Paul Pine Tree at Saint-Tropez
Cross Henri-Edmond A Venetian Canal Matisse Henri Le Cap Layet
Franco Angelo Blooming Tree Matisse Henri Luxe, Calme et Volupté
Ferrigno Andrea Divide and Conquer Matisse Henri Still Life
Franco Angelo Abstract Forest IV Matisse Henri Still Life with Purro II
Zeniuk Jerry Untitled Metzinger Jean Bathers, Two Nudes in an Exotic Landscape
Dellavallée Henri Farmyard Metzinger Jean Bord de Mer
Dellavallée Henri La Rue au Soleil à Port-Manech Metzinger Jean Femme Assise au Bouquet de Feuilage
Holton William Garden Metzinger Jean Le Château de Clisson
Holton William Attractor Metzinger Jean Nature Morte
Franco Angelo Forest Abstraction Metzinger Jean Paysage au Deux Cypres
Franco Angelo Forest Abstraction #6 Metzinger Jean Paysage Neo-Impressiste
Franco Angelo Forest of Love Metzinger Jean Matin au Parc Montsouris
Holton William Indra Metzinger Jean Parc Monceau
Franco Angelo Virginia Forest Abstraction 1 Klee Paul Croix et Colonnes
Franco Angelo Floral Abstraction Verdant Picabia Francis View of St. Tropez from the Citadel
Franco Angelo Manhattan Pidgeon Picasso Pablo Le Retour du Bapteme, d’apres le Nain
Franco Angelo November Bouquet Pissarro Camille Children on a Farm
Franco Angelo Nude Abstraction Signac Paul Palais des Papes Avignon
Franco Angelo Portrait of a Hill Franco Sean Bouquet in Ochre
Franco Angelo Rare Bird Segal Arthur Marseille
Angrand Charles In the Garden Seurat Georges The Maria—Honfleur
Angrand Charles Couple dans la Rue Signac Paul The Port of Saint-Tropez
Balla Giacomo Girl Running on a Balcony Signac Paul River’s Edge—the Seine at Herblay
Cross Henri-Edmond The Golden Isles Seurat Georges Port-en-Bessin—Avant-Port Marée Haute
Holton William Fallout Seurat Georges Port-en-Bessin—Entrance to the Harbor
Cross Henri-Edmond Sunset on the Lagoon Venice Signac Paul Les Andelys—the Riverbank
Signac Paul Saint-Tropez—the Storm Seurat Georges Gravelines Annonciade
Cross Henri-Edmond Undergrowth Lemmen Georges Factories on the Thames
Cross Henri-Edmond La Chaine des Maures Goldstein Leonard Going Home in Black and White #1
Cross Henri-Edmond The Scarab van Rysselberghe Théo Pointe Saint-Pierre at Saint-Tropez
Cross Henri-Edmond The Wood Goldstein Leonard Shield of Moie
Cross Henri-Edmond Cypresses at Cagnes Goldstein Leonard Flower Nebular #2
Dali Salvador Madrid, Architecture and Poplars Luce Maximilien The Seine at Herblay
Dali Salvador Dawn, Noon, Sunset and Dusk Luce Maximilien Montmartre—de la Rue Cortot, Vue vers Saint-Denis
Dali Salvador Bathers of Llane Luce Maximilien Morning Interior
Derain André Boats at Collioure van Rysselberghe Théo Sailboats and Estuary
Dubois Louis La Marne à l’Aube Malevich Kazimir Landscape
Biggi Gastone Apalachi van Dongen Kees Le Moulin de la Galette
Signac Paul Saint-Tropez—the Storm Marevna Flower Still Life
Biggi Gastone Odessa Chant Kusama Yayoi Sunlight
Signac Paul View of Saint-Tropez Lacombe Georges In the Forest
Vuillard Edouard My Grandmother Lemmen Georges Beach at Heist
Biggi Gastone Attraversamenti Lemmen Georges Heyst No.3 High Tide
Hofmann Hans Self Portrait Lemmen Georges View of the Thames
supraliminal priming images in the experiment (see Painting
Observation and Liking Rates). All images were adjusted to the
same size (470 ×351 pixels) using Adobe Photoshop and pre-
sented on a screen with a resolution of 1280 ×800 pixels, at
55 cm distance to subtend 12◦horizontal and 9◦vertical visual
angles.
VISUOMOTOR TRAINING
We first established an association between the participants’ own
movements and the creation of pointillist-style or stroke-style
paintings. To achieve this, we presented the participants with one
out of three right gloved-hand images (Figure 1A)displayedon
a screen (in random order, for 10s, 6 times each) that served as
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org June 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 391 |2
Ticini et al. Painting simulations affects aesthetic experience
instruction for the subjects to perform the desired training with
the right hand.
The image of the hand holding a paintbrush with a preci-
sion grip instructed the participants to paint dots by executing
stippling movements while holding the paintbrush with the pre-
cision grip (Figure 1B). The image depicting the hand holding a
paintbrush with a power grip instructed the participants to paint
strokes of about 10 cm by holding the paintbrush with a power
grip (Figure 1C). The image depicting the hand rested palm down
instructed the participants to position their hand palm down on
the table. Task completion was supervised by the experimenter.
The training was repeated before the first, third and sixth primed
blocks (see below) for each grip (10 s each) to strengthen the
visuomotor association.
PAINTING OBSERVATION AND LIKING RATES
After the visuomotor training, participants observed the 90
pointillist-style paintings preceded by one of the three images
(700–1000 ms, randomly presented) depicting a right gloved-
hand holding a paintbrush with a grip that supraliminally primed
actions (for studies investigating how hand images prime actions
see Borghi et al., 2007) that were either Compatible (preci-
sion grip) or Incompatible (power grip) with the drawing of
pointillist-style paintings (Figure 2A). A palm down image served
as Control. Each painting was presented three times, in nine
randomized blocks (of 30 trials each) preceded by a different
priming image. After 500 ms, the participants rated the paint-
ings by moving a dot along a 9-point Likert-type scale displayed
below the painting for 2500 ms (from “I like it very much” to “I
do not like it at all,” direction counterbalanced across subjects) by
left ring and index finger key-presses. Choices were confirmed by
FIGURE 1 | Visuomotor training. During the associative training, three
images (A) depicting a right gloved-hand holding a paintbrush with a
precision or a power grip (or rested palm down as control) instructed the
participants to produce pointillist-style (B), and stroke-style (C),
respectively.
middle finger key-presses. A 1000 ms blank screen completed each
trial. Due to the numerous unconfirmed ratings (≥10%) two par-
ticipants were excluded from further analysis. In the remaining
18, a total of 3.25% of unconfirmed ratings was excluded.
FAMILIARITY
Upon completion of the experiment, the participants were
debriefed to assess their familiarity with art by using an art
questionnaire adapted from Chatterjee et al. (2010) by exclud-
ing questions 1–3 due to differences between the France and
USA education systems. A median split (median of the Sums
=5.5) of the questions in Tabl e 2 separated the participants
into art-familiar and art-unfamiliar groups composed of nine
participants each.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
To asses whether covert painting simulation modulated the lik-
ing rating, we entered the ratings in a 3 (Condition: Compatible,
Incompatible, Control; within subjects) ×2 (Group: art-familiar,
art-unfamiliar; between subjects) ANOVA. A significance thresh-
old of p<0.05 was set for all statistical tests.
RESULTS
The main factor Group [F(1,16) =0.665, p=0.427, η2
p=0.040]
and the interaction Group ×Condition [F(2,32) =2.577, p=
0.092, η2
p=0.139] were not significant. In other words, this result
indicates that art familiarity did not influence the results. Instead,
the factor Condition was significant [F(2,32) =3.355, p=0.047,
η2
p=0.173]. In particular, the aesthetic preference expressed
for the paintings in the Compatible condition (4.974 ±0.181;
Mean ±s.e.m.) was significantly higher (p=0.048, Newman-
Keuls post-hoc test) than that in the Incompatible condition
(4.877 ±0.168), and marginally different (p=0.067) from that
in the Control condition (4.899 ±0.176; Figure 2B). Instead, the
liking rates did not differ between the Incompatible and Control
conditions (p=0.567).
Correlations between each condition and individuals’ sum of
experience ratings (see Tabl e 2) were not significant (Pearson cor-
relations rs <0.236, ps >0.346) thus ruling out any association
between familiarity and liking scores.
DISCUSSION
In this behavioral study we show that the aesthetic appreciation
for pointillist-style paintings is enhanced by presenting supral-
iminal action priming images that are congruent (Compatible
condition) with the style required to create those paintings. How
can the priming modulate liking ratings of passively observed
canvases? We believe that the congruent priming facilitated the
covert simulation of the brushstrokes present in the paintings,
thus yielding to higher ratings. This interpretation is consistent
with the hypothesis that motor structures have a role in aesthetic
and particularly that involuntary painting simulation contributes
to aesthetic appreciation (Freedberg and Gallese, 2007; Leder
et al., 2012; Umiltà et al., 2012). In agreement with previous work
(Umiltà et al., 2012), our results also suggest that this effect is
independent of familiarity with art. Nonetheless, since all partici-
pants were not actively engaged in creating artwork (see Question
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org June 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 391 |3
Ticini et al. Painting simulations affects aesthetic experience
FIGURE 2 | (A) Images of a gloved-hand holding a paintbrush were
used as supraliminal priming before the display of each pointillist-style
painting. The images consisted of either a precision or a power grip,
or of a rested palm down hand and they created three conditions.
Compatible (precision grip) or Incompatible (power grip) with the
drawing of pointillist-style paintings. The palm down image served as
Control.(B) The preference expressed when the paintings were
preceded by priming images activating motor programs Compatible
with the production of pointillist-style brushstrokes was higher than
that expressed for the Incompatible (∗p<0.05) and the Control
(marginally significant §p=0.067) conditions. The liking ratings in the
Incompatible and Control conditions did not differ from each other
(p=0.567). Mean liking ratings in the three conditions are depicted
(error bars represent s.e.m.).
3 in the Art familiarity questionnaire, Ta ble 2 ) we cannot rule out
the possibility that the results would be different for artists.
What is the mechanisms involved in simulating brushstrokes?
The concept of covert action simulation has acquired a new
interest with the work conducted on the mirror neuron mech-
anism in the non-human and human primate brain (Rizzolatti
and Sinigaglia, 2010). Through this mechanism, other agents’
actions are mirrored in one’s own motor system thus, it is
thought, helping to understand others’ motor acts from “within.”
Action of other agents can be mirrored or covertly simulated
when they are directly observed as well as when they are repre-
sented as static pictures (i.e., images depicting body movements,
see Mado-Proverbio et al., 2009; Urgesi et al., 2010), and when
they are hidden from view and only their sound (Ticini et al.,
2012)ortheirtraces(Longcamp et al., 2003) are perceived.
For instance, there is evidence that observation of hand writ-
ten letters triggers activity in motor areas involved in writings
(Longcamp et al., 2003;seealsoTicini, 2013), and particularly
that learning to write facilitates the visual recognition of letters
through the participation of brain areas known to be activated
by the execution, imagery and observation of actions (Longcamp
et al., 2008). Our result is supported by these and more recent
behavioral findings reporting that the direction of observed
brushstrokes affects participants’ response speed in reaction time
experiments (Taylor et al., 2012) and that active execution of
movements increases (or decreases) the viewer’s liking ratings
when they match (or not) the style of the painting (Leder et al.,
2012).
These results could be also explained by alternative mecha-
nisms not necessarily involving painting simulation. For instance,
it is plausible that the implicit knowledge about the correct
action needed to manipulate the paintbrush (see Buxbaum and
Kalenine, 2010) may have facilitated the most functional and
effortless motor program to grasp a brush in order to cre-
ate pointillist-like paintings. This would be in accordance with
the idea that fluency in stimulus processing can influence aes-
thetic responses, as well (Reber et al., 2004). Moreover, unlike
in Leder et al. (2012), we cannot exclude that self-observation
of one own’s hands during the training may have strengthened
visuo-visual (instead of visuo-motor) associations between the
hand grip and the painting style. We also cannot exclude that
an intrinsic affective value of the action primes may have biased
the preference ratings (e.g., the precision grip could have been
perceived as more positive than the power grip). In this regard,
a recent article from Flexas et al. showed differences in liking
for abstract artwork when they were preceded by facial primes
showing happiness, disgust or no emotion (Flexas et al., 2013).
In particular, paintings preceded by happiness primes were liked
more than those preceded by disgust primes. If it were the case
in our experimental setup, our results would extend previous
research on how the affective transfer elicited by priming may
influence evaluative judgments (e.g., Murphy and Zajonc, 1993;
Rotteveel et al., 2001) to the domain of aesthetic experience.
Finally, we cannot exclude that the prior training alone could
be sufficient to enhance the ratings as a result of an exposure
effect, without the need of priming images presented before each
painting.
In conclusion, we here provide empirical evidence that,
beyond other factors such as upbringing, historical context and
nature of the artistic stimuli, covert painting simulation may
influence affective responses to art (Freedberg and Gallese, 2007).
Although we cannot fully rule out alternative explanations, we
suggest that the contribution of motor areas may be fundamental
for the attribution of the hedonic value to some objects of art.
Since simulation appears pivotal for understanding the actions
and emotions of others, one important area of future research
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org June 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 391 |4
Ticini et al. Painting simulations affects aesthetic experience
Table 2 | Art familiarity questionnaire.
Subject Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Sum Group
1 22001 5 1
2 44000 8 2
3 22000 4 1
4 22000 4 1
5 42000 6 2
6 44000 8 2
7 42002 8 2
8 5302212 2
9 54215 17 2
10 21001 4 1
11 20000 2 1
12 00000 0 1
13 20000 2 1
14 00000 0 1
15 44062 16 2
16 32012 8 2
17 21011 5 1
18 44011 10 2
Participants were divided into two Groups according to a questionnaire on art
familiarity. Group 1 (median of the Sum <5.5) and Group 2 (median of the
Sum >5.5) were composed of participants (nine in each group) with less or
more art familiarity, respectively. Questionnaire: Q1. On average, you visit art
museums about once every . . . (*); Q2. On average, you visit art galleries about
once every. . . (*); Q3. In the average week how many hours do you spend mak-
ing visual art? (range: “0” to “6 or above”); Q4. In the average week how many
hours do you spend reading a publication that is related to visual art? (range: “0”
to “6 or above”); Q5. In the average week how many hours do you spend each
week looking at visual art? *range for Q1 and Q2:“0” to “5.” 0 (almost never),
1 (once a year), 2 (once every 6 months), 3 (once every 2 months), 4 (once a
month), 5 (once a week).
will be to characterize its influence on affective centers beyond
the domain of artistic preference. Obtaining a better understand-
ing of the contribution of action simulation in affective states is
likely to shed light not just on how the brain encodes affective
stimuli but also may enrich our perspective on the neural mech-
anisms involved in some social and communicative deficits asso-
ciated with action simulation, such as autism spectrum disorder
(Oberman and Ramachandran, 2007).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
TheauthorswishtothankA.Berthoz,H.Leder,M.Nadal,andthe
reviewers for their insightful comments. This work was supported
by the French National Research Agency (ANR-10-CREA-005).
REFERENCES
Borghi, A. M., Bonfiglioli, C., Lugli, L., Ricciardelli, P., Rubichi, S., and Nicoletti, R.
(2007). Are visual stimuli sufficient to evoke motor information? Studies with
hand primes. Neurosci. Le tt. 411, 17–21. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2006.10.003
Buxbaum, L. J., and Kalenine, S. (2010). Action knowledge, visuomotor activation,
and embodiment in the two action systems. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1191, 201–218.
doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05447.x
Cela-Conde, C. J., Ayala, F. J., Munar, E., Maestú, F., Nadal, M., Capó, M. A.,
et al. (2009). Sex-related similarities and differences in the neural correlates
of beauty. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 3847–3852. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0900
304106
Cela-Conde, C. J., Marty, G., Maestú, F., Ortiz, T., Munar, E., Fernández, A.,
et al. (2004). Activation of the prefrontal cortex in the human visual aesthetic
perception. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101, 6321–6325. doi: 10.1073/pnas.
0401427101
Chatterjee, A., Widick, P., Sternschein, R., Smith, W. B., and Bromberger, B.
(2010). The assessment of art attributes. Empir. Stud. Arts 28, 207–222. doi:
10.2190/EM.28.2.f
Cross, E. S., Kirsch, L., Ticini, L. F., and Schuetz-Bosbach, S. (2011). The impact
of aesthetic evaluation and physical ability on dance perception. Front. Hum.
Neuro sci. 5:102. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00102
Cross, E. S., and Ticini, L. F. (2012). Neuroaesthetics and beyond: new horizons in
applying the science of the brain to the art of dance. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 11,
5–16. doi: 10.1007/s11097-010-9190-y
Flexas, A., Rosselló, J., Christensen, J. F., Nadal, M., Olivera La Rosa, A.,
and Munar, E. (2013). Affective priming using facial expressions modu-
lates liking for abstract art. PLoS ONE 8:e80154. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.
0080154
Freedberg, D., and Gallese, V. (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in
esthetic experience. Tre nd s Cog n. S ci . 11, 197–203. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.
02.003
Hajcak, G., Molnar, C., George, M. S., Bolger, K., Koola, J., and Nahas, Z. (2007).
Emotion facilitates action: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study of motor
cortex excitability during picture viewing. Psychophysiology 44, 91–97. doi:
10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00487.x
Ishizu, T., and Zeki, S. (2011). Toward a brain-based theory of beauty. PLoS ONE
6:e21852. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0021852
Ishizu, T., and Zeki, S. (2013). The brain’s specialized systems for aesthetic
and perceptual judgment. Eur. J. Neurosci. 37, 1413–1420. doi: 10.1111/ejn.
12135
Jacobsen, T., Schubotz, R. I., Höfel, L., and Cramon, D. Y. V. (2006). Brain
correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty. Neuroim age 29, 276–285. doi:
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.07.010
Kawabata, H., and Zeki, S. (2004). Neural correlates of beauty. J. Neurophysiol. 91,
1699–1705. doi: 10.1152/jn.00696.2003
Leder, H., Bär, S., and Topolinski, S. (2012). Covert painting simulations influ-
ence aesthetic appreciation of artworks. Psychol. Sci. 23, 1479–1481. doi:
10.1177/0956797612452866
Longcamp, M., Anton, J.-L., Roth, M., and Velay, J.-L. (2003). Visual presentation
of single letters activates a premotor area involved in writing. Neuroimag e 19,
1492–1500. doi: 10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00088-0
Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J.-C., Anton, J.-L., Roth, M., Nazarian,
B., et al. (2008). Learning through hand- or typewriting influences
visual recognition of new graphic shapes: behavioral and functional imag-
ing evidence. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 802–815. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.
20504
Mado-Proverbio, A. M., Riva, F., and Zani, A. (2009). Observation of static pictures
of dynamic actions enhances the activity of movement-related brain areas. PLoS
ONE 4:e5389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005389
Murphy, S. T., and Zajonc, R. B. (1993). Affect, cognition, and awareness: affective
priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures. J.Pers.Soc.Psychol.
64, 723–739. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.723
Oberman, L. M., and Ramachandran, V. S. (2007). The simulating social mind:
the role of the mirror neuron system and simulation in the social and commu-
nicative deficits of autism spectrum disorders. Psychol. Bull. 133, 310–327. doi:
10.1037/0033-2909.133.2.310
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., and Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency
and aesthetic pleasure: is beauty in the perceiver’s processing expe-
rience? Pers.Soc.Psychol.Rev. 8, 364–382. doi: 10.1207/s15327957
pspr0804_3
Rizzolatti, G., and Sinigaglia, C. (2010). The functional role of the parieto-frontal
mirror circuit: interpretations and misinterpretations. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 11,
264–274. doi: 10.1038/nrn2805
Rotteveel, M., de Groot, P., Geutskens, A., and Phaf, R. H. (2001). Stronger subop-
timal than optimal affective priming? Emotion 1, 348–364. doi: 10.1037/1528-
3542.1.4.348
Sbriscia-Fioretti, B., Berchio, C., Freedberg, D., Gallese, V., and Umiltà,
M. A. (2013). ERP Modulation during observation of abstract paint-
ings by Franz Kline. PLoS ONE 8:e75241. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.
0075241
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org June 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 391 |5
Ticini et al. Painting simulations affects aesthetic experience
Taylor, J. E., Witt, J. K., and Grimaldi, P. J. (2012). Uncovering the connec-
tion between artist and audience: viewing painted brushstrokes evokes cor-
responding action representations in the observer. Cognition 125, 26–36. doi:
10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.012
Ticini, L. F. (2013). Does the motor cortex differentiate between linguistic sym-
bols and scribbles? Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:715. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.
00715
Ticini, L. F., and Omigie, D. (2013). Why do we like what we like? When informa-
tion flow matters. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:731. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00731
Ticini, L. F., Schuetz-Bosbach, S., Weiss, C., Casile, A., and Waszak, F. (2012).
When sounds become actions: higher-order representation of newly learned
action sounds in the human motor system. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 24, 464–474. doi:
10.1162/jocn_a_00134
Umiltà, M. A., Berchio, C., Sestito, M., Freedberg, D., and Gallese, V. (2012).
Abstract art and cortical motor activation: an EEG study. Front. Hum. Neurosci.
6:311. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00311
Urgesi, C., Maieron, M., Avenanti, A., Tidoni, E., Fabbro, F., and Aglioti, S. M.
(2010). Simulating the future of actions in the human corticospinal system.
Cereb. Cortex 20, 2511–2521. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhp292
Vartanian, O., and Goel, V. (2004). Neuroanatomical correlates of aesthetic
preference for paintings. Neuroreport 15, 893–897. doi: 10.1097/00001756-
200404090-00032
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was con-
ducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be
construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Received: 16 December 2013; accepted: 16 May 2014; published online: 03 June 2014.
Citation: Ticini LF, Rachman L, Pelletier J and Dubal S (2014) Enhancing aesthetic
appreciation by priming canvases with actions that match the artist’s painting style.
Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:391. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00391
This article was submitted to the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.
Copyright © 2014 Ticini, Rachman, Pelletier and Dubal. This is an open-access arti-
cle distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this
journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or
reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org June 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 391 |6
Content uploaded by Luca F. Ticini, FRSA
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Luca F. Ticini, FRSA on Jun 03, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 3.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 3.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Stéphanie Dubal
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Stéphanie Dubal on Jun 18, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.