ArticlePDF Available

Collaborative Art: A Transformational Force within Communities

September 2019
Journal of the Association for Consumer Research 4(4):000-000

DOI:10.1086/705023

Authors:

Melissa Bublitz

University of Wisconsin–Oshkosh

Luca Cian

University of Viginia - Darden Graduate School of Business Administration

Xavier Cortada

University of Miami

Show all 11 authorsHide

Collaborative art: A force for transforming communities.

…

How Organizations Use Collaborative Art to Transform Communities

…

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Adriana Madzharov

Content may be subject to copyright.

EVERYDAY CONSUMER AESTHETICS

Collaborative Art: A Transformational Force

within Communities

MELISSA G. BUBLITZ, TRACY RANK-CHRISTMAN, LUCA CIAN, XAVIER CORTADA,

ADRIANA MADZHAROV, VANESSA M. PATRICK, LAURA A. PERACCHIO, MAURA L. SCOTT,

APARNA SUNDAR, NGOC (RITA) TO, AND CLAUDIA TOWNSEND

ABSTRACT This article provides a new perspective on collaborative art as a transformational force to strengthen

community and enhance well-being. We outline a best practices-based framework to foster community-based, collab-

orative art such as cocreated community murals. Speciﬁcally, we identify a strategic and successive process for collab-

orative art initiatives by integrating the academic literature on art, aesthetics, community, and consumer research to-

gether with the practices of arts organizations working to transform communities through participatory, cocreated art.

The article highlights the contributions of this work to academic research, public policy, and community organizing

efforts and outlines questions to encourage more researchers and practitioners to investigate the dynamics of collab-

orative art to transform communities.

People have an intuitive desire to have art around. (Golden 2015)

Everyday aesthetic experiences have a profound impact

on people’s daily lives and their “identity and view

of the world”(Duncum 1999, 295; Saito 2007). Unlike

“high art”that is exhibited inside a museum or on the walls

of an art gallery, everyday aesthetics—community-based mu-

rals and sculptures—form the streetscape of daily life in a lo-

cality. These public artworks, often displayed on the exterior

of a school, community center, or neighborhood business,

are accessible to everyone in a community and can be experi-

enced without the barriers of cost and class. Such public art

initiatives can be transformative for a community, particu-

larly if that community collaborates in the creation of the art

and the artwork represents core community values. For ex-

ample, Mural Arts Philadelphia (MAP; see app. C; apps. A–V

are available online) engages Philadelphia neighborhoods

in community-based collaborative art initiatives to trans-

form otherwise empty walls in largely underserved neighbor-

hoods into murals that portray community heroes, neigh-

borhood stories, and innovative designs (Golden, Rice, and

Kinney 2002). Community-based, collaborative art initiatives

Melissa G. Bublitz (bublitzm@uwosh.edu) is associate professor of marketing, University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh College of Business, Afﬁliated Faculty of the

Sustainability Institute for Regional Transformations (SIRT), 800 Algoma Boulevard, Oshkosh, WI 54901. Tracy Rank-Christman (rankchri@uwm.edu)is

assistant professor of marketing, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, Sheldon B. Lubar School of Business, 3202 N. Maryland Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53211.

Luca Cian (cianl@darden.virginia.edu) is assistant professor of marketing, University of Virginia, Darden School of Business, 100 Darden Boulevard, Charlottesville,

VA 22903. Xavier Cortada (xcortada@miami.edu) is professor of practice, Department of Art and Art History, University of Miami, Merrick Building 301, 5202

University Drive, Room 301, Coral Gables, FL 33146. Adriana Madzharov (adriana.madzharov@stevens.edu) is assistant professor of marketing, School of Business,

Stevens Institute of Technology, 1 Castle Point on Hudson, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Vanessa M. Patrick (vpatrick@uh.edu) is Bauer Professor of Marketing, University

of Houston, Bauer College of Business, 334 Melcher Hall, Houston, TX 77204-6021. Laura A. Peracchio (lperacch@uwm.edu) is Judith H. and Gale E. KlappaPro-

fessor of Marketing, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, Sheldon B. Lubar School of Business, 3202 N. Maryland Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53211. Maura L. Scott

(mlscott@fsu.edu) is Madeline Duncan Rolland Associate Professor of Business Administration, Florida State Universi ty, 821 Academic Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306-

1110. Aparna Sundar (asundar@uoregon.edu) is assistant professor of marketing, University of Oregon, Lundquist College of Business, 1208 University Street,

Eugene, OR 97403. Ngoc (Rita) To (nmto@bauer.uh.edu) is a doctoral candidate, University of Houston, Bauer College of Business, 334 Melcher Hall, Houston,

TX 77204-6021. Claudia Townsend (c.townsend@miami.edu) is associate professor of marketing, Miami Business School, Kosar Epstein 507, Coral Gables,

FL 33124. The authors are grateful for funding from the Association for Consumer Research and Miami Business School, which played a critical role in making

this collaborative effort possible. The authors also thank the reviewers who provided thoughtful feedback and helped us to reﬁne and enhance our contribution

as well as DACRA and Miami Business School, who hosted our pop-up Transformative Consumer Researchconference. Finally, the authors wish to express their

sincere gratitude for the tireless work of the arts and nonproﬁt organizations who took the time to share their experiences and insights regarding their im-

portant work to transform communities through art and make the world a better place for all.

JACR, volume 4, number 4. Published online September 9, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/705023

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

provide a vital way to bring residents of a community to-

gether to embrace a shared goal and foster neighborhood in-

novation and growth (Lowe 2000, 2001).

Research on the transformative nature of the arts docu-

ments how community-based, collaborative arts initiatives

enhance collective identity (Neel and Dentith 2004), build

community (Jones 1988), and address community problems

(Fisher 1996). Despite its many beneﬁts and positive out-

comes, a strategic and systematic conceptualization of the

process for developing successful community-based, collabo-

rative art initiatives is missing in the literature; a gap this

article aims to address. We propose a best practices-based

framework, a ﬁve-stage process, for developing community-

based, collaborative art experiences with the potential to en-

gage and transform a community and its members. At a time

when electronic communication is increasingly dominant

and human, person-to-person contact is becoming less acces-

sible to people living in underserved communities (Bowles

2019), our framework focuses on in-person involvement

and/or face-to-face interactions between people in a local-

ized geographic community. Several scholars (e.g., Tebes

et al. 2015; Nicolás and Harrison 2018) have called for more

academic research in marketing to guide societal transfor-

mation through art. We respond to this call by offering a

strategic process for developing community-based, collabo-

rative art and then articulating a research agenda to encour-

age more researchers to investigate the dynamics of the

power of collaborative art to transform communities.

This work’s contribution is grounded in Ozanne et al.’s

(2017, 1) relational engagement approach, which involves

“engaging directly with relevant stakeholders”and cocre-

ating “research with audiences beyond academia.”Speciﬁ-

cally, our process framework is informed not only by aca-

demic research but also by the practices of organizations and

individuals who have hands-on experience in transforming

communities through collaborative art. We captured these

practices in two ways. First, along with the academic re-

searchers who coauthored this article, this research team

included Xavier Cortada (see app. D), a socially engaged envi-

ronmental artist who is experienced in developing commu-

nity art initiatives. Second, we adopted a multiple case study

method (Bublitz et al. 2019) to cross-validate the high impact

practices that we identiﬁed (Ravenswood 2011) and to offer

more generalizable insights (Battistella et al. 2017). Our team

of researchers began by exploring secondary sources and net-

working with industry experts to identify arts organizations

with innovative programs. We asked these leaders to identify

other organizations innovating in this space, using snowball

sampling to identify additional arts organizations. We in-

terviewed arts organizations using a semi-structured inter-

view process beginning with broad questions (e.g., Tell us

how your organization/program got started ). We sought to

include the arts organizations as partners in the research pro-

cess for this project, not as units of observation (Eisenhardt

1989; Ravenswood 2011). Finally, we relied on an inductive

approach to identify patterns of practice that leverage the

transformative impact of participatory art experiences. These

alliances, interviews, and investigations provided us with

deep insights about collaborative art and cocreation experi-

ences. By synthesizing research on cocreation and participa-

tory art experiences with the collective processes of arts or-

ganizations working to transform their own communities,

we were able to identify the best practices and key mile-

stones to amplify the impact of community-based, participa-

tory art. Appendixes C through V provide an in-depth proﬁle

of each organization who participated in this research process.

This research offers concrete contributions for practi-

tioners, such as community developers and artists, as well

as theoretical contributions for academics investigating mar-

keting, aesthetics, the arts, or community engagement. For

practitioners, we offer a clearly deﬁned ﬁve-stage process

for the systematic development of community-based, col-

laborative art experiences. The process borrows from the

extant consumer behavior and psychology literature to high-

light the critical importance of three speciﬁc elements essen-

tial for success that prior discussions of community arts ini-

tiatives seem to have overlooked. First, drawing on the study

of customer cocreation (see O’Hern and Rindﬂeisch [2010]

for a review), we underscore the importance of community

member involvement in the arts initiative. Second, drawing

on the notion of “small wins”(Amabile and Kramer 2011),

we highlight the importance of documenting the arts initia-

tive process, celebrating the initiative upon culmination, and

subsequent celebrations to broaden the reach of the initia-

tive. This enables transformative art experiences to amplify

a direct and indirect positive impact in a community. Finally,

we also point to the tensions and conﬂicts that can inevi-

tably emerge during a large-scale community-based effort.

These tensions are discussed in more detail in appendix A.

We draw on extant literature on social power, to emphasize

the need for key community members to take on leadership

roles to help diffuse the tension, manage the conﬂicts, and

mobilize individuals to keep moving constructively toward

the intended goals of the community project.

For academics, this work offers a novel appreciation for

aesthetics in three ways. First, whereas previous literature

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

has generally focused on the hedonic aspect of aesthetics,

here we consider aesthetics as a functional solution to a

social problem (e.g., community engagement). Second, we

also consider a novel dimension of aesthetics, namely the

process of creation, rather than what is traditionally in-

vestigated, the aesthetic appreciation of the ﬁnal outcome.

Third, using existing consumer behavior theories (e.g., so-

cial power, cocreation) to empirically test these theories in

a collaborative community-based art projects can yield valu-

able and important insights. All of these offer new ways in

which academics might appreciate the power of aesthetics

and, in doing so, open up the potential for further research.

More broadly, this research answers previous calls (Nowak

2007; Ozanne et al. 2017; Inman et al. 2018) for investiga-

tions that aim to have real, consequential impact on people

and communities.

We begin by offering a brief overview of the research fo-

cused on art and everyday consumer aesthetics, as well as

community, to identify why the former is a particularly

powerful tool for transforming the latter. We then offer a

review of the stakeholders who inﬂuence and are inﬂuenced

by community-based, collaborative art before presenting our

strategic and successive ﬁve-stage process for transforming

communities through collaborative art. We synthesize re-

search in marketing, aesthetics, design, and psychology with

the practices of nonproﬁt and public policy organizations

to develop our framework. Finally, we further highlight the

contributions of this work to public policy, academic re-

search, and community organizing efforts as well as iden-

tify areas where future research is needed.

ART AND CONSUMER AESTHETICS

In recent years, the study of consumer aesthetics has moved

beyond traditional art-centric constructs (e.g., unity and pro-

totypicality; Veryzer and Hutchinson 1998) to investigate

“non-art, non-nature everyday aesthetic objects and experi-

ences”(Patrick 2016, 60). The focus of everyday consumer

aesthetics research ranges from the study of overall visual

features (e.g., color and shape; Sevilla and Kahn 2014;

Hagtvedt and Brasel 2017; Sundar and Kellaris 2017) to

the investigation of speciﬁc design elements (e.g., logo place-

ment and visual dynamism; Sundar and Noseworthy 2014;

Cian, Krishna, and Elder 2015; Mourey and Elder 2019) that

inﬂuence consumer perceptions and choices. For example,

researchers have investigated how “cuteness”motivates pro-

social behaviors (Wang, Mukhopadhyay, and Patrick 2017;

Schnurr 2019) and how design helps regulate overconsump-

tion (Thaler and Sustein 2008; Madzharov and Block 2010;

Hara 2011) and waste (Huang et al. 2019; Koo, Oh, and Pat-

rick 2019). This stream of research reveals how art, design,

and aesthetics can inﬂuence cognition, feelings, and behav-

ior while also “nudging”consumers to make better and more

responsible choices.

More recently, there has been a gradual shift to investi-

gate the role of art and aesthetics as an essential element of

the user-experience (Patrick and Hagtvedt 2011; Buechel

and Townsend 2018) with a focus on understanding how

art and design impact day-to-day life. Another aspect of

consumer aesthetics, and germane to this article, is a macro-

perspective of everyday aesthetics and design that iden-

tiﬁes opportunities to strengthen community and enhance

well-being. Much of the prior research on art and community

has considered the impact of communities’aesthetic dimen-

sions (e.g., outdoor parks and iconic architecture) on com-

munity satisfaction (Florida, Mellander, and Stolarick 2011;

Ahlfeldt and Mastro 2012). However, little is known about

how to deploy aesthetics strategically to transform commu-

nities, particularly how art and aesthetics can facilitate com-

munity building and engagement.

Yet the work of artists and arts organizations suggest that

art can transform communities. In response to Hurricane

Harvey, artists Dan Havel and Dean Ruck created the “Ripple

in Cherryhurst Project,”which involved transforming demo-

lition spaces into works of art that visualize the effects of a

deluge. By transforming these “doomed”spaces, Havel and

Ruck not only highlighted Houstonians’resilience in the

wake of Harvey but also created a dialogue within the commu-

nity. In light of the Black Lives Matter movement, Houston-

based “Project Row Houses”(see app. E) brought the col-

lective “Black Women Artists for Black Lives Matter”to the

art houses to cultivate public dialogues. The intersection be-

tween art and activism at this showcase offered the commu-

nity a conduit to host conversations about race. A similar ex-

ample of how art gives voice to social issues is the “Free

Speech Monument”(see app. F) in Charlottesville, Virginia,

a chalkboard wall where the community can openly convey

their opinions and debate alternative points of view, while

in New Orleans the “Before I Die”wall captures the hopes

of a community. Grace Farms (https://gracefarms.org; see

app. G) in New Canaan, Connecticut, is an open space for peo-

ple to “experience nature, encounter the arts, pursue justice,

foster community, and explore faith”(www.gracefarms.org;

app. G). These installations provide a forum to elevate the

voices of all people fosteringinclusiveness within community.

These examples demonstrate the power of art and aes-

thetics to strengthen a community and give voice to its social

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

and cultural values, such as equality, resilience, and human

rights. We challenge academic researchers to expand their

lens of inquiry beyond the study of visual design elements

to investigate the intersection between art and community.

In the next section, we explore what a communityis and how

communities develop identities.

WHAT IS COMMUNITY?

The word community is derived from the Latin communi-

tas, meaning “joint ownership”and “public spirit”(Chocano

2018). Historically, communities were deﬁned as small,

well-bounded, homogeneous, and integrated geographic

areas with shared needs and values (Schwartz 1981). To-

day’s communities often tend to be heterogeneous groups

of people with numerous interrelated differences, including

wealth, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, and power (Cornwall

and Jewkes 1995). Moreover, a recent conceptualization of

community deﬁnes it even more broadly as groups of peo-

ple who are connected by social bonds, common viewpoints,

and/or speciﬁc virtual or geographical locations (Hagel 1999;

MacQueen et al. 2001). The conceptualization of commu-

nity that we focus on in the context of collaborative or par-

ticipatory art may be deﬁned as a “heterogeneous”group of

people with shared needs and values who come together in

a speciﬁc geographic location to participate either singly or

in jointly in face-to-face collaboration with others with the

goal to create an art-based community initiative.

Participatory, community-based art experiences can be har-

nessed toward bettering individual and collective well-being

in many ways. These collaborative experiences make art a

part of people’s everyday life (Duncum 1999) and foster an

appreciation for art (Taunton 1982). They also provide hu-

mane and healing environments for vulnerable populations,

such as hospital patients and nursing home residents (Saito

2015). Consider, for example, Calimala (see app. H), a crea-

tive fashion house located in Italy in which the artists are

people with severe motor and speech disabilities. Calimala

(app. H) produces scarfs and foulards based on the paintings

of these artists. Visual art is used as a medium for the artists

to express their feelings and convey emotions. Beyond self-

expression, participatory art experiences, such as Calimala

(app. H), provide an opportunity for a cathartic experience

(Schaper 1968) by allowing people to share their emotions

and feel reinvigorated.

On a deeper level, McMillan and Chavis (1986) identify

four elements as the basis for establishing a sense of com-

munity: membership, inﬂuence, integration,and shared emo-

tional connection. Membership is the feeling of belonging

and deﬁnes boundaries: people who belong and people who

do not. Inﬂuence is the sense of mattering, of making a dif-

ference to a group; it is a bidirectional concept where mem-

bers exert some inﬂuence over each other as well as what

the group does or is (e.g., with community norms). Integra-

tion refers to the reciprocal fulﬁllment of needs. Belonging

to a group offers some form of reward to the individual while

the group also beneﬁts from its members. Finally, shared

emotional connection is the belief that members have and

will share values, stories, and similar experiences. Shared

emotional connections are facilitated by frequent contact

and high-quality interactions. Research adds two other criti-

cal dimensions of community: conscious identiﬁcation and

awareness of fellow members (Obst, Smith, and Zinkiewicz

2002). These factors tie the concept of community to social

identity theory, which posits that individual identity derives

partially from group afﬁliations (Tajfel and Turner 1979) via

categorization (e.g., “I belong to this community”) and self-

enhancement (e.g., “I am proud to be part of this commu-

nity”; Hogg 2006). However, people today are increasingly

disconnected from their communities (Hays 2018). In the

next section, we consider how participatory art experiences

can help communities to build their identity.

Community Identity Making

The artist did not just teach us to paint. He taught

us to live together, to work together, and help one

another. (https://www.cityarts.org; see app. I)

Community identity is the overarching values, attitudes,

and beliefs among a group of people who have a shared re-

sponsibility to one another, a mutual tradition or history,

and a relationship built around a speciﬁc neighborhood or

interest (Chavis and Newbrough 1986; Puddifoot 1995; Mu-

niz 2001). The connection shared among community mem-

bers often centers on a communal or unique space in which

the group has invested (Puddifoot 1995). It is through this

common, shared investment that individuals in the com-

munity build personal connections. Thus, collaborative art

is a community investment in which members dedicate time

or resources. As a result of this investment, both the space

and the people of a community may be transformed. Golden

et al. (2002, 9) offer this quote from a community resident

about how collaborative art galvanized their community’s

collective identity and engaged residents: “Without that

mural, we wouldn’t be a community ...once the mural

was complete ...neighborhood youth began helping their

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

elders keep the area in front of the mural clean .... Some-

times designing and producing a local mural begins a pro-

cess of social connection and political activism that previ-

ously did not exist.”

This quote illustrates how art can contribute to building

a collective community identity that transforms a commu-

nity (e.g., cooperativeness, social interaction, commitment

to community; Puddifoot 1995). Next, we consider how the

process of transforming a community through art can be a

positive force in community life.

Community Life

Collaborative art also enhances community life by provid-

ing an opportunity for individuals to gain an appreciation

for each other and build close-knit relationships with one

another (Speer and Hughey 1995), which in turn, augments

feelings of belonging. Indeed, “relationships based on shared

values and emotional ties betweenindividuals produce bonds

that are more meaningful than relationships based on ratio-

nal or emotional reactions to community issues alone”(Speer

and Hughey 1995, 733). Such bonds forge a greater sense

of belonging and cultivate community (McMillan and Chavis

1986; Baumeister and Leary 1995).

Collaborative art provides emotional and tangible bene-

ﬁts to community life. For instance, participatory art builds

pride and self-reliance (Sharp, Pollock, and Paddison 2005)

that in turn can increase prosocial behaviors such as help-

ing neighbors and cleaning up communal areas (Hart and

Matsuba 2007) and can ultimately lead to a decrease in van-

dalism (i.e., grafﬁti; e.g., “100 Gates Project”2017 [see

app. J]; https://www.cityarts.org [app. I]; Laneri 2009).

More broadly, a neighborhood becomes more aesthetically

pleasing, which in turn may increase property values and

tourism (Laneri 2009; Pedro 2018).

Expressing emotions through art not only improves re-

lationships with others, but also enhances the well-being of

the individuals involved in art making (Slatcher and Penne-

baker 2006). Through collaborative art, community mem-

bers have a platform to express and share their views, val-

ues, beliefs, and goals with a group of close others (Hall

and Robertson 2001). Providing a platform for community

members to engage in collaborative art can enhance their

overall well-being (Slatcher and Pennebaker 2006). As an

example, the mission of CITYarts (see app. I), a New York

City nonproﬁt, is to provide children with the opportunity

to engage in participatory art. CITYarts offers children a

space to discuss social issues such as climate change and so-

cial justice as well as to learn about their community’s his-

tory. As a result of such participatory art experiences, peo-

ple become more engaged community members.

In this article, we propose that collaborative art experi-

ences can transform a community and its collective identity

as a result of people in the community working together.

As a result, community functioning and quality of life is

augmented (Puddifoot 1995) transforming not only a phys-

ical space, but also the people that reside within it, advanc-

ing well-being for individuals and the community. In the

following section, we consider the roles people within the

community, speciﬁcally, community stakeholders, play in

this transformational process.

COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS

AND THEIR INTERACTIONS

The stakeholders of a collaborative art initiative are integral

to its success. Stakeholders are the individuals, groups, and

organizations who either have the power to inﬂuence, or

are inﬂuenced by, the focal project (Freeman 1984). Com-

munities have many stakeholders for arts initiatives—res-

idents, employees and owners of neighborhood businesses,

students and faculty at local schools, members of commu-

nity groups including churches, neighborhood leaders, local

government employees, elected ofﬁcials, and funders. In

most initiatives, the primary stakeholders include the tar-

get community and its members that are enacting the col-

laborative art experience, speciﬁcally, those who beneﬁt di-

rectly from the initiative. For example, Project Row Houses

(app. E) has transformed a neighborhood and has a posi-

tive impact on its primary stakeholders, the residents of the

Third Ward community in Houston.

Secondary stakeholders are those who have an emotional

interest (e.g., nonresident artists and teachers) or a ﬁnancial

interest (e.g., local governments and businesses) in the out-

come of the initiative but do not beneﬁt directly from it.

For each collaborative art experience, we propose consider-

ing three dimensions of the stakeholders’roles: (1) Primary

and secondary stakeholder identiﬁcation: Who are the stake-

holders? (2) Stakeholder motives: What do stakeholders want

or need? (3) Stakeholder engagement: How can stakeholders

be engaged to support the initiative? Appendix B provides

an assessment tool for stakeholders’involvement in a col-

laborative arts initiative.

The success and design of community-based collabora-

tive art initiatives is dependent on the effective involve-

ment of stakeholders; their motivations including afﬁlia-

tion, power, and achievement (McClelland 1971); and their

levels of engagement. A 2016 collaboration between UMOS,

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

an organization that provides education, health, and hous-

ing services for underserved groups, ArtWorks (see app. K),

and the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (UWM) designed

and cocreated a mural to honor the history of Latino mi-

grant workers in Milwaukee. The primary stakeholders of

this initiative included community members and local ac-

tivists ﬁghting for fair wages, housing, and bilingual educa-

tion in Milwaukee. Raoul Deal, an artist and a UWM faculty

member who spearheaded the initiative, described the mural

as “not only [connecting] the agricultural movement to that

of immigrant workers demanding jobs at foundries and brew-

eries,butitalsodemonstrates how history applies to current

events and ongoing struggles for equality”(Mendez 2016).

Secondary stakeholders are crucial to the success of a

collaborative arts initiative because they comprise the so-

cial entrepreneurship ecosystem within which the primary

stakeholders are situated. The ecosystem may involve small

business associations, university and education partners,

as well as foundations and funding partners. Critical to

the UMOS collaborative mural was the identiﬁcation of sec-

ondary stakeholders who could help to develop the vision

and design for this mural celebrating Latino history. These

secondary stakeholders included: (1) community partners,

such as ArtWorks (app. K), who employed the teen interns

that interviewed community members and painted the mu-

ral; (2) educational partners including UWM whose faculty

and students also interviewed residents and researched the

history of their struggle as they helped to design the mural;

and (3) funding partners ranging from the Greater Mil-

waukee Foundation, Wisconsin Humanities Council, the Na-

tional Endowment for the Humanities, Milwaukee School

of Engineering, Manpower Group, and a federal Community

Development Block Grant. In the next section, we document

a process that engages these stakeholders to transform

communities through collaborative art.

A F RAMEWORK TO TRANSFORM COMMUNITIES

THROUGH COLLABORATIVE ART

Everything is art, that every aspect of life could be ap-

proached creatively. (Joseph Beuys, quoted in Tisdall

1974, 48)

Through our relational engagement partnerships with a

variety of arts organizations, we identiﬁed a strategic and

successive process that enhances the capacity of collabora-

tive art initiatives to transform communities. Our integrated

framework, reported in this section, codiﬁes this process and

highlights our partner organizations’best practices. Speciﬁ-

cally, our framework includes ﬁve key stages: (1) community

need identiﬁcation; (2) engaged ideation; (3) collaborative

art-making; (4) shared celebration; and (5) amplify impact.

We visually depict this process in ﬁgure 1 and summarize

how each of our partner organizations enact each of these

ﬁve stages in table 1. In the following sections, we describe

each of these stages in greater detail and explore how each

step is critical to the transformative power of community-

based, collaborative art. To be clear, the sections that follow

interweave descriptions of the practices of our partner arts

organizations with the ﬁndings from the extant academic

literature in consumer research that investigates these prac-

tices. We integrate this information with opportunities for

future research on community participatory art and cocrea-

tion experiences and call for consumer researchers to con-

duct research investigating how collaborative art can ad-

vance the well-being of individuals and communities.

Community Need Identiﬁcation

A community identiﬁed need for change often serves as the

catalyst for community-based art initiatives. These needs

may emerge as long-term, slowly emerging, or sudden and

urgent. For example, a community’s need for positive change

might stem from the build-up of longer-term conditions of

societal, political, or economic stagnation (Land and Micha-

los 2018) or may be motivated by the sudden occurrence of

an unfavorable event such as a natural disaster (Baker 2009).

When the need for change exists within a community, art-

work emerges as a “social sculpture”that embodies artists’

and the community’s understanding for the potential of

art to transform a community (Biddle 2014). Community

need identiﬁcation begins when stakeholders and arts orga-

nizations listen with an intent to understand the commu-

nity’s needs and remain open to diverse, creative solutions.

For many of the organizations proﬁled in appendixes C

through V (e.g., AWE [app. L], Arts @ Large [app. M], Art-

Works [app. K], CITYarts [app. I],ProjectArt [app. N], Thrive

Collective [app. O], Arts4All Florida [app. P]) the recognition

of a gap in funding for arts education or equal access to art

education motivated their origin; however, other commu-

nity needs surface as these nonproﬁts formed community

relationships. Both the short- and long-term goals of an arts

initiative should be grounded in a community’s needs. Yet

research should continue to examine the antecedents that

cause communities to seek out community-based, collabora-

tive arts initiatives.

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Consider, for example, Project Row Houses (PRH; app. E)

as a case of a social structure that emerged from the growing

need for change in Houston’s economically disadvantaged

Third Ward neighborhood. In this PRH initiative, seven art-

ists joined together to transform 22 row houses using art to

reﬂect the concerns of the community and simultaneously

preserve the history of this neighborhood. PRH has evolved

over the past 26 years from a venue to display art, to a thriv-

ing institution that helps meet the local Third Ward com-

munity’s educational and economic needs. PRH has part-

nered with urban movements, museums, and schools to

inspire community involvement as well as a passion for so-

cial progress (Thompson 2012). The need for PRH at its ini-

tiation was aptly described by one of the seven founding art-

ists and recipient of the MacArthur Genius award, Rick

Lowe. He said: “I mean, it initially started with a problematic

circumstance: blight within a neighborhood. That was the

core of the problem, or of the opportunity. And as I was con-

templating that blight as a problem, I was able to think

about the poetics of addressing that problem and contextu-

alize it in a poetic way.”

Art can also serve as a response to needs arising from

unforeseen events and natural disasters. Whether it was

the artistic response to Hurricane Katrina in the form of a

5-year collective initiative called Transforma, the Angels and

Accordions performance in the years following Hurricane

Sandy, or the photographs that comprise the Ferguson Mo-

ment in the aftermath of the death of Michael Brown, the US

Department of Arts and Culture has created a repository of

the artistic response to natural and civil disasters and social

emergencies called, Art Became the Oxygen. After identifying

a need for a transformative art experience,a community may

move to the next stage in the collaborative art process, en-

gaged ideation.

Engaged Ideation

Engaged ideation is a community-wide process that gives

voice to stakeholders’unique needs and challenges, considers

the potential arts initiative, and works toward developing

a consensus for a shared vision and plan for the community

art initiative and its outcomes. The success of a collaborative

community arts initiative will depend on bringing commu-

nity members, who are primary stakeholders, and the many

other stakeholder groups together in a community dialogue.

Jane Golden, the founder of MAP (app. C), explains, “People

[stakeholders] become really inspired and excited. We were

giving voice to people’s stories, struggles, their triumphs, their

aspirations. It was about a dialogue, a discourse, and holding

Figure 1. Collaborative art: A force for transforming communities.

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Table 1. How Organizations Use Collaborative Art to Transform Communities

Organization Community need identiﬁcation Engaged ideation Collaborative art making Shared celebration Amplify impact

100 Gates Project

(app. J)

http://100gates.nyc

Mounting tensions between

businesses, grafﬁti artists,

and community

Converted business gates

as space for public art,

opened dialogue between

artists and owners

Business owners choose

and collaborate with

artists on design, art

versus advertisement

Artists and public tag work,

leverage social media to

share and celebrate art,

promote business trafﬁc

Increase in prosocial behav-

iors: neighborhood clean-up,

decrease in vandalism

Artists Working in Edu-

cation (AWE; app. L)

https://awe-inc.org/

Artists concerned about

reduced funding for arts

education in public schools

Work with schools (art

teachers), artists,

parents, kids and teens

in community

Deliver art experiences and

education to Milwaukee’s

inner-city children via

mobile art studios

Murals create beautiful

public art space for

community events

Impact spillover: from sum-

mer art education to

transform vacant lots:

benches, gardens, sculpture

Arts @ Large (app. M)

https://www

.artsatlargeinc.org/

Integrate art education

into everyday curriculum

(science, English,

history, etc.)

Involve students in

selection and creation of

mural content, empowers

students and normalizes

their families’stories

Empowers youth to create

visual art that reﬂects

important and

challenging public

conversations

School families (youth,

parents, teachers) with

local community see art

as daily reminder of their

power to affect change

Examine the ﬁnancial

impact of art as a tool to

develop creativity and

self-expression, the

business of art

Arts4All Florida

(Formerly VSA

Florida; app. P) http://

arts4allﬂorida.org/

State-wide organization

delivering services via

the arts to people with

disabilities, juvenile

justice youth

Not observed Range of cocreation: guided

art creation experiences,

(differently abled

individuals), education

justice involved youth

Public sharing of art

validates abilities and

contribution, art shows,

contests, display venues,

galleries

Collaborative art a tangible

symbol of inclusivity, sig-

naling presence, effort,

and contribution of all

community members

ArtWorks (app. K)

https://

artworksformilwaukee

.org/

Teaches history of

community’s immigrant

workers, contextualize

ﬁght for equality today

Teens gather oral history

from early immigrants,

learn about their

struggles

Art educators teach

methods and employ

interns in the cocreation

of murals to honor history

Art used to mark important

historical events, transmit

culture and history to

next generation

Paid summer internships,

work experience, leadership

development

Calimala (app. H)

https://facebook.com

/ateliercalimala/

Equal art opportunities for

those with disabilities,

arts accessibility

Collaborative painting

experiences ensures no

one is excluded from the

design or creation process

Cathartic art experiences as

therapy and way to

facilitate self-expression

Convert their art into

fashion, opportunity for

families and friends share

pride, change perceptions

of their abilities

Funding from cocreated

products supports programs

for artists with severe motor

and speech disabilities

000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Table 1. (Continued )

Organization Community need identiﬁcation Engaged ideation Collaborative art making Shared celebration Amplify impact

Center for Art & Social

Engagement (CASE)

(app. V) http://www

.uh.edu/kgmca//case/

Arts has a place at the table

on issues: housing, land-use,

transportation, economic,

education, infrastructure,

and public safety

Artists and arts

organizations can take a

leadership role bringing

awareness to needs, public/

private partnerships,

inspire public discourse

One example: Springboard

for the Arts’project

around the light rail line,

created neighborhood

identity through

120 collaborative

art projects

Not observed Community vitality, NEA

measures: Resident attach-

ment to community,

Quality of life, Arts

and cultural activity,

Economic conditions

CITYarts (app. I) https://

www.cityarts.org/

Give kids a voice in civic

and social issues, expression

via participatory art

experiences

Space for youth to discuss

social issues: climate

change, social justice

Participating in mural

painting increases school

attendance, involvement

in change

Local community sees art

as daily reminder that

they have a voice and the

power to affect change

Beyond teaching art,

strengthens community

relationships, decreases

violence

CoSign initiative:

American Sign Museum

(app. U) https://www

.cosigncincy.org/

Local businesses nominated,

focus on businesses that

enhance community,

support local charities

Artist and business

collaborate to create

unique signage ideas

that differentiate

business

Not observed Generate press, walking

tours, and events to revi-

talize business districts,

support buy local,

facilitate growth

National roll-out of tool-kit,

connect sign artists to

local businesses, increase

economic impact

Faces of Incarceration

(app. S) https://

philipsalamone.com

/faces-of-incarceration/

Increase awareness and

challenge the narrative sur-

rounding mass incarceration,

who it affects, how

Not observed Portrait is a cocreation be-

tween painter and subject,

you get a “sense of who

they are versus what they

look like”

Portrait shifts conversation

about mass incarceration

from statistics to one

that spotlights the

human experience

Two-sided beneﬁt, instills

pride and self-worth,

change the way others

see them, they are more

than their past offenses

Free Speech Monument

(app. F) http://tjcenter

.org/free-speech

-monuments/

Provide space to opinions,

ideas, perspectives left out

of public media and

discourse

Constant community col-

laboration, 12-year,

asynchronous public

dialogue about

free speech

Cultivate real-time public

dialogue, community

“self-polices”erasing,

responding to offensive

speech

Continuous dialogue, lon-

gevity of use by local

community as well as

visitors shows staying

power

Sparked other mobile

monument projects

across the state

Grace Farms (app. G)

https://gracefarms

.org/

Preserving and sharing

historic land, providing

public space to experience

nature

Collaboration space to

facilitate community

engagement on wide

range of issues

Deliver aesthetic experi-

ences and education

on-site, encourage com-

munity to work, play,

and eat in the space

“Providing a peaceful

respite,”nature to

stimulate creativity,

advance common good

Supports arts, justice,

community engagement,

and faith initiatives

Mural Arts Philadelphia

(MAP) (app. C) https://

www.muralarts.org/

Transmits history and

culture, local heroes/stories

featured in murals, provides

constructive creative outlet

Give voice to struggles and

triumph, build bridges

of dialogue,

foster empathy

One example: mural

cocreation by prisoners

and their children, reuniﬁ-

cation, family bonds

formed and strengthened

Transforms the civic life

in city, catalytic power

to inject vibrant energy

into a neighborhood

Murals increase awareness

of social injustice, public

health issues, and facilitate

healing in community

000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Table 1. (Continued )

Organization Community need identiﬁcation Engaged ideation Collaborative art making Shared celebration Amplify impact

Project Row Houses

(app. E) https://

projectrowhouses.org/

Address blight of Houston’s

Third Ward and simulta-

neously preserve history

Community engagement

and neighborhood

development

Intersection of art,

community engagement,

and neighborhood

development

Each project culminates in

event, community gathers

to see current installation

and honor the culture

and history

Transformed neighborhood

aesthetic, provides housing,

counseling services

ProjectArt (app. N)

https://projectart.org/

Make arts education

accessible in public libraries

of major cities across U.S.

Artists, educators, librar-

ians, public policy

makers, and funders

collaborate to ﬁll

gap in arts education

Hands-on visual arts cur-

riculum fosters creativ-

ity and life-long art

appreciation

Celebration of their culture

within each community,

arts reﬂect the image

of a community

Social and psychological ben-

eﬁts of art, awareness of

library resources, protect

kids, take back streets

The Walldogs Movement

(app. R) http://

thewalldogs.com/

Community was losing indus-

tries (dying) losing sense

of self, its identity, other

communities request

projects

Families, business owners,

artists, come together;

young people energized

by cause

Not observed Event-based, community

festival to watch creation,

interact with artists,

celebrate the new com-

munity aesthetic

Change in the visual aesthetic

instills pride, improves

safety, care for public spaces,

spurseconomicgrowth

Thrive Collective

(app. O) http://www

.thrivecollective.org/

Secured a grant to beautify

the community by painting

amural

Teaching artists, students,

parents, volunteers, and

school ofﬁcials: vision

through conversation

Cocreation: discover

talent, develop creativity,

empower engagement

in community

Document and share mural

art experience, shared

responsibility to protect

the art and the integrity

of all in community

Film shared with Dept. of Ed,

promote power of partici-

patory art, generated in-

quiries from other schools

Walls of Wittenberg

(WOW; app. Q) http://

www.wallsofwittenberg

.com/

Rural town, highway bypass

led to economic hardship,

empty buildings, mural

projects to revitalize

the town

Local community, schools,

and businesses collabo-

rate to identify space,

promote arts, fundraise

One example: Participants

personalized elements of

community quilt mural

to represent uniqueness

and collective in fabric

of their community

Creation brings opportuni-

ties to engage with art-

ists, festivals and local

art shows to celebrate

initiatives

Beyond beautiﬁcation,

attract visitors and

economic development;

expand to other forms

of art (theatre, music)

Xavier Cortada (app. D)

http://cortada.com/

Leverage public art to

connect people to their

community and more

broadly to the

natural world

Not observed One example: Social media

campaign inviting signs

to display when rising

sea levels will consume

their home

Public art shows prompt

community discussions

about the intersection

of humans and nature

Spark conversations about

sustainability, science,

coexisting with nature

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

up a mirror to people and saying, ‘Your life counts.’” In-

volving stakeholders in community decision processes pro-

motes a sense of ownership, belonging, pride, and responsi-

bility to care for the community (McMillan and Chavis 1986;

Obst et al. 2002).

The engaged ideation process builds connections and con-

versations between stakeholders. A vital element of this pro-

cess involves fostering the role of empathy, being absorbed

into the feelings of another person, among diverse commu-

nity stakeholders (Escalas and Stern 2003). Empathy pro-

motes perspective-taking, which increases helping behaviors

(Eisenberg and Miller 1987) and fosters community involve-

ment (Batson, Ahmad, and Tsang 2002). Experiencing em-

pathy results in compassion and greater perceived similarity

between the self and another person (Oveis, Horberg, and

Keltner 2010). As an example, MAP describes their process

of creating murals as one of connection though “building

bridges of dialogue.”They describe their engaged ideation

process in this way:

Connections begin when people picture themselves in

each other’s shoes. Once we have found our inspira-

tion, we mobilize our partners and build a team of in-

dividuals—artists, participants, residents, nonproﬁt

leaders, funders, policy makers—anyone who wants

to help us make change happen. We connect people

and institutions who normally do not talk to each other,

andbuildbridgesofdialogueoverlong-standingchasms

of misunderstanding, distrust, or ignorance. The con-

nections are not always comfortable or convenient.

But they result in important conversations that spark

change—in attitudes, in understanding, and in hearts

and minds. (https://www.muralarts.org/our-process)

One important way that the engaged ideation process

can foster empathy and understanding is by having commu-

nity stakeholders share their own personal stories as well as

to listen to other stakeholders’stories (Van Laer et al. 2014;

Bublitz et al. 2016). In routine analytical processing, for ex-

ample, a recitation of facts designed to encourage critical

thinking, people may discount the information presented

(Nielsen and Escalas 2010; Bublitz et al. 2016). By contrast,

personal stories evoke empathy (Escalas and Stern 2003)

and elicit higher levels of engagement and inﬂuence (Van

Laer et al. 2014). Listening to stories promotes an uncon-

scious absorption of the emotion conveyed in a story (Van

Laer et al. 2014). As a result of being absorbed into a story,

people’s beliefs about the world, and their own communi-

ties, may be altered (Green and Brock 2000). By sharing

stakeholders’stories during the engaged ideation process,

individuals may shift how they see themselves, fellow com-

munity members, and their community as a whole. Further-

more, as Bublitz et al. (2016) suggest, listening to stories

broadens our understanding of others and calls people to ac-

tion. Following the engaged ideation process, communities

move to the collaborative art-making phase. In the next sec-

tion, we explore the process of creating collaborative art.

Collaborative Art Making

Collaborative art making involves participatory art experi-

ences in which the community cocreates, sometimes along

with an artist, and then assists in the proliferation of the

arts initiative. Collaborative community art as social sculp-

ture shapes a community’s visual aesthetic and builds com-

munity relationships (Biddle 2014). Artists all over the

world have been drawn to such collaborative or collective

modes of artistic production which offer an intersection

of art, social activism, and community development (Kester

2011). As an example, the “Walls of Wittenberg”(WOW; see

app. Q ) gathered its rural residents to create a community

quilt mural that not only displays their shared heritage

and small-town traditions but also allowed each participant

to personalize design elements on their quilt square as they

painted the mural together. Collaborative art making and

cocreation take many forms. From parks to libraries, arts

organizations are working to provide access to art-making

experiences. “Artists Working in Education”(AWE; app. L)

deliver art experiences and education to the children of Mil-

waukee in city parks with the “goal of helping kids see a

more creative life and a world of possibility for the future

of their neighborhood.”ProjectArt (app. N) brings artists

together with children living in underserved communities

in 38 cities across the United States to deliver a hands-on

visual arts curriculum that fosters a sense of creativity and

a life-long appreciation for art.

The potential of community-based, participatory art to

fulﬁll not only art’s creative potential to beautify communal

space and rejuvenate the spirit (Desmet and Pohlmeyer 2013)

but also to forge meaningful collaboration within a commu-

nity is what makes collaborative art transformative. Sanders

and Stappers (2008, 9) note that, “cocreation practiced at

the early front end of the design development process can

have an impact with positive, long-range consequences.”For

example, a community has sprung up around the aforemen-

tioned PRH initiative. From children doing homework to res-

ident mothers and aspiring entrepreneurs, PRH epitomizes

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

the intersection of art, community engagement, neighbor-

hood development, and enriched personal development of

individuals. Next, after communities cocreate art, they need

to ﬁnd ways to celebrate and share their collaborative work.

Shared Celebration

After completing an arts initiative, shared celebration en-

courages communities to celebrate their collaborative art as

a symbol of a shared, community effort and the power of

community organizing. Most of all, the art is celebrated for

its symbolic value, or for what it represents to the members

of the community and for what it communicates about the

community to the outside world. It serves as an enduring re-

minder of the community’s shared values and history. Re-

vealing the collaborative art commences a ritual that engages

the community in celebration of the shared meaning of the

art (Patrick, Ateﬁ, and Hagtvedt 2017), a ritual that may be

repeated over time to nurture relationships and continue to

draw the community together. Participatory art brings mean-

ing at both the individual and communal level, fostering a

sense of pride, personal signiﬁcance, achievement, power, be-

longing, and inspiration. Celebration of collaborative art is a

celebration of inclusivity and fosters a shared identity within

the community.

The completion of the community-based collaborative art

initiative is not the end but rather the start of moving the

transformation process beyond the initial stakeholder groups

into a space where the impact of the art can grow throughout

the community. The transformed visual aesthetic generates

an expression of individual emotions that can be shared and

celebrated. These shared emotions, in turn, create stronger

connections between members of the community and solid-

ify people’s sense of belonging to the community (McMillan

and Chavis 1986; Van Kleef and Fischer 2016). In addition,

seeing each individual expression as part of the communal

effort encourages people to continue to express themselves

and to make their voices heard (McMillan and Chavis 1986).

As such, the collaborative art fosters pride in the community

and a sense of belonging and ownership that installs a sense

of dignity and personal signiﬁcance in community members

by bringing awareness of past achievements and a sense of

progress toward future goals (Desmet and Pohlmeyer 2013).

The celebration of collaborative art may carry particularly

powerful meaning to marginalized groups that reside within

the community (e.g., children or the disabled) who often feel

invisible or that their voices are not heard. Consider, for ex-

ample, “Arts4All Florida”(app. P), an arts organization that

works with people with disabilities and kids in the juvenile

justice system to empower them to create art and to share

their art publicly. In this sense, a collaborative art initiative

becomes a tangible symbol of inclusivity, signaling the pres-

ence, effort, and contribution of all community members.

For participating stakeholder groups, the celebration of the

art brings empowerment and sense of worth, as well as a

sense of ownership and belonging to the community (McMil-

lan and Chavis 1986). The sense of signiﬁcance for all com-

munity members also comes from the realization that each

member is part of something bigger than their individual

selves, something that they might not be able to accomplish

without a collective, communal effort.

Collaborative art becomes a symbol for what the com-

munity can achieve together. This collective accomplish-

ment often inspires future collaborations and signals to the

community members, and to the outside world, that change

is possible. Research shows that “when people successfully

complete a labor-intensive task ...they come to value the

fruits of that labor more highly”(Norton, Mochon, and

Ariely 2012, 454). Investing a personal stake in a collabora-

tive art initiative instills a sense of responsibility and moti-

vates community members to care for the art as well as the

community. The collaborative art becomes a reminder of the

shared moral responsibility that community members have

to each other (Muniz and O’Guinn 2001). Furthermore, the

art becomes a behavioral nudge that directs the members

of the community toward further efforts to cherish, pre-

serve, and improve their community (Desmet and Pohl-

meyer 2013). The Founder of Thrive Collective (app. O),

an arts organization that engages communities in school

mural initiatives, stated: “The art demonstrates that if the

community can have a shared responsibility to protect the

art then the community can have a similar shared responsi-

bility to protect the integrity of each individual within that

community. The mural is a tangible symbol; it is not just

an abstract thought or speech. The mural makes the creative

and communal experience concrete”(Jeremy Del Rio, Foun-

der, Thrive Collective).

In sum, the celebration of collaborative art invigorates

and inspires, bringing joy and meaning to the members of

the community. Extant research on happiness and well-

being has deﬁned joy, contentedness, meaningfulness, and

worthiness as essential components of feelings of well-

being (Lyubomirsky 2008). In the next section, we syn-

thesizehowamplifyingtheimpactofthecollaborative

art process can extend its long-term effects to beneﬁtin-

dividual and community well-being.

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Amplify Impact

The collaborative art itself serves as physical proof of the

community’s ability to work together and a reminder of

its collective values; it also offers an opportunity to amplify

the impact of this collaborative effort within the commu-

nity. In the same way that material possessions are reﬂec-

tions of one’s self-identity that can preserve and protect

memories (Belk 1988; Winterich, Reczek, and Irwin 2017)

collaborative art can serve as an anchor for a community’s

shared history and common goals. As an example, The Wall-

dogs Movement (see app. R) is an arts initiative founded

to revitalize a dying community where the decline of local

industries resulted in the loss of the community’s identity.

Through a muralism event, families, business owners, and

artists came together to change the community’s visual aes-

thetic which increased pride, improved safety, and spurred

economic growth. This and other nonproﬁts highlighted in

this article (e.g., 100 Gates Project [app. J], MAP [app. C],

WOW [app. Q ]) and proﬁled in appendixes C through V

struggle to keep up with the many requests from communi-

ties who want to be part of these initiatives to transform

their community’s visual aesthetic and tell their own story.

Collaborative art is enduring evidence that a community

has the power to transform itself. Arts organizations often

measure the short- and long-term achievements of collabo-

rative arts initiatives. More research is needed to under-

stand the lasting effects of a collaborative art initiative

within a community as well as long-term efforts to docu-

ment and celebrate the importance of these initiatives in

the life of a community.

Arts organizations should continue to highlight the pos-

itive outcomes of collaborative arts initiatives for stakehold-

ers and communities. Our initial investigation revealed that

a transformation that centers on the engagement and par-

ticipation of the community stakeholders could foster posi-

tive outcomes that extend far beyond visual beautiﬁcation.

The beneﬁts of this transformation occur at the individual

and community levels, positively impacting community mem-

bers, businesses and nonproﬁt organizations, and govern-

ment service providers and public agencies. When the com-

munity is engaged and empowered to cocreate art, a broad

mix of positive physical, economic, social, and psychological

outcomes are possible including reduced crime, enhanced

health and physical well-being of residents, decreases in

income inequality, growth in small business start-ups, in-

creased employment opportunities in the community, and

an increased sense of collective responsibility to the commu-

nity (Pierce, Kostova, and Dirks 2003; Keizer, Lindenberg,

and Steg 2008; Mitchell and Popham 2008; Borrup 2009;

Markusen and Gadwa 2010; Florida et al. 2011; Elmqvist

et al. 2015; Jussila et al. 2015; Stern and Seifert 2017; Land

and Michalos 2018). Yet these positive outcomes are not

without their tensions and challenges.

A Brief Word on Tensions and Challenges

Our research focuses on the normative guidelines and best

practices for organizations to create effective collaborative

art projects. However, as with any endeavor that requires

the cooperation and collaboration between different stake-

holders with different motivations, ideas and goals, there is

likely to be conﬂict and challenge, which ultimately result

in less successful collaborative art projects. These tensions

might include different levels of power in the community hi-

erarchy, the battle for ﬁnancial resources and governmental

support, mismatch between the goals of the target commu-

nity and the community project, and so forth. Appendix A

summarizes some sources of tension for each of the fol-

lowing key stakeholders: community members, artists, and

funders. These sources of tension also present research op-

portunities as helping stakeholders navigate and alleviate

challenges often advances the effectiveness of community-

based, collaborative art initiatives. A key takeaway from this

application is that despite the inevitable tensions and con-

ﬂicts that might arise, community members need to take a

leadership role to ensure that all stakeholders give voice to

their values and feel greater ownership in the project to fa-

cilitate a sense of individual and community well-being.

DISCUSSION

This work offers several contributions to the efforts of arts

organizations, as well as to the academic literature, seek-

ing to transform communities through art. We offer a stra-

tegic best practices-based framework for transformative

community-based, collaborative art initiatives. This process

is meant to act as a guide that can be modiﬁed to ﬁt the

needs of particular communities and speciﬁc arts initiatives.

For the arts organizations highlighted throughout this arti-

cle and in appendixes C through V, the process for collabo-

rative arts initiatives is less focused on improving a design

or technique (e.g., artistry) and more motivated by leverag-

ing the experience to amplify art’s transformative impact on

well-being.

Collaborative art can be an important prompt to push

difﬁcult conversations on pressing social issues forward.

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

The “Faces of Incarceration”(see app. S) is a public art initia-

tive in Madison, Wisconsin, trying to change the narrative,

as well as the public’s view, of mass incarceration by pairing

local portrait artists with a formerly incarcerated person

(Jammeh 2017). Artist Philip Salamone describes this initia-

tive: “When you paint someone, you get a sense of who they

are versus what they look like. You develop a relationship.

The portrait is a record of that experience.”The portraits

are featured at high-proﬁle community events where the for-

mer prisoners tell their stories, shifting the conversation

about mass incarceration from one that centers on statistics

to one that spotlights the human experience.

Note our intentional focus is on the transformative ef-

fect of community involvement in participatory art experi-

ences. This form of community transformation arises from

projects designed to build bonds, bring a community to-

gether, create pride and identity, and educate. Foundations

such as Bloomberg Philanthropies has designed funding

mechanisms, including a community-based competition, to

support public arts initiatives that seek to address a lo-

cality’s pressing social problems. However, other commu-

nity initiatives may have different motives and goals as well

as focus on the needs of a difference set of stakeholders. If

the initiative is primarily focused on creating “world-class”

art experiences and transforming a space into a destination,

then community involvement may not be central to the goal.

For example, the Wynwood Walls in Miami, Florida, are cu-

rated to feature street art by international grafﬁti artists.

Prior to the installation of the walls, Wynwood was a com-

munity of abandoned garment factories. Now, in large part

because of these walls, the Wynwood neighborhood attracts

millions of visitors a year. In turn this enterprise has led to

more arts initiatives, commercial development, and new busi-

nesses in this community. However, while these positive out-

comes beneﬁt some, many of the artists who participated in

the early rejuvenation of this community have been priced

out of the neighborhood. Balancing the tensions among com-

munity stakeholders merits more research attention.

Moreover, while our research focuses on collaborative art,

the process we propose may be relevant to other community

development initiatives, such as community gardens, and

adapted to varying stakeholder needs. Our focus here is not

design-based but rather anchored in community engagement

and well-being. Klinenberg (2018) adopts a similar focus for

enhancing community well-being through considering the

social aspects of physical space in a community. Klinenberg

stresses how the social infrastructure created by community-

based art, neighborhood gardens, libraries, and community

centers work together to create human connections and rela-

tionships that ﬁght inequality, combat polarization, and call

community members to come together. We encourage fu-

ture research to examine how community-based, collabora-

tive art works synergistically with other elements of social

infrastructure, for example community gardens, to enhance

individual and community well-being.

Public Policy Implications

Creating a collaborative process for transformation through

art ensures that community members view an arts initiative

as an appropriate response to their particular needs. In addi-

tion, a collaborative process builds social relationships and

a local arts entrepreneurship community that can adapt as

the community’s needs evolve. According to the National

Endowment for the Arts, “within a community—a collection

of people bound by some common element, be it geography,

history, an area of interest, or some other shared character-

istic—engaging in art can foster a sense of identity and be-

longing”(2012, 8). Research in underserved communities

and subsistence marketplaces suggests policy makers focus

on developing a community entrepreneurship ecosystem that

will “preserve close-knit bonds while creating new opportu-

nities for resource sharing and learning across networks”

(Barrios and Blocker 2015, 284). Infusing art and visual

transformation with a participatory process directly con-

nects a community’s unique culture and history to the revi-

talization process (Stern and Siefert 2008). This research

reinforces recommendations that place-making strategies

be tailored to the communities in which they occur (Berg-

strom 2013).

Research Implications

While this article seeks to guide practitioners, it also offers

new insights to the academic literature. First, we offer a

novel appreciation for aesthetics. Previous work considering

aesthetics in the context of consumer behavior or elsewhere

has, almost entirely, considered it purely hedonic in nature

(Schmitt and Simonson 1997; Hagtvedt and Patrick 2008;

Alba and Williams 2012). In the current work, we identify

a purposeful beneﬁt of aesthetics and art: it is a solution

to a problem, speciﬁcally, the vehicle through which commu-

nity engagement and transformation may occur. While some

of that may result due to inspiration from the beauty of the

art, we focus more on the process of creating collaborative

art to transform a community and how this process can en-

hance well-being.

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Applying this notion to consumer decision making, a

natural extension is product use and/or experiential prod-

ucts. Consumers generally enjoy experiences more when

they are shared with others (Ramanathan and McGill

2007). However, little research has considered how the re-

lationship between users may beneﬁt from joint product

use or sharing in experiential consumption. Our work sug-

gests such an experience may strengthen these bonds. Sev-

eral of the arts organizations proﬁled work to develop rela-

tionships between community members and artists as a

critical step toward successful cocreation. For example, us-

ing cocreation of art to strengthen bonds (e.g., between

foster parents and children) could be an extension of this

work. Similarly, while the “IKEA effect”(Norton et al.

2012) identiﬁes how consumers increase valuation of the

products they make, little is known about how cocreation

with others might inﬂuence personal bonds. Likewise, the

“IKEA effect”does not speak to how creation inﬂuences

pride and self-esteem (Sharp et al. 2005; Hart and Matsuba

2007), which research suggests might be elevated through

participatory art experiences.

We echo Nowak’s (2007) call for more research on the

“impact of arts and culture on distressed places.”Research-

ers and community change-makers should consider both

short- and long-term effects, as well as compare different

forms of investment, to identify key community outcomes.

At the same time, communities need better tools to measure

and compare the outcomes achieved through the process of

community transformation. With these tools, future policy

makers can measure an initiative’s impact and assess how

well investments are working within a given community

ecosystem. It is important that future work distinguish

bottom-up forms of community transformation that begin

by engaging people within a community from top-down ef-

forts using capital investment to revitalize neighborhoods.

However well intended, such efforts have the potential to

displace residents by pricing them out of the neighborhood

(Guerrieri, Hartley, and Hurst 2013) without offering the

beneﬁts of the transformation to the community members.

Before embarking on this form of change, research is needed

to identify how to engage the community in a way that en-

sures the direct and positive physical, social, psychological,

economic, and behavioral outcomes are realized for the

community and its members. Table 2 lists many possibilities

for future research, organized by the ﬁve stages of the col-

laborative art process.

The arts organizations we partnered with were at dif-

ferent stages of development and transformative impact.

PRH had been in existence for 26 years and had branched

out from the initial art displays to a variety of community-

based arts initiatives. In contrast, Grace Farms (app. G) is a

relatively new community initiative seeking to create aware-

ness and gain attention from the local community. Future

research might draw on the vast literature on brand growth

strategies (Keller, Parameswaran, and Jacob 2011; Kapferer

2012) to address how a collaborative art initiative and a

community can expand its reach and grow. Another area

to explore in the future is the role of transient art in a com-

munity, in which the cocreated art is a shared experience,

but there is no physical reminder of the initiative. The Rob-

erts Creek Mandala, for example, is a nonproﬁt summer

public arts initiative that has grown from ﬁve community

artists to over 500 participants. Each year there is a new

Mandala design and new artists join the initiative. Future

research can also expand into other art forms (i.e., perfor-

mance arts) and explore how experiences in theater ordance

contribute to building community. For example, one such

program, “Dancing Classrooms”(see app. T), engages chil-

dren, parents, and educators through the art of ballroom

dance. More research is needed to establish how other col-

laborative art forms, such as transient art, engageand trans-

form communities.

Another issue that might be of interest to consumer re-

searchers is the question of how to mobilize communities

to participate and become engaged in community-based

projects, like collaborative art. Future research can develop

a systematic understanding of the factors that enhance en-

gagement (e.g., increased awareness of current social condi-

tions and political developments) versus those that inhibit

(e.g., increased busyness and time stress individuals today

experience as evidenced by the decline in volunteerism and

community participation in the United States; Grimm and

Dietz 2018) an individual’s likelihood of participation in

collaborative art projects. Notably, from an organizational

standpoint, our relational engagement partners suggest that

collaborative art in communities remains desirable. Virtually

all of the nonproﬁt organizations we partnered with have

many more communities who want to replicate and model

their success. For instance, Project Row Houses has most re-

cently worked with Athenian artists to replicate their model

in Athens, Greece, with the Victoria Square Project for “a

community of refugees in need of a catalyst for empower-

ment”(https://projectrowhouses.org/news/journey-with

-us-to-athens; app. E). It turns out that there is a great de-

mand for collaborative art but a shortfall in operational ca-

pacity and funding.

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Finally, community engagement has the potential to as-

sist in a multitude of initiatives and venues where change

has faced signiﬁcant challenges. In these situations, a pre-

scription of community involvement to articulate the prob-

lem and develop a shared vision for change, as opposed to

external promotion of a prescribed solution, may alleviate

tensions and resistance to change. In this way, collabora-

tive initiatives can realize their potential to transform

Table 2. Future Research to Explore Collaborative Art as a Transformational Force within Communities

Framework stage Research questions

Community need identiﬁcation •How do arts initiatives that arise from external forces (i.e., forces from outside the ecosys-

tem) differ from those that rise up within the community in their ability to engage and

transform a community?

•What techniques help community stakeholders see value in investing in transformative

art initiatives compared to other forms of community investment?

•How can organizers capture and manage the range of voices from the local community, from

the artist to the sponsor, in the process in a way that balances the risks and maximizes

the beneﬁts to well-being?

Engaged ideation •What are the best strategies to balance the diverse ideas and directions that surface in

community dialogue and ideation to assure an inclusive process and minimize

disagreement and disillusionment that can result when some ideas rise to the top while

others may not be fully realized?

•Are there ways to support transformative art initiatives that enhances community

development but reduces the negative effects that can result from gentriﬁcation?

Collaborative art making •Past research suggests that the more time or commitment a consumer puts into creating or

building a product the more they value it (e.g., Norton et al. 2012); what are the minimum

time and activities required by stakeholders to experience positive individual outcomes?

•Since aesthetics can also be self-afﬁrming (Townsend and Sood 2012), how do artists and

community participants navigate the tensions that can arise from differences in the

vision of the artists and the community stakeholders?

•How can communities cocreate art that engages a diverse community of ideas and opinions

in constructive dialogue without inﬂaming divisiveness within a community?

Shared celebration •How do people leverage shared identity signals in the community? Are the social signals

of a community different from individual identity signals as explored in Berger and

Heath (2007)?

•How are community identity signals (e.g., public art, murals, sculptures, etc.) consumed

or used by external stakeholders and individuals other than community members

(e.g., visitors)?

•Could the ownership effects and tight-knit relationships that result from efforts to transform

a community create an in-group that responds negatively to newcomers, rather than

being welcoming and open to new people, businesses, and social innovations

(e.g., Property Lines in the Mind; Krik, Peck, and Swain 2018)?

Amplify impact •What are the long-term effects of collaborative art to enhance the power of individuals and

the community to advocate and ﬁght for lasting positive change?

•How do the social bonds among community members change from participatory art

experiences? What are the community beneﬁts and/or risks?

•While there is research on the beneﬁts of community development activities more broadly,

what are the differences in the physical, economic, social, and psychological beneﬁts of

investing in transformative art experiences?

•Are there negative down-stream consequences of investing in aesthetic transformation?

For example, might some divert funding or support because of a misattribution that

the community is less in need than another community who has not invested in

transformation (e.g., Townsend 2017)?

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

communities, enhancing the individual and collective well-

being of all community members.

REFERENCES

Ahlfeldt, Gabriel, and Alexandra Mastro (2012), “Valuing Iconic Design:

Frank Lloyd Wright Architecture in Oak Park, Illinois,”Housing Studies,

27 (8), 1079–99.

Alba, Joseph A., and Eleanor F. Williams (2012), “Pleasure Principles:

A Review of Research on Hedonic Consumption,”Journal of Consumer

Psychology, 23 (1), 2–18.

Amabile, Teresa, and Steven Kramer (2011), The Progress Principle: Using

Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement, and Creativity at Work, Boston:

Harvard Business Press.

Baker, Stacey Menzel (2009), “Vulnerability and Resilience in Natural Di-

sasters: A Marketing and Public Policy Perspective,”Journal of Public

Policy & Marketing, 28 (1), 114–23.

Barrios, Andrés, and Christopher P. Blocker (2015), “The Contextual

Value of Social Capital for Subsistence Entrepreneur Mobility,”Journal

of Public Policy and Marketing, 34 (2), 272–86.

Batson, C. Daniel, Nadia Ahmad, and Jo-Ann Tsang (2002), “Four Motives

for Community Involvement,”Journal of Social Issues, 58 (2), 429–45.

Battistella, Cinzia, Alberto F. De Toni, Giovanni De Zan, and Elena Pessot

(2017), “Cultivating Business Model Agility through Focused Capabil-

ities: A Multiple Case Study,”Journal of Business Research, 73, 65–82.

Baumeister, Roy. F., and Mark R. Leary (1995), “The Need to Belong: De-

sire for Interpersonal Attachment as a Fundamental Human Motiva-

tion,”Psychological Bulletin, 117 (3), 497–529.

Belk, Russell W. (1988), “Possessions and the Extended Self,”Journal of

Consumer Research, 15 (September), 139–68.

Berger, Jonah, and Chip Heath (2007), “Where Consumers Diverge from

Others: Identity Signaling and Product Domains,”Journal of Consumer

Research, 34 (2), 121–34.

Bergstrom, Kip (2013), “Ten Policies to Increase the Impact of the Arts

on Placemaking,”Policy, February, https://conference.placemakers.us

/2013/10/29/ten-policies-increase-impact-arts-placemaking/.

Biddle, Erika (2014), “Re-Animating Joseph Beuys’‘Social Sculpture’: Ar-

tistic Interventions and the Occupy Movement,”Communication and

Critical/Cultural Studies, 11 (1), 25–33.

Borrup, Tom (2009), “5 Ways Arts Projects Can Improve Struggling Com-

munities,”Project for Public Spaces, www.pps.org/article/artsprojects.

Bowles, Nellie (2019), “Human Contact Is Now a Luxury Good,”New York

Times, March 23, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/sunday-review

/human-contact-luxury- screens.html.

Bublitz, Melissa G., Jennifer Edson Escalas, Laura A. Peracchio, Pia Furch-

heim, Stacy Landreth Grau, Anne Hamby, Mark J. Kay, Mark R.Mulder,

and Andrea Scott (2016), “Transformative Storytelling: A Framework

for Crafting Stories for Social Change Organizations,”Journal of Public

Policy and Marketing, 35 (2), 237–48.

Bublitz, Melissa G., Laura A. Peracchio, Charlene A. Dadzie, Jennifer Ed-

son Escalas, Jonathan Hansen, Martina Hutton, Gia Nardini, Carrie

Absher, and Andrea Heintz Tangari (2019), “Food Access for All: Em-

powering Innovative Local Infrastructure,”Journal of Business Research,

100 (July), 354–65.

Buechel, Eva C., and Claudia Townsend (2018), “Buying Beauty for the Long

Run: (Mis) Predicting Liking of Product Aesthetics,”Journal of Consumer

Research, 45 (2), 275–97.

Chavis, David M., and J. Robert Newbrough (1986), “The Meaning of ‘Com-

munity’in Community Psychology,”Journal of Community Psychology,

14 (4), 335–40.

Chocano, Carina (2018), “What Good Is Community When Someone Else

Makes All the Rules,”New York Times, April 17, https://www.nytimes

.com/2018/04/17/magazine/what-good-is-community-when-someone

-else-makes-all-the-rules.html.

Cian, Luca, Aradhna Krishna, and Ryan S. Elder (2015), “A Sign of Things

to Come: Behavioral Change through Dynamic Iconography,”Journal

of Consumer Research, 41 (6), 1426–46.

Cornwall, Andrea, and Rachel Jewkes (1995), “What Is Participatory Re-

search?”Social Science and Medicine, 41 (12), 1667–76.

Desmet, Pieter M.A., and Anna E. Pohlmeyer (2013), “Positive Design: An

Introduction to Design for Subjective Well-Being,”International Journal

of Design, 7 (3), 5–19.

Duncum, Paul (1999), “A Case for an Art Education of Everyday Aesthetic

Experiences,”Studies in Art Education, 40 (Summer), 295–311.

Eisenberg, Nancy, and Paul A. Miller (1987), “The Relation of Empathy to

Prosocial and Related Behaviors,”Psychological Bulletin, 101 (1), 91–

119.

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989), “Building Theories from Case Study Re-

search,”Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 532–50.

Elmqvist, Thomas, H. Setälä, S. N. Handel, S. van der Ploeg, J. Aronson,

James Nelson Blignaut, Erik Gomez-Baggethun, D. J. Nowak, J. Kro-

nenberg, and R. de Groot (2015), “Beneﬁts of Restoring Ecosystem Ser-

vices in Urban Areas,”Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,

14, 101–8.

Escalas, Jennifer Edson, and Barbara B. Stern (2003), “Sympathy and Em-

pathy: Emotional Responses to Advertising Drama,”Journal of Consumer

Research, 29 (4), 566–78.

Fisher, David H. (1996), “Public Art and Public Space,”Soundings: An Inter-

disciplinary Journal, 79 (1/2), 41–57.

Florida, Richard, Charlotta Mellander, and Kevin Stolarick (2011), “Beau-

tiful Places: The Role of Perceived Aesthetic Beauty in Community Sat-

isfaction,”Regional Studies, 45 (1), 33–48.

Freeman, R. Edward (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Golden, Jane (2015), “Mural Arts Program Engages Community Members

in Murals that Improve Aesthetics and Transform Neighborhoods,”

Prevention Institute, https://www.preventioninstitute.org/sites/default

/ﬁles/editor_uploads/images/stories/Documents/Philadelphia_Mural

_Arts_Program.pdf.

Golden, Jane, Robin Rice, and Monica Yant Kinney (2002), Philadelphia

Murals and the Stories They Tell, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Green, Melanie C., and Timothy C. Brock (2000), “The Role of Transpor-

tation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives,”Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 79 (5), 701–21.

Grimm, Robert T., Jr., and Nathan Dietz (2018), “Where Are America’s

Volunteers? A Look at America’s Widespread Decline in Volunteer-

ing in Cities and States,”Research Brief, Do Good Institute, University

of Maryland.

Guerrieri, Veronica, Daniel Hartley, and Erik Hurst (2013), “Endogenous

Gentriﬁcation and Housing Price Dynamics,”Journal of Public Economics,

100 (April), 45–60.

Hagel, John, III (1999), “Net Gain: Expanding Markets through Virtual

Communities,”Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13 (1), 55–65.

Hagtvedt, Henrik, and S. Adam Brasel (2017), “Color Saturation Increases

Perceived Product Size,”Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (2), 396–413.

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Hagtvedt, Henrik, and Vanessa M. Patrick (2008), “Art Infusion: The In-

ﬂuence of Visual Art on the Perception and Evaluation of Consumer

Products,”Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (3), 379–89.

Hall, Tim, and Iain Robertson (2001), “Public Art and Urban Regeneration:

Advocacy, Claims and Critical Debates,”Landscape Research, 26 (1), 5–

26.

Hara, Kenya (2011), Designing Design, Baden, Switzerland: Muller.

Hart, Daniel, and M. Kyle Matsuba (2007), “The Development of Pride and

Moral Life,”in The Self-Conscious Emotions: Theory and Research, ed.

Jessica L. Tracy, Richard W. Robins, and June Price Tangney, New York:

Guilford, 114–33.

Hays, R. Allen, ed. (2018), Neighborhood Change and Neighborhood Ac-

tion: The Struggle to Create Neighborhoods that Serve Human Needs, Lon-

don: Lexington.

Hogg, Michael A. (2006), “Social Identity Theory,”in Contemporary Social

Psychological Theories, ed. Peter James Burke, Stanford, CA: Stanford

University Press, 111–36.

Huang, Rong, Darren Dahl, Shenyu Li, and Qiong Zhou (2019), “The Ef-

fect of Packaging Perceptual Cues on Consumer Disposal of Partially

Consumed Products,”Journal of the Association for Consumer Research,

4 (4), in this issue.

Inman, J. Jeffrey, Margaret C. Campbell, Amna Kirmani, and Linda L.

Price (2018), “Our Vision for the Journal of Consumer Research:

It’s All about the Consumer,”Journal of Consumer Research,44(5),955–

59.

Jammeh, Sheikh (2017), “New Overture Exhibits Put Faces on the Issue of

Mass Incarceration,”Capital Times, June 17, https://madison.com/ct

/entertainment/arts-and-theatre/new-overture-exhibits-put-faces-on

-the-issue-of-mass/article_da571cd8-7f4a-5863-9a73-1dc70a883518

.html.

Jones, Bernie (1988), “The Community Artist as Community Develop-

ment Catalyst: An Evaluation of a Pilot Project,”Community Develop-

ment, 19 (1), 37–50.

Jussila, Iiro, Anssi Tarkiainen, Marko Sarstedt, and Joseph F. Hair (2015),

“Individual Psychological Ownership: Concepts, Evidence, and Implica-

tions for Research in Marketing,”Journal of Marketing Theory and Prac-

tice, 23 (2), 121–39.

Kapferer, Jean-Noel (2012), The New Strategic Brand Management: Ad-

vanced Insights and Strategic Thinking, London: Kogan.

Keizer, Kees, Siegwart Lindenberg, and Linda Steg (2008), “The Spreading

of Disorder,”Science, 322 (5908), 1, 681–85.

Keller, Kevin Lane, M. G. Parameswaran, and Isaac Jacob (2011), Strategic

Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity,

London: Pearson Education.

Kester, Grant H. (2011), The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative

Art in a Global Context, London: Duke University Press.

Klinenberg, Eric (2018), Palaces for the People: How Social Infrastructure

Can Help Fight Inequality, Polarization, and the Decline of Civic Life,

New York: Crown.

Koo, Minkyung, Hyewon Oh, and Vanessa M. Patrick (2019), “From Oldie

to Goldie: Humanizing Old Produce Enhances its Appeal,”Journal of

the Association for Consumer Research, 4 (4), in this issue.

Krik, Colleen, Joann Peck, and Scott Swain (2018), “Property Lines in the

Minds: Consumers’Psychological Ownership and their Territorial Re-

sponses,”Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (1), 148–68.

Land, Kenneth C., and Alex C. Michalos (2018), “Fifty Years after the So-

cial Indicators Movement: Has the Promise Been Fulﬁlled?”Social In-

dicators Research, 135 (3), 835–68.

Laneri, Raquel (2009), “Why We Love—And Need—Public Art,”Forbes,

May 5, https://www.forbes.com/2009/05/05/state-of-the-city-opinions

-george-rickey-public-art.html#17f22a2842be.

Lowe, Seana S. (2000), “Creating Community: Art for Community Devel-

opment,”Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 29 (3), 357–86.

——— (2001), “The Art of Community Transformation,”Education and

Urban Society, 33 (4), 457–71.

Lyubomirsky, Sonja (2008), The How of Happiness: A New Approach to Get-

ting the Life You Want, New York: Penguin.

MacQueen, Kathleen M., Eleanor McLellan, David S. Metzger, Susan

Kegeles, Ronald P. Strauss, Roseanne Scotti, Lynn Blanchard, and Rob-

ert T. Trotter II (2001), “What Is Community? An Evidence-Based Def-

inition for Participatory Public Health,”American Journal of Public

Health, 91 (12), 1929–38.

Madzharov, Adriana V., and Lauren G. Block (2010), “Effects of Product

Unit Image on Consumption of Snack Foods,”Journal of Consumer Psy-

chology, 20 (4), 398–409.

Markusen, Ann, and Anne Gadwa (2010), Creative Placemaking, Washing-

ton, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.

McClelland, David C. (1971), Assessing Human Motivation, New York: Gen-

eral Learning Press.

McMillan, David W., and David M. Chavis (1986), “Sense of Community:

ADeﬁnition and Theory,”Journal of Community Psychology, 14 (1), 6–

23.

Mendez, Edgar (2016), “Mural Honors UMOS Legacy, Connects Past and

Current Movements for Equal Rights,”On Milwaukee, September 5,

https://onmilwaukee.com/raisemke/articles/nnsumosmural.html.

Mitchell, Richard, and Frank Popham (2008), “Effect of Exposure to Nat-

ural Environment on Health Inequalities: An Observational Population

Study,”Lancet, 372 (9650), 1655–60.

Mourey, James A., and Ryan S. Elder (2019), “How Incorporating Dyna-

mism in Advertising Affects Evaluations,”Journal of the Association for

Consumer Research, 4 (4), in this issue.

Muniz, Albert M., Jr., and Thomas C. O’Guinn (2001), “Brand Commu-

nity,”Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (4), 412–32.

National Endowment for the Arts (2012), “How Art Works,”https://www

.arts.gov/sites/default/ﬁles/How-Art-Works_0.pdf.

Neel, Lisa, and Audrey M. Dentith (2004), “Art and the Politics of State

Control: Finding Spaces That Nurture Voice among Homeless Women,”

Journal of the Motherhood Initiative for Research and Community Involve-

ment, 6 (1), 157–67.

Nicolás, Juan Carlos Ortiz, and Thomas Harrison (2018), “Understanding

the Context of Design for Social Innovations: A Methodological Case

Study,”in Handbook of Research on Ergonomics and Product Design,

IGI Global, 301–24.

Nielsen, Jesper H., and Jennifer Edson Escalas (2010), “Easier Is Not Al-

ways Better: The Moderating Role of Processing Type on Preference

Fluency,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (3), 295–305.

Norton, Michael I., Daniel Mochon, and Dan Ariely (2012), “The IKEA

Effect: When Labor Leads to Love,”Journal of Consumer Psychology,

22 (3), 453–60.

Nowak, Jeremy (2007), “Creativity and Neighborhood Development:

Strategies for Community Investment,”https://www.reinvestment

.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Creativity_and_Neighborhood

_Development_Strategies_for_Community-Investment-Report_2008

.pdf.

Obst, Patricia, Sandra G. Smith, and Lucy Zinkiewicz (2002), “An Explora-

tion of Sense of Community, Part 3: Dimensions and Predictors of

000 Collaborative Art Bublitz et al.

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Psychological Sense of Community in Geographical Communities,”

Journal of Community Psychology, 30 (1), 119–33.

O’Hern, Matthew S., and Aric Rindﬂeisch (2010), “Customer Cocreation,”

in Review of Marketing Research, ed. N. K. Malhotra, Bingley: Emerald

Group Publishing Limited, 84–106.

Oveis, Christopher, E. J. Horberg, and Dacher Keltner (2010), “Compas-

sion, Pride, and Social Intuitions of Self-Other Similarity,”Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (4), 618–30.

Ozanne, Julie L. Brennan Davis, Jeff B. Murray, Sonya Grier, Ahmed

Benmecheddal, Hilary Downey, Akon E. Ekpo, Marion Garnier, Joel

Hietanen, Marine Le Gall-Ely, Anastasia Seregina, Kevin D. Thomas,

and Ekant Veer (2017), “Assessing the Societal Impact of Research:

The Relational Engagement Approach,”Journal of Public Policy and

Marketing, 36 (1), 1–14.

Patrick, Vanessa M. (2016), “Everyday Consumer Aesthetics,”Current

Opinion in Psychology, 10, 60–64.

Patrick, Vanessa M., Yashar Ateﬁ, and Henrik Hagtvedt (2017), “The Al-

lure of the Hidden: How Product Unveiling Confers Value,”Interna-

tional Journal of Research in Marketing, 34 (2), 430–41.

Patrick, Vanessa M., and Henrik Hagtvedt (2011), “Aesthetic Incongruity

Resolution,”Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (2), 393–402.

Pedro, Kelly (2018), “As Public Art Goes Up, So Do Nearby Home Prices,”

https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/public-art-holds-key-unlocking

-real-estate-growth/.

Pierce, Jon L., Tatiana Kostova, and Kurt T. Dirks (2003), “The State of

Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Re-

search,”Review of General Psychology, 7 (1), 84–107.

Puddifoot, John E. (1995), “Dimensions of Community Identity,”Journal

of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 5 (5), 357–70.

Ramanathan, Suresh, and Ann L. McGill (2007), “Consuming with Others:

Social Inﬂuences on Moment-to-Moment and Retrospective Evalua-

tions of an Experience,”Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (4), 506–24.

Ravenswood, Katherine (2011), “Eisenhardt’s Impact on Theory in Case

Study Research,”Journal of Business Research, 64 (7), 680–86.

Saito, Yuriko (2007),Everyday Aesthetics, New York: Oxford University Press.

——— (2015), “Aesthetics of the Everyday,”in Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta, Stanford, CA: Metaphysics Research

Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information.

Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N., and Pieter Jan Stappers (2008), “Cocreation and

the New Landscapes of Design,”Co-design, 4 (1), 5–18.

Schaper, Eva (1968), “Aristotle’s Catharsis and Aesthetic Pleasure,”Philo-

sophical Quarterly, 18 (71), 131–43.

Schmitt, Bernd, and Alex Simonson (1997), Marketing Aesthetics, New

York: Free Press.

Schnurr, Benedikt (2019), “Too Cute to Be Healthy: How Cute Packaging

Designs Affect Product Tastiness and Healthiness,”Journal of the As-

sociation for Consumer Research, 4 (4), in this issue.

Schwartz, Norman B. (1981), “Anthropological Views of Community and

Community Development,”Human Organization, 40 (4), 313–22.

Sevilla, Julio, and Barbara E. Kahn (2014), “The Completeness Heuristic:

Product Shape Completeness Inﬂuences Size Perceptions, Preference,

and Consumption,”Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (1), 57–68.

Sharp, Joanne, Venda Pollock, and Ronan Paddison (2005), “Just Art

for a Just City: Public Art and Social Inclusion in Urban Regeneration,”

Urban Studies,42(5–6), 1001–23.

Slatcher, Richard B., and James W. Pennebaker (2006), “How Do I Love

Thee? Let Me Count the Words: The Social Effects of Expressive Writ-

ing,”Psychological Science, 17 (8), 660–64.

Speer, Paul W., and Joseph Hughey (1995), “Community Organizing: An

Ecological Route to Empowerment and Power,”American Journal of

Community Psychology, 23 (5), 729–48.

Stern, Mark J., and Susan C. Seifert (2008), “From Creative Economy to

Creative Society,”Culture and Community Revitalization: A Collaboration,

https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article51006&context

5siap_revitalization.

——— (2017), “The Social Wellbeing of New York City’s Neighborhoods:

The Contribution of Culture and the Arts,”Culture and Social Wellbe-

ing in New York City, https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi

?article51001&context5siap_culture_nyc.

Sundar, Aparna, and James J. Kellaris (2017), “How Logo Colors Inﬂuence

Shoppers’Judgments of Retailer Ethicality: The Mediating Role of Per-

ceived Eco-Friendliness,”Journal of Business Ethics, 146 (3), 685–701.

Sundar, Aparna, and Theodore J. Noseworthy (2014), “Place the Logo

High or Low? Using Conceptual Metaphors of Power in Packaging De-

sign,”Journal of Marketing, 78 (5), 138–51.

Tajfel, Henri, and John C. Turner (1979), “An Integrative Theory of Inter-

group Conﬂict,”in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, ed. Wil-

liam G. Austin and Stephen Worchel, Paciﬁc Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole

Publishing Company, 33–47.

Taunton, Martha (1982), “Aesthetic Responses of Young Children to the

Visual Arts: A Review of the Literature,”Journal of Aesthetic Education,

16 (3), 93–109.

Tebes, Jacob Kraemer, Samantha L. Matlin, Bronwyn Hunter, Azure B. Thomp-

son, Dana M. Prince, and Nathaniel Mohatt (2015), Porch Light Program,

Final Evaluation Report, New Haven, CT: Yale School of Medicine, 1–36.

Thaler, Richard H., and Cass R. Sunstein (2008), Nudge: Improving Deci-

sions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness, London: Penguin

Thompson, Nato (2012), “Socially Engaged Art Is a Mess Worth Making,”

Journal of the American Institute of Architects, 13 August, https://www

.architectmagazine.com/design/culture/socially-engaged-art-is-a-mess

-worth-making_o.

Tisdall, Caroline (1974), Art into Society, Society into Art, London: ICA.

Townsend, Claudia (2017), “The Price of Beauty: Differential Effects

of Design Elements with and without Cost Implications in Nonproﬁt

Donor Solicitations,”Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (4), 794–815.

Townsend, Claudia, and Sanjay Sood (2012), “Self-Afﬁrmation through

the Choice of Highly Aesthetic Products,”Journal of Consumer Research,

39 (2), 415–28.

Van Kleef, Gerben A., and Agneta H. Fischer (2016), “Emotional Collec-

tives: How Groups Shape Emotions and Emotions Shape Groups,”Cog-

nition and Emotion, 30 (1), 3–19.

Van Laer, Tom, Ko D. Ruyter, Luca M. Visionti, and Martin Wetzels

(2014), “The Extended Transportation-Imagery Model: A Meta-Analysis

of the Antecedents and Consequences of Consumers’Narrative Trans-

portation,”Journal of Consumer Research,40(5),797–817.

Veryzer, Robert W., Jr., and J. Wesley Hutchinson (1998), “The Inﬂuence

of Unity and Prototypicality on Aesthetic Responses to New Product

Designs,”Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 374–94.

Wang, Tingting, Anirban Mukhopadhyay, and Vanessa M. Patrick (2017),

“Getting Consumers to Recycle NOW! When and Why Cuteness Ap-

peals Inﬂuence Prosocial and Sustainable Behavior,”Journal of Public

Policy and Marketing, 36 (2), 269–83.

Winterich, Karen Page, Rebecca Walker Reczek, and Julie R. Irwin (2017),

“Keeping the Memory but Not the Possession: Memory Preservation

Mitigates Identity Loss from Product Disposition,”Journal of Market-

ing, 81 (5), 104–20.

Volume 4 Number 4 2019 000

This content downloaded from 158.046.215.200 on September 16, 2019 12:06:59 PM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Assessing the impact of the S+T+ARTS framework. Main evidence and reflections to inform the community and policymakers for supporting artistic research

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Artistic research holds significant potential by addressing contemporary challenges at societal, environmental, and technological levels. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of the impact of artistic research by assessing a framework funded since 2016 by the European Commission called Science, Technology and Arts (=S+T+ARTS). The discussion assesses the impact of the S+T+ ARTS framework by focusing on its ability to bridge science, technology, and artistic practice, reaching significant impacts at different levels. Through a comprehensive evaluation methodology, the study examines various dimensions of impact, including social, economic, technological, political, and environmental aspects. Findings suggest a pronounced social impact, evidenced by enhanced networking, interdisciplinary collaboration, and engagement with vulnerable groups. While economic impacts are less tangible, the framework underscores the need for innovative indicators to capture the economic value of artistic research accurately. Overall, the study advocates for (i) continued support and exploration of artistic research frameworks to address contemporary societal challenges effectively and (ii) the development of ad-hoc methodologies to map the assessment of such initiatives.

Pendidikan Seni melalui Inovasi Desain, Kewirausahaan, dan Pemasaran Produk Kerajinan Bambu di Kalurahan Bawuran

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2024

Tujuan penelitian dari program diseminasi inovasi seni untuk kelompok kerajinan bambu di Kalurahan Bawuran, Pleret, Bantul, Yogyakarta adalah menciptakan desain baru dan pemasaran produk bambu di era digital untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan ekonomi masyarakat melalui pendidikan seni dan pelatihan teknis. Produk bambu di Kalurahan Bawuran merupakan warisan keterampilan yang diwariskan secara turun-temurun dari nenek moyang. Bahan baku bambu diperoleh dari wilayah setempat, tetapi seringkali kualitas bambu kurang baik, desain monoton dan pemasaran produk yang masih menjadi masalah bagi para perajin. Perajin belum memiliki sistem produksi yang efisien untuk menghasilkan produk dengan kualitas dan kapasitas pemasaran optimal. Urgensi penelitian ini untuk meningkatkan kualitas desain terbarukan dengan teknologi mesin yang lebih baik, sehingga hasil produk meubel bambu mampu menembus pasar global. Jumlah pengrajin yang dilibatkan sebanyak 30 orang terpilih dibekali dengan manjamen usaha, kewirausahaan, dan pemasaran digital. Penelitian kualitatif ini menggunakan metode estetika dengan pendekatan practice based research yang dilakukan dengan tahapan literature research, study empiric, visual research, and practice. Estetika kreasi baru kerajinan bambu memiliki dampak pada pelestarian kreasi artistik lokal berkelanjutan yang mampu memenuhi kebutuhan di era global. Penelitian ini menghasilkan 3 set produk fungsional dan 1 gazebo desain baru berdampak pada peningkatan ekonomi dengan metode manajemen usaha (kewirausahaan dan pemasaran modern) yang diharapkan mampu menjadi sarana edukasi berwawasan lingkungan dan regenerasi pengrajin kreatif sebagai entitas yang harus terus dijaga, dilestarikan, serta dikembangkan sesuai tuntutan zaman.

Students’ Acceptability of AI Chatbot Utilization: Implications to Counseling Service Implementation

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2024

There is a growing interest in using Artificial Intelligence (AI) led counseling chatbots. In its early stage, there have been documented concerns about data privacy, providing inaccurate and culturally insensitive information, and the inability to create and sustain human-like connections. Current advancements focus more on enhanced features such as accessibility and anonymity of use to address recurring issues regarding counseling services availability, affordability, and stigma in seeking help. All these influenced the acceptability of use. This study used a quantitative approach specifically the descriptive comparative research design. An online survey was conducted on Grade 12 Senior High School and college students (N=2,280) to explore and verify levels of acceptability and whether or not the demographic variables can influence these levels. Results reveal that sex, year level, awareness, and previous experience with AI technology influenced these levels. Implications for the implementation of counseling services were discussed thoroughly for all stakeholders to ensure the safety and benefits of all users along with the ethical use of AI Counseling Chatbot and other emerging related technologies.

ID Model: Classification and Criteria of an Impressive Drawing in Art and Design Perspectives for Higher Education

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2024

Drawing is widely recognised as a fundamental skill in higher education, particularly in art and design fields, where it plays a pivotal role in creative expression and technical development. However, assessing impressive drawings presents challenges due to the subjective nature of creativity and the evolving standards of art education. This study aims to develop a conceptual model that offers a structured approach for educators and students to evaluate impressive drawings effectively. Using qualitative research methods and inductive content analysis of literature from 2019 to 2024, the study identifies key components of impressive drawing, such as technical proficiency, creativity, conceptual depth, and visual communication. The findings highlight a shift in teaching practices, driven by historical and contemporary perspectives, and explore the integration of digital tools with traditional techniques in art and design education. The study acknowledges the inherent subjectivity in drawing assessments and recommends developing a more objective and consistent evaluation system that still preserves creative expression. The proposed ID model balances technical skill with creativity, providing a framework for improving assessment practices and guiding students toward meeting the expectations of impressive drawings. This model adapts to the evolving needs of the field, contributing to ongoing discourse in art and design education.

Exploring the Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Art in Contemporary Exhibitions on Social Media Platforms: Insights from Practitioners

Article

Full-text available

Jun 2024

This research investigates the multifaceted landscape of electronic art exhibitions on social media platforms in Pakistan, focusing on technological challenges, social media utilization, and global accessibility concerns. Drawing on the Media Aesthetic Theory, Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding model, and Actor-Network this study aims to uncover the challenges and opportunities facing digital art in contemporary social media contexts. Using a semi-structured interview approach, adopted by Pitts (2020) fifteen emerging visual artists were interviewed. The interviews focused on understanding the artists’ perspectives on digital exhibitions, exploring technological innovations, artistic anatomy, and ethical considerations. The findings highlight a synthesis of technological innovations and the complexities of this digital terrain within an inclusive and ethically responsible art ecosystem. Prospects, accounting of respondents' perspectives, include enhanced content moderation, curatorial flexibility, and global reach. Challenges encompass algorithmic bias, lack of training, and financial constraints while ethical quandaries representing respondents' insights pertain to cultural sensitivity, environmental responsibility, and equitable collaboration. The study underlines the complexities of the digital landscape, advocating for an integrative and ethically responsible art ecosystem. Addressing these complexities, digital art practitioners stress the importance of transparency, community engagement, and promotion of innovation in the Pakistani art scene. These insights stress the multifaceted landscape of digital art and social media, with careful maneuvering of ethical and impactful artistic expressions.

Ode to Barelas: Supporting Youth Agency Cultural Expression, and Community Engagement Through an Interactive Mural

Conference Paper

Full-text available

Jul 2024

Interactive Murals: New Opportunities for Collaborative STEAM Learning

Conference Paper

Full-text available

May 2024

Plan(T)ing for the future: using socially engaged climate art to mobilize change agents

Article

Feb 2025
Clim Dev

Us and them: We draw together: Exploring inclusivity in a community mural project

Article

Dec 2024

The Community Mural Project in St Pauls, Cheltenham, United Kingdom reflects on the dynamics of ‘us and them’ within a community mural initiative. It seeks to develop inclusive social spaces through participatory arts-based research using drawing. The article also addresses the complexities of power and influence in mural arts. Furthermore, it examines the interconnectedness of community and the role of drawing and illustration methods in understanding and addressing inclusivity and exclusivity. The project takes place in St Pauls, a mixed-class area of Cheltenham known for its annual festivals, where observations and reflections from the interdisciplinary team contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the project’s context. The project included workshops, community consultations and the creation of twelve mini-murals, each a product of diverse images. These phases aimed to break down barriers and facilitate collaboration among community members, addressing power differentials and the complexities of community dynamics.

EVOLUTION OF PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS: A HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY ANALYSIS

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2024

This research paper delves into the rich history and transformative journey of performing arts centres from ancient times to the present day and showcases a study of modern design of performing arts centre. Beginning with open-air amphitheaters and ritualistic performances in ancient civilizations, the study traces the development of these centres through medieval courtly settings, the Renaissance period's architectural innovations, and the emergence of dedicated opera houses and concert halls in the 19th century. Examining the 20th-century shift towards modernist architecture and multipurpose venues, the research highlights the profound impact of technology on the performing arts experience. From gas lighting and improved rigging systems in the 19th century to the integration of cutting-edge audio-visual technologies in the 21st century, the paper explores how these advancements have shaped the design and functionality of performance spaces. Furthermore, the study addresses the societal shifts reflected in the design of performing arts centres, including the emphasis on inclusivity and accessibility in the 21st century. It investigates the contemporary trends of sustainability, flexibility, and the integration of virtual platforms, showcasing how performing arts centres have evolved into dynamic hubs for cultural expression, community engagement, and global connectivity. Through an interdisciplinary lens that considers architectural, technological, and socio-cultural dimensions, this research paper provides a comprehensive overview of the history and present-day transformation of performing arts centres. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the dynamic interplay between architecture, technology, and societal values in shaping the landscape of performing arts venues.

The Effect of Packaging Perceptual Cues on Consumer Disposal Behavior of Partially Consumed Products

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2019

From Oldie to Goldie: Humanizing Old Produce Enhances Its Appeal

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2019

Worldwide food waste amounts to approximately 1.3 billion tons every year. The desire for perfection (fresh and unblemished) in produce has been identified as one of the key reasons underlying this immense waste. This article identifies the need to shape consumer’s aesthetic preference for perfect produce to increase the acceptance of old and imperfect produce. We suggest that when old produce is humanized, it is evaluated more favorably, since it leads consumers to evaluate the old produce with a more compassionate lens. Four experiments show that (1) humanizing old produce enhances evaluation and purchase intent, and (2) consumer lay beliefs about human aging (an “old is gold” vs. a “young is good” lay theory) can influence the effectiveness of humanizing old produce to enhance its appeal. The current work offers practical managerial implications for retailers and marketers about the transformative potential of aesthetics in helping reduce food waste.

Understanding the Context of Design for Social Innovations: A Methodological Case Study

Chapter

Full-text available

Mar 2018

Juan Carlos Ortiz Nicolás

The chapter describes the applicability of designers to the space of finding solutions to social issues through the generation of social innovations. Based on a literature review, it was evident that design requires new methods to apply to the resolution of social issues, and as such, this chapter presents a new method that supports designers in the development of solutions within the design for social innovation (DfSI) framework. The proposed method consists of six stages: (1) identifying the challenge, (2) analyzing the system in which the challenge co-exists, (3) understanding the system using user-centered design techniques, (4) defining the design brief, (5) generating proposals, and (6) evaluating and concluding. The chapter also introduces a design case study that describes in detail the implementation of the design method. The results indicated that the method supports designers to structure their process when aiming to design for social innovation and in particular to define the potential solution, which is reflected in a design brief.

Property Lines in the Mind: Consumers' Psychological Ownership and Their Territorial Responses

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2017
J CONSUM RES

Psychological ownership, or the feeling that something is mine, has garnered growing attention in marketing. While previous works focuses on the positive aspects of psychological ownership, this research draws attention to the darker side of psychological ownership, territorial behavior. Results of five experimental studies demonstrate that when consumers feel psychological ownership of a target, they are prone to perceptions of infringement and subsequent territorial responses when they infer that another individual feels ownership of the same target. Potential infringers are held less accountable when they acknowledge ownership prior to engaging in otherwise threatening behaviors, and when they could not be expected to know that a target is owned, as it was not clearly marked. In addition, narcissists are subject to a psychological ownership metaperception bias, and are thus more apt than low narcissists to perceive infringement. A multitude of territorial responses are documented for both tangible (coffee, sweater, chair, pizza) and intangible (a design) targets of ownership. Further, consumers infer the psychological ownership of others from signals of the antecedents of psychological ownership: control, investment of self, and intimate knowledge. Theoretical implications for territoriality and psychological ownership are discussed, along with managerial implications and areas for future research.

The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context

Book

Sep 2011

Grant Kester

Dynamic by Design: How Incorporating Dynamism in Advertising Affects Evaluations

Article

Sep 2019

Too Cute to Be Healthy: How Cute Packaging Designs Affect Judgments of Product Tastiness and Healthiness

Article

Jul 2019

Benedikt Schnurr

Buying Beauty for the Long Run: (Mis)predicting Liking of Product Aesthetics

Article

Aug 2018

How well can consumers predict future liking of different product designs? The present research identifies a systematic error in consumers' preferences and predicted liking for product aesthetics. Consumers predict a faster decrease in liking for high- (vs. low-) arousal-potential product designs (i.e., intense colors or intense patterns) over repeat exposure because high-arousal-potential designs are expected to become increasingly irritating. These predictions are misguided, however, falsely leading consumers to avoid products with high-arousal-potential designs when making a decision for extended product use. Seven studies test this conceptualization in the laboratory and in the field. The first five studies examine predicted liking for product designs of varying arousal potential levels over repeat exposure and how these intuitions influence product design preferences for long- (versus short-) term use. The last two studies then investigate the accuracy of these intuitions by directly comparing predicted versus experienced liking for product designs of varying arousal potential levels over repeat exposure. The studies reveal a systematic error in prediction whereby consumers overestimate satiation from high-arousal-potential product designs. Managerial and theoretical applications are also discussed. © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. All rights reserved.

Our Vision for the Journal of Consumer Research: It’s All about the Consumer

Article

Feb 2018

The Price of Beauty: Differential Effects of Design Elements with and without Cost Implications in Nonprofit Donor Solicitations

Article

Dec 2017

Claudia Townsend

Research on the optimization of donation solicitations has focused on language and content rather than appearance. The present work considers how a solicitation's appearance influences donor response. The results indicate that potential donors make inferences about the soliciting organization based on the aesthetics of the solicitation materials. In general, highly aesthetic elements increase perceptions of organizational professionalism, which consequently leads to greater donations. However, aesthetic enhancement can backfire; when high levels of aesthetics with cost implications (e.g., embossed cardstock, gold ink) are combined with high levels of aesthetics without cost implications (e.g., attractive background, appealing font), perceptions of organizational wastefulness discourage donations. Thus, the most effective solicitation is not the most beautiful but rather one offering high levels of aesthetics without cost implications and low levels of aesthetics with cost implications. The studies demonstrate these effects in the field and in the lab and also identify moderators of the negative effect of aesthetics with cost implications on donations.

Collaborative Art: A Transformational Force within Communities

Figures

Recommended publications

Collaborative Art: A Transformational Force within Communities

Introduction to Special Issue: Uncovering the Potential of Aesthetics and Design to Transform Everyd...

“Curating” the JCP special issue on aesthetics in consumer psychology: An introduction to the aesthe...

From Oldie to Goldie: Humanizing Old Produce Enhances Its Appeal

Everyday consumer aesthetics