Arousal,positive and negative affect,and preference for Renaissance and 20th-century paintings

Treatments expected to raise the level of arousal and induce different degrees of positive and negative affect were paired on some trials with Renaissance or 20th-century paintings, whereas no paintings were shown on other trials. The design was within-subjects (24 females); the dependent measures were skin conductance (SC) and the preference for paintings. All treatments, including the paintings/no paintings factor, raised SC over the base-line, and the pattern was essentially additive. The perceived failure to attain control over aversive auditory stimulation (resulting in negative affect) raised SC to a higher level than did the unavoidable aversive stimulation (minimal affect) or monetary gains (positive affect). Paintings paired with affect (positiveor negative) were rated as more pleasing than were those paired with no affect. The Renaissance works were preferred to the 20th-century works when negative affect was induced, whereas the opposite was true in the case of positive affect. The collative-motivation model could not account for the fact that pleasingness of paintings was not related to SC by an inverted-U function. The contiguity model could not explain the considerable rated pleasingness of paintings paired with negative affect. In contrast, there was considerable support for a more comprehensive hypothesis (distraction/soothingness) based on attentional and affective considerations, and the differential cognitive labeling of fluctuations of arousal.This research was supported by Grant GS-42802 from the National Science Foundation to VJK. Some of the findings were presented at the 6th International Colloquium of Empirical Aesthetics, and the 21st International Congress of Psychology, both held during July 1976 in Paris, France.