2016 Vol. 36 No. 2 101-106 PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPLORATION 1 2 1 1. 100084 2. 100084 B8409 A 1003-5184 2016 02-0101 - 06 1 aesthetics Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten 2 1735 /1998 Baumgarten Fechner 1896 Kant 1790 /2002 Daniel Berlyne 1971a 1974 sensual pleasure intellectual pleasure Berlyne beauty Armstrong & Detweiler - Bedell Reber Schwarz & Winkielman 2004 2008 Leder Belke Oeberst & Augustin 2004
102 2016 Berlyne 1971 wanting liking reward aversion Berlyne Berlyne Chatterjee 2014 Berlyne Bargh 2013 Reber Schwarz Winkleman Prototypicality Mod- 2004 el Martindale Moore & Borkum 1990 Reber Wurtz & Zimmermann 2004 Russell 2003 Leder Carbon & Ripsas 2006 3 Silvia & Barona 2009 fluency Reber et al. 2004 3. 1 Reber Winkielman & Schwarz 1998 Alter & Oppenheimer 2009 processing fluency perceptual fluency retrieval fluency Carbon 2013 Wagner Menninghaus Hanich & Muth & Jacob- conceptual fluency Reber Wurtz & Zimmermann 2004 i. e. Smith & Smith 2006 Oppenheimer & Frank 2008 Belke Leder Strobach & Carbon 2010 Silvia 2007 pleasing interesting sen 2014
36 2 103 derstanding Swami 2013 Armstrong & Det- weiler - Bedell 2008 3. 2 Flexas Rossello Christensen Nadal La Rosa & Munar 2013 Ticini Rachman Pelletier & Dubal 2014 balance proportion symmetry informational content complexity 3. 3 contrast clarity Chatterjee Widick Sternschein Smith & Bromberger 2010 Reber Winkielman & Schwarz 1998 Sanchez 2011 Song Schwarz 2008 Cutting 2003 2007 Bourdieu 2013 Bullot Reber truth basic exposure design stance artistic un- Leder 2004
104 2016 4 Friedenberg 2012 hedonically - marked Belke Leder Strobach & Carbon 2010 affect - as - information framework Isbell Lair & Rovenpor 2013 Bullot Reber 2013 Gerger Leder & Kremer 2014 Van den Bos 2003 mere exposure Eastwood Frischen Fenske &
36 2 105 Smilek 2012 Bullot N. J. & Reber R. 2013. The artful mind meets art history Toward a psycho - historical framework for the science of art appreciation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 2 123-137. Chatterjee A. Widick P. Sternschein R. Smith W. B. & Bromberger B. 2010. The assessment of art attributes. Empirical Studies of the Arts 28 2 207-222. Francesca Bacci Chatterjee A. 2014. The Aesthetic Brain. New York Oxford U- niversity Press. Cutting J. E. 2007. Mere exposure reproduction and the impressionist canon. Durham NC Duke University Press. Bacci & Melcher 2011 Eastwood J. D. Frischen A. Fenske M. J. & Smilek D. 2012. The unengaged mind defining boredom in terms of attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 5 482-495. Fenske J. E. 2003. Gustave Caillebotte French impressionism and mere exposure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10 2 319-343. Flexas A. Rosselló J. Christensen J. F. Nadal M. La Rosa A. O. & Munar E. 2013. Affective priming using facial expressions modulates liking for abstract art. PloS One 8 Kant 1790 / 11 e80154. 2002 Friedenberg J. 2012. Aesthetic judgment of triangular shape Compactness and not the golden ratio determines perceived attractiveness. i - Perception 3 3 163. Gerger G. Leder H. & Kremer A. 2014. Context effects on emotional and aesthetic evaluations of artworks and IAPS pictures. Acta Psychologica 151 174-183. Isbell L. M. Lair E. C. & Rovenpor D. R. 2013. Affect - as - Information about Processing Styles A Cognitive Malleability Approach. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 7. 2002... 2 93-114. Alter A. L. & Oppenheimer D. M. 2009. Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review 13 219-235. Armstrong T. & Detweiler - Bedell B. 2008. Beauty as an e- motion The exhilarating prospect of mastering a challenging world. Review of General Psychology 12 4 305-329. Bacci F. & Melcher D. 2011. Art and the senses Vol. 52. Oxford University Press. Bargh J. A. 2013. Social psychology and the unconscious The automaticity of higher mental processes. Psychology Press. Baumgarten A. G. 1735 /1954. Reflections on poetry. Berkeley University of California Press. Belke B. Leder H. Strobach T. & Carbon C. C. 2010. Cognitive fluency High - level processing dynamics in art appreciation. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 4 4 214-222. Bourdieu P. 2013. Distinction A social critique of the judgement of taste. New York Routledge. Leder H. Belke B. Oeberst A. & Augustin D. 2004. A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology 95 4 489-508. Leder H. Carbon C. C. & Ripsas A. L. 2006. Entitling art Influence of title information on understanding and appreciation of paintings. Acta Psychologica 121 2 176-198. Martindale C. Moore K. & Borkum J. 1990. Aesthetic preference Anomalous findings for Berlyne s psychobiological theory. The American Journal of Psychology 53-80. Muth C. & Carbon C. C. 2013. The Aesthetic Aha On the pleasure of having insights into Gestalt. Acta Psychologica 144 1 25-30. Oppenheimer D. M. & Frank M. C. 2008. A rose in any other font would not smell as sweet Effects of perceptual fluency on categorization. Cognition 106 3 1178-1194. Reber R. Schwarz N. & Winkielman P. 2004. Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure Is beauty in the perceiver s processing experience Personality and Social Psychology Re-
106 2016 view 8 4 364-382. Reber R. Winkielman P. & Schwarz N. 1998. Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science 9 1 45-48. Reber R. Wurtz P. & Zimmermann T. D. 2004. Exploring fringe consciousness The subjective experience of perceptual fluency and its objective bases. Consciousness and Cognition 13 1 47-60. Russell P. A. 2003. Effort after meaning and the hedonic value of paintings. British Journal of Psychology 94 1 99-110. Sanchez C. A. 2011. Working through the pain Working memory capacity and differences in processing and storage under physical pain. Memory 19 2 226-232. Silvia P. J. 2007. Knowledge - based assessment of expertise in the arts Exploring aesthetic fluency. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 1 4 247-249. Silvia P. J. & Barona C. M. 2009. Do people prefer curved objects Angularity expertise and aesthetic preference. Empirical Studies of the Arts 27 1 25-42. Smith L. F. & Smith J. K. 2006. The nature and growth of aesthetic fluency. In P. Locher C. Martindale L. Dorfman V. Petrov & D. Leontiev Eds. New Directions in Aesthetics Creativity and the Psychology of Art pp. 47-58. Amityville NY Baywood. Song H. & Schwarz N. 2008. Fluency and the detection of misleading questions Low processing fluency attenuates the Moses illusion. Social Cognition 26 6 791-799. Swami V. 2013. Context matters Investigating the impact of contextual information on aesthetic appreciation of paintings by Max Ernst and Pablo Picasso. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 7 3 285-295. Ticini L. F. Rachman L. Pelletier J. & Dubal S. 2014. Enhancing aesthetic appreciation by priming canvases with actions that match the artist s painting style. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8 391 1-6. Van den Bos K. 2003. On the subjective quality of social justice The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85 3 482-498. Wagner V. Menninghaus W. Hanich J. & Jacobsen T. 2014. Art schema effects on affective experience The case of disgusting images. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 8 2 120-129. Insights into Aesthetic Pleasure and Processing Fluency Chai Fangyuan 1 Yu Feng 2 Peng Kaiping 1 1. Department of Psychology Tsinghua University Beijing 100084 2. School of Economics and Management Tsinghua University Beijing 100084 Abstract It s been long since beauty and aesthetics draw academic attentions especially in psychological areas. General researches suggest that aesthetic preference is the result of joint action by objective traits and personal knowledge and experience. If the audiences have easy access to the information of certain artwork then he /she may experience positive emotional arousal and this positive emotion can then transfer into aesthetic pleasure. The kind of pleasure is instant and can be felt by the audience immediately if the processing is fluent. In other words he two are positively correlated always. In article we define what is aesthetic pleasure and processing fluency the relationship between aesthetic pleasure and positive emotions and explain the whole process how processing fluency can influence and transform into aesthetic pleasure. And we suggest for further supporting empirical evidences. Key words aesthetic psychology aesthetic pleasure processing fluency aesthetic criterion positive emotions