Vague, impressive language used in descriptions (bullshit) is thought to make art seem more profound and valuable to the viewer. We studied the effect during art exhibitions in real-life gallery-goers who saw paintings of four artists, each with either simplified, neutral, or bullshitty description. We crafted a typical description of each painting, which we later manipulated in terms of language. A simplified description was modified to be concrete and simplistic, while a bullshitty one was very abstract and vague. After analyzing over 1500 ratings, we found the expressive language of descriptions had a negligible effect on the perceived quality and monetary value of art (R2 marginal ≤ 1%). We conclude that, at least for experienced gallery-goers, the description accompanying a painting has little influence, and the art speaks for itself.
AndersenM. M.KiversteinJ.MillerM.RoepstorffA. (2022). Play in predictive minds: A cognitive theory of play. Psychological Review, 130(2), 462–479. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000369
2.
AndersenM. M.SchjoedtU.PriceH.RosasF. E.ScrivnerC.ClasenM. (2020). Playing with fear: A field study in recreational horror. Psychological Science, 31(12), 1497–1510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620972116
3.
BeckJ.ForstmeierW. (2007). Superstition and belief as inevitable by-products of an adaptive learning strategy. Human Nature, 18(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02820845
4.
DardaK. M.ChatterjeeA. (2023). The impact of contextual information on aesthetic engagement of artworks. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 4273. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30768-9
5.
DissanayakeE. (1995). What is art for? (3. print). University of Washington Press.
6.
DonaldM. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition. Harvard University Press.
FeistG. J.BradyT. R. (2004). Openness to experience, non-conformity, and the preference for abstract art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.2190/Y7CA-TBY6-V7LR-76GK
FrankfurtH. G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton University Press.
11.
GallucciM. (2019). GAMLj: General analyses for linear models. [jamovi module]. Retrieved fromhttps://gamlj.github.io/
12.
GergerG.LederH. (2015). Titles change the esthetic appreciations of paintings. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00464
13.
HumphreyN. (1999). Cave art, autism, and the evolution of the human mind. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6–7), 116–143.
14.
KraussL.OttC.OpwisK.MeyerA.GaabJ. (2021). Impact of contextualizing information on aesthetic experience and psychophysiological responses to art in a museum: A naturalistic randomized controlled trial. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(3), 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000280
15.
LandauM. J.GreenbergJ.SolomonS.PyszczynskiT.MartensA. (2006). Windows into nothingness: Terror management, meaninglessness, and negative reactions to modern art. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(6), 879–892. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.879
16.
LederH.CarbonC.-C.RipsasA.-L. (2006). Entitling art: Influence of title information on understanding and appreciation of paintings. Acta Psychologica, 121(2), 176–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.005
17.
LederH.GergerG.BrieberD.SchwarzN. (2014). What makes an art expert? Emotion and evaluation in art appreciation. Cognition and Emotion, 28(6), 1137–1147. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.870132
18.
Lewis-WilliamsD. (2011). The mind in the cave: Consciousness and the origins of art. Thames & Hudson.
MariE.QuaglieriA.LausiG.BocciaM.PizzoA.BaldiM.BarchielliB.BurraiJ.PiccardiL.GianniniA. M. (2021). Fostering the aesthetic pleasure: The effect of verbal description on aesthetic appreciation of ambiguous and unambiguous artworks. Behavioral Sciences, 11(11), 144. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11110144
21.
MattsonM. P. (2014). Superior pattern processing is the essence of the evolved human brain. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8, 265. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00265
22.
MillisK. (2001). Making meaning brings pleasure: The influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. Emotion, 1(3), 320–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.320
PennycookG.CheyneJ. A.BarrN.KoehlerD. J.FugelsangJ. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(6), 549–563. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500006999
25.
PihkoE.VirtanenA.SaarinenV.-M.PannaschS.HirvenkariL.TossavainenT.HaapalaA.HariR. (2011). Experiencing art: The influence of expertise and painting abstraction level. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5, 10994. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00094
26.
PrattJ. W. (1978). Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica, 32(1/2), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913738
27.
RamachandranV. S.HirsteinW. (1999). The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6–7), 15–51.
28.
RussellP. A.MilneS. (1997). Meaningfulness and hedonic value of paintings: Effects of titles. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(1), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.2190/EHT3-HWVM-52CB-8QHJ
29.
ShermerM. (2011). The believing brain: From ghosts and gods to politics and conspiracies—How we construct beliefs and reinforce them as truths. Macmillan.
30.
SilviaP. J. (2013). Interested experts, confused novices: Art expertise and the knowledge emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 31(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.31.1.f
31.
SokalA. D. (1996). Transgressing the boundaries: Toward a transformative hermeneutics of quantum gravity. Social Text, 46/47, 217–252.
32.
SzubielskaM.ImbirK.SzymańskaA. (2021). The influence of the physical context and knowledge of artworks on the aesthetic experience of interactive installations. Current Psychology, 40(8), 3702–3715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00322-w
TurpinM. H.WalkerA. C.Kara-YakoubianM.GabertN. N.FugelsangJ. A.StolzJ. A. (2019). Bullshit makes the art grow profounder. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(6), 658–670. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3410674
35.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,5, 297–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122574
36.
Van HarreveldF.RutjensB. T.SchneiderI. K.NohlenH. U.KeskinisK. (2014). In doubt and disorderly: Ambivalence promotes compensatory perceptions of order. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(4), 1666–1676. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036099
37.
WhitsonJ. A.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Lacking control increases illusory pattern perception. Science, 322(5898), 115–117. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1159845
