1.
Shimamura, A.P., Palmer, S.E.: Aesthetic science: connecting minds, brains, and experience.
2.
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., Winkielman, P.: Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and social psychology review. 8, 364–382 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3.
3.
Zajonc, R.B.: Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of personality and social psychology. 9, 1–27 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848.
4.
Jacoby, L.L., Kelley, C., Brown, J., Jasechko, J.: Becoming famous overnight: Limits on the ability to avoid unconscious influences of the past. Journal of personality and social psychology. 56, 326–338 (1989).
5.
Semir Zeki: Art and the brain. Daedalus. 127, 71–103 (1998).
6.
Ramachandran, V.S., Hirstein, W.: The science of art: a neurological theory of aesthetic experience. Journal of consciousness studies. 6, 15–51 (1999).
7.
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., Augustin, D.: A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology. 95, 489–508 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811.
8.
Cinzia, D.D., Vittorio, G.: Neuroaesthetics: a review. Current opinion in neurobiology. 19, 682–687 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2009.09.001.
9.
Jacobsen, T.: The Fine Arts, Neurology, and Neuroscience - New Discoveries and Changing Landscapes. In: The Fine Arts, Neurology, and Neuroscience - New Discoveries and Changing Landscapes. pp. 159–168. Elsevier (2013).
10.
Zeki, S., Lamb, M.: The neurology of kinetic art. Brain. 117, 607–636 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/117.3.607.
11.
Goldstein, E.B.: Sensation and perception. Wadsworth-Thomson Learning, Australia (2002).
12.
Berlyne, D.E.: Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Hemisphere Publishing, Washington, D.C. (1974).
13.
Gombrich, E. H.: Art and illusion: a study in the psychology of pictorial representation. Phaidon, London (2002).
14.
Rolf Reber, Piotr Winkielman and Norbert Schwarz: Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological science. 9, 45–48 (1998).
15.
Bornstein, R.F.: Exposure and affect: overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological bulletin. 106, 265–289 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265.
16.
Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., Catty, S.: Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological science. 17, 799–806 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01785.x.
17.
Nadal, M., Capó, M.À., Rosselló, J., Munar, E., Cela-Conde, C.J.: Towards a framework for the study of the neural correlates of aesthetic preference. Spatial vision. 21, 379–396 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1163/156856808784532653.
18.
Rudolf Arnheim: On order, simplicity and entropy. Leonardo. 7, 139–141 (1974).
19.
Jacobsen, T., Hoefel, L.: Descriptive and evaluative judgement processes: Behavioral and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics. Cognitive, affective, & behavioral neuroscience. 3, (2003).
20.
Silvia, Paul J., Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, NC, US, p_silvia@uncg.edu: Emotional responses to art: From collation and arousal to cognition and emotion. Review of general psychology.
21.
R. Von Der Heydt, E. Peterhans and G. Baumgartner: Illusory Contours and Cortical Neuron Responses. Science. 224, 1260–1262 (1984).
22.
Colin Martindale, Kathleen Moore and Jonathan Borkum: Aesthetic Preference: Anomalous Findings for Berlyne’s Psychobiological Theory. The American Journal of Psychology. 103, 53–80 (1990).
23.
doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.005 - ledercarbonripsas2006.pdf, http://www.experimental-psychology.de/ccc/docs/pubs/ledercarbonripsas2006.pdf.
24.
AugustinLederHutzlerCarbon2008.pdf, http://www.experimental-psychology.org/ccc/docs/pubs/AugustinLederHutzlerCarbon2008.pdf.
25.
Augustin, M.D., Defranceschi, B., Fuchs, H.K., Carbon, C.-C., Hutzler, F.: The neural time course of art perception: An ERP study on the processing of style versus content in art. Neuropsychologia. 49, 2071–2081 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.03.038.
26.
Berlyne, D.E.: Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Perception & Psychophysics. 8, 279–286 (1970). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212593.
27.
Checkosky, S.F., Whitlock, D.: Effects of pattern goodness on recognition time in a memory search task. Journal of experimental psychology. 100, 341–348 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035692.
28.
Livingstone, M.S.: Is it warm? Is it real? Or just low spatial frequency? Science. 290,.
29.
Kawabata, H., Zeki, S.: Neural correlates of beauty. Journal of neurophysiology. 91, 1699–1705 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00696.2003.
30.
Neuroanatomical correlates of aesthetic preference for paintings. Neuroreport. (2004).
31.
Zeki, S., Stutters, J.: A brain-derived metric for preferred kinetic stimuli. Open biology. 2, 120001–120001 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsob.120001.
32.
Bar, M., Neta, M.: Humans prefer curved visual objects. Psychological science. 17, 645–648 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01759.x.
33.
Sammartino, J., Palmer, S.E.: Aesthetic issues in spatial composition: Effects of vertical position and perspective on framing single objects. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance. 38, 865–879 (2012).
34.
Palmer, S., Schloss, K.B., Sammartino, J.: Visual aesthetics and human preference. Annual review of psychology. (2013).
35.
Hurlbert, A.C., Ling, Y.: Biological components of sex differences in color preference. Current biology. 17, R623–R625 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.022.
36.
Schloss, K.B., Poggesi, R.M., Palmer, S.E.: Effects of university affiliation and "school spirit” on color preferences: Berkeley versus Stanford. Psychonomic bulletin & review. 18, 498–504 (2011). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0073-1.
37.
McManus, I.C.: The aesthetics of simple figures. British journal of psychology. 71, 505–524 (1980).
38.
McManus, I.C., Weatherby, P.: The golden section and the aesthetics of from and composition. Empirical studies of the arts. 15, 209–232 (1997).
39.
Palmer, S., Gardner, J., Wickens, T.: Aesthetic issues in spatial composition: effects of position and direction on framing single objects. Spatial vision. 21, 421–449 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1163/156856808784532662.
40.
Tucker, M., Ellis, R.: On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance. 24, 830–846 (1998).
41.
McManus, I.C.: Symmetry and asymmetry in aesthetics and the arts. European review. 157–180 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798705000736.
42.
Jakesch, M., Leder, H., Forster, M.: Image ambiguity and fluency. PLoS ONE. 8, (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074084.
43.
Kirk, U.: The neural basis of object-context relationships on aesthetic judgment. PLoS ONE. 3, (2008). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003754.
44.
McManus, I.C., Zhou, F.A., l’Anson, S., Waterfield, L., Stöver, K., Cook, R.: The psychometrics of photographic cropping: The influence of colour, meaning, and expertise. Perception. (2011). https://doi.org/10.1068/p6700.
45.
Vartanian, O., Navarrete, G., Chatterjee, A., Fich, L.B., Leder, H., Modrono, C., Nadal, M., Rostrup, N., Skov, M.: Impact of contour on aesthetic judgments and approach-avoidance decisions in architecture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 110, 10446–10453 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1301227110.
46.
Zeki, S., Ishizu, T.: The "Visual Shock” of Francis Bacon: an essay in neuroesthetics. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 7, (2013). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00850.
47.
Stefan Koelsch: Brain and music. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, West Sussex (2012).
48.
Koelsch, S.: Toward a neural basis of music perception – a review and updated model. Frontier in psychology. 2, (2011). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00110.
49.
Kornysheva, K., von Cramon, D.Y., Jacobsen, T., Schubotz, R.I.: Tuning-in to the beat: aesthetic appreciation of musical rhythms correlates with a premotor activity boost. Human brain mapping. NA-NA (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20844.
50.
Stevens, C.J.: Music perception and cognition: a review of recent cross-cultural research. Topics in cognitive science. 4, 653–667 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01215.x.
51.
Unjung Nam: Pitch distributions in Korean court music: evidence consistent with tonal hierarchies. Music perception: an interdisciplinary journal. 16, 243–247.
52.
Krumhansl, C.L., Shepard, R.N.: Quantification of the hierarchy of tonal functions within a diatonic context. Journal of experimental psychology: human perception and performance. 5, 579–594 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.5.4.579.
53.
Wacongne, C., Labyt, E., van Wassenhove, V., Bekinschtein, T., Naccache, L., Dehaene, S.: Evidence for a hierarchy of predictions and prediction errors in human cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 108, 20754–20759 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117807108.
54.
Besson, M., Faïta, F.: An event-related potential (ERP) study of musical expectancy: Comparison of musicians with nonmusicians. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance. 21, 1278–1296 (1995).
55.
Kuhn, G., Dienes, Z.: Implicit learning of nonlocal musical rules: Implicitly learning more than chunks. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, memory, and cognition. 31, 1417–1432 (2005).
56.
Orgs, G., Lange, K., Dombrowski, J.-H., Heil, M.: Conceptual priming for environmental sounds and words: an ERP study. Brain and cognition. 62, 267–272 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2006.05.003.
57.
Nozaradan, S., Peretz, I., Mouraux, A.: Selective Neuronal Entrainment to the Beat and Meter Embedded in a Musical Rhythm. Journal of Neuroscience. 32, 17572–17581 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3203-12.2012.
58.
Calvo-Merino, B., Urgesi, C., Orgs, G., Aglioti, S.M., Haggard, P.: Extrastriate body area underlies aesthetic evaluation of body stimuli. Experimental brain research. 204, 447–456 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-010-2283-6.
59.
Rhodes, G.: The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual review of psychology. 57, 199–266 (2006).
60.
Peelen, Marius V.1Downing, Paul E.1 p.downing@bangor.ac.uk: The neural basis of visual body perception. Nature reviews neuroscience. 8, 636–648.
61.
Minnebusch, D.A., Daum, I.: Neuropsychological mechanisms of visual face and body perception. Neuroscience & biobehavioral reviews. 33, 1133–1144 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.05.008.
62.
Di Dio, C., Macaluso, E., Rizzolatti, G.: The golden beauty: brain response to classical and renaissance sculptures. PLoS ONE. 2, (2007). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001201.
63.
Lambrou, C., Veale, D., Wilson, G.: The role of aesthetic sensitivity in body dysmorphic disorder. Journal of abnormal psychology. 120, 443–453 (2011).
64.
Mele, S., Cazzato, V., Urgesi, C.: The importance of perceptual experience in the esthetic appreciation of the body. PLoS ONE. 8, (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081378.
65.
Lambrou, C., Veale, D., Wilson, G.: The role of aesthetic sensitivity in body dysmorphic disorder. Journal of abnormal psychology. 120, 443–453 (2011).
66.
Winkler, C., Rhodes, G.: Perceptual adaptation affects attractiveness of female bodies. British journal of psychology. 96, 141–154 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1348/000712605X36343.
67.
Aviezer, H., Trope, Y., Todorov, A.: Body cues, not facial expressions, discriminate between intense positive and negative emotions. Science. 338, 1225–1229 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1224313.
68.
de Gelder, B.: Towards the neurobiology of emotional body language. Nature reviews neuroscience. 7, 242–249 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1872.
69.
Urgesi, C., Calvo-Merino, B., Haggard, P., Aglioti, S.M.: Transcranial magnetic stimulation reveals two cortical pathways for visual body processing. Journal of neuroscience. 27, 8023–8030 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0789-07.2007.
70.
Daprati, E., Iosa, M., Haggard, P.: A dance to the music of time: aesthetically-relevant changes in body posture in performing art. PLoS ONE. 4, (2009). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005023.
71.
Scott, I.M., Clark, A.P., Josephson, S.C., Boyette, A.H., Cuthill, I.C., Fried, R.L., Gibson, M.A., Hewlett, B.S., Jamieson, M., Jankowiak, W., Honey, P.L., Huang, Z., Liebert, M.A., Purzycki, B.G., Shaver, J.H., Snodgrass, J.J., Sosis, R., Sugiyama, L.S., Swami, V., Yu, D.W., Zhao, Y., Penton-Voak, I.S.: Human preferences for sexually dimorphic faces may be evolutionarily novel. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1409643111.
72.
Calvo-Merino, B., Jola, C., Glaser, D.E., Haggard, P.: Towards a sensorimotor aesthetics of performing art. Consciousness and cognition. 17, 911–922 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2007.11.003.
73.
Dalziell, A.H., Peters, R.A., Cockburn, A., Dorland, A.D., Maisey, A.C., Magrath, R.D.: Dance choreography is coordinated with song repertoire in a complex avian display. Current biology. 23, 1132–1135 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.05.018.
74.
Orgs, G., Hagura, N., Haggard, P.: Learning to like it: aesthetic perception of bodies, movements and choreographic structure. Consciousness and cognition. 22, 603–612 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2013.03.010.
75.
Orgs, G., Dombrowski, J.-H., Heil, M., Jansen-Osmann, P.: Expertise in dance modulates alphabeta event-related desynchronization during action observation. European journal of neuroscience. 27, 3380–3384 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06271.x.
76.
McCarty, K., Hönekopp, J., Neave, N., Caplan, N., Fink, B.: Male body movements as possible cues to physical strength: a biomechanical analysis. American journal of human biology. 25, 307–312 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.22360.
77.
Cross, E.: The impact of aesthetic evaluation and physical ability on dance perception. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 5, (2011). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00102.
78.
Sian L. Beilock and Lauren E. Holt: Embodied preference judgments: can likeability be driven by the motor system? Psychological science. 18, 51–57 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2307/40064577.
79.
Topolinski, S.: Moving the eye of the beholder: motor components in vision determine aesthetic preference. Psychological science. 21, 1220–1224 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610378308.
80.
Saygin, A.P.: Point-light biological motion perception activates human premotor cortex. Journal of neuroscience. 24, 6181–6188 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0504-04.2004.
81.
Calvo-Merino, B., Grèzes, J., Glaser, D.E., Passingham, R.E., Haggard, P.: Seeing or doing? Influence of visual and motor familiarity in action observation. Current biology. 16, 1905–1910 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.065.
82.
Rizzolatti, G., Sinigaglia, C.: The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: interpretations and misinterpretations. Nature reviews neuroscience. 11, 264–274 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2805.
83.
Opacic, T., Stevens, C., Tillmann, B.: Unspoken knowledge: Implicit learning of structured human dance movement. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, memory, and cognition. 35, 1570–1577 (2009).
84.
Reddish, P., Fischer, R., Bulbulia, J.: Let’s dance together: synchrony, shared intentionality and cooperation. PLoS ONE. 8, (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071182.
85.
Shankar, M.U., Levitan, C.A., Spence, C.: Grape expectations: The role of cognitive influences in color–flavor interactions. Consciousness and Cognition. 19, 380–390 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.08.008.
86.
Auvray, M., Spence, C.: The multisensory perception of flavor. Consciousness and Cognition. 17, 1016–1031 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2007.06.005.
87.
Loeken et al., L.S.: Coding of pleasant touch. Nature neuroscience. 12, 547–548 (2009).
88.
Ackerley, R., Saar, K., McGlone, F., Backlund Wasling, H.: Quantifying the sensory and emotional perception of touch: differences between glabrous and hairy skin. Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience. 8, (2014).
89.
Djordjevic, J., Zatorre, R.J., Jones-Gotman, M.: Odor-induced changes in taste perception. Experimental brain research. 159, 405–408 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2103-y.
90.
Rudenga, K., Green, B., Nachtigal, D., Small, D.M.: Evidence for an integrated oral sensory module in the human anterior ventral insula. Chemical senses. 35, 693–703 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/bjq068.
91.
Birch, L.: Development of food preferences. Annual review of nutrition. 19, 41–62 (1999).
92.
Evans, M., Jamal, A., Foxall, G. R.: Consumer behaviour. Wiley, Chichester (2009).
93.
Haugtvedt, C.P., Herr, P., Kardes, Frank R.: Handbook of consumer psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum, New York (2008).
94.
Carbon, C.-C.: The cycle of preference: Long-term dynamics of aesthetic appreciation. Acta Psychologica. 134, 233–244 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.004.
95.
Karremans, J.C., Stroebe, W., Claus, J.: Beyond Vicary’s fantasies: The impact of subliminal priming and brand choice. Journal of experimental social psychology. 42, 792–798 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.002.
96.
Piech, R.M., Lewis, J., Parkinson, C.H., Owen, A.M., Roberts, A.C., Downing, P.E., Parkinson, J.A.: Neural correlates of affective influence on choice. Brain and cognition. 72, 282–288 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.09.012.
97.
Hannon, E.E., Soley, G., Ullal, S.: Familiarity overrides complexity in rhythm perception: A cross-cultural comparison of American and Turkish listeners. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance. 38, 543–548 (2012).
98.
Chrea, C.: Semantic, typicality and odor representation: a cross-cultural study. Chemical senses. 30, 37–49 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/bjh255.
99.
Royet, J.-P., Plailly, J., Saive, A.-L., Veyrac, A., Delon-Martin, C.: The impact of expertise in olfaction. Frontiers in psychology. 4, (2013). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00928.
100.
Kirsch, L.P., Drommelschmidt, K.A., Cross, E.S.: The impact of sensorimotor experience on affective evaluation of dance. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 7, (2013). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00521.
101.
Delon-Martin, C., Plailly, J., Fonlupt, P., Veyrac, A., Royet, J.-P.: Perfumers’ expertise induces structural reorganization in olfactory brain regions. NeuroImage. 68, 55–62 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.11.044.
102.
Castriota-Scanderberg, A.: The appreciation of wine by sommeliers: a functional magnetic resonance study of sensory integration. NeuroImage. 25, 570–578 (2005).
103.
Calvo-Merino, B.: Action observation and acquired motor skills: an fMRI study with expert dancers. Cerebral cortex. 15, 1243–1249 (2004).
104.
T.F., M., E., A., L., J.: The musician’s brain as a model of neuroplasticity : Article : Nature Reviews Neuroscience, http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v3/n6/full/nrn843.html. https://doi.org/doi:10.1038/nrn843.
