HOW DO CHILDREN RESPOND TO DIFFERENT ARTISTIC GENRES?

Lilly K. V., Sudhakar Venukapalli

Abstract


Art is as beautiful as sunshine and as important as nourishment to our body. Though art is a stimulating aspect, art appreciation is regarded as a highly subjective phenomenon. Art education and art appreciation is known to enrich the lives of children. Various factors including one’s experience, knowledge, and exposure to arts as well as processing fluency are known to influence one’s aesthetic appreciation. The objective of the present study is to examine children’s expressions of art appreciation. The quantitative study examines how children respond to artworks from different artistic genres. The participants in this study are sixty grade IX children in the age group of 13-15 years, from rural and urban backgrounds from the state of Telangana. The study employed equal number of boys and girls. Images of nine famous artworks depicting landscapes are used as stimuli. The images of artworks belonged to three artistic genres: representational, semi-representational, and abstract artworks. The artworks are selected from Western, Middle Eastern and Oriental paintings. Images of paintings are shown randomly to children to elicit their responses. The results of analysis of children’s descriptions of paintings indicate that children appreciated representational artworks more than semi-representational artworks and their appreciation of abstract artworks is minimum. Children’s appreciation of artworks according to the type of paintings indicate differences in appreciation among western, middle eastern and oriental paintings. The statistical analysis of overall appreciation of three genres of artworks depending on the type of paintings reveal that there exists a statistically significant difference in the appreciation of three types of artworks depending on the genre of artworks. The findings of this study can be used to enlighten the development of art education curricula.

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


art appreciation, art education, aesthetic experience, artistic genres, abstract art and representational art

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anderson, D., Piscitelli, B., Weir, K., Everett, M. & Tayler, C. (2002). Children’s museum experiences: Identifying powerful mediators of learning. Curator, 45, 213-231. Retrieved from http://www.magsq.com.au/_dbase_upl/curator_andersonetal%20copy.pdf.

Ariffin, M. S. N. (2010). Sejauhmana keberkesanan perlaksanaan sesi apresiasi seni di sekolah menengah dalam pendidikan seni. In Ping, C. T. S., & Ladin, C. A. (2019). Applications of Art Appreciation in Teaching and Learning in Primary School. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 8(4): 130–140. doi: 10.6007/IJARPED/v8-i4/6441.

Armstrong, T., & Detweiler-Bedell, B. (2008). Beauty as an emotion: the exhilarating prospect of mastering a challenging world. Review of General Psychology, 12, 305– 329. doi:10.1037/a0012558.

Bao, Y., Yang T, Lin X, Fang Y, Wang Y, Pöppel E & Lei, Q. (2016). Aesthetic preferences for eastern and western traditional visual art: Identity matters. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(2143). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01596.

Barron, F. & Welsh, G. S. (1952). Artistic perception as a possible factor in personality style: Its measurement by a figure preference test. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 33, 199-203. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1952.9712830.

Bellanca, J. A., & Brandt, R. S. (2010). 21st Century skills: Rethinking how students learn. Solution Tree Press. Retrieved from http://soltreemrls3.s3-website-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/solution-tree.com/media/pdf/study_guides/21st_Century_Skills_Study_Guide.pdf.

Brinkmann, H., Commare, L., Leder, H., & Rosenberg, R. (2014). Abstract art as a universal language? Leonardo, 47(3): 256-257. doi: 10.1162/LEON_a_00767.

Burchenal, P., Housen, A., Rawlinson, K., & Yenawine, P. (2008). Why Do we teach Arts in the Schools? Advancing Art Education, 50(2). A Publication of the National Art Education Association. Retrieved from https://vtshome.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/17why-do-we-teach-art-in-the-schools_NAEANews_April08.pdf.

Chatterjee, A. (2003). Prospects for a cognitive neuroscience of a visual aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 4, 55–60. doi: 10.1037/e514602010-003.

Eckhoff, A. (2010). Using games to explore visual art with young children. Young Children, 65(1): 18-22. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290551309.

Efland, A. D. (2002). Art and cognition: Integrating the visual arts in the curriculum. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Eglinton, K. A. (2003). Art in the early years. London: Routledge Falmer. Retrieved from https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Art_in_the_Early_Years.html?id=r1dORy41UWcC&redir_esc=y.

Gardner, H., Winner, E., & Kirchner, M. (1975). Children’s conceptions of the Arts. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 9 (3), 60–77. Retrieved from http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-8510%28197507%299%3A3%3C60%3ACCOTA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-F.

House, C. A. & Rule, A. C. (2005). Pre-schoolers’ ideas of what makes a picture book illustration beautiful. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(5): 283-290. doi:10.1007/s10643-004-1022-7.

Housen, A. (2002). Aesthetic thought, critical thinking and transfer. Art and Learning Research Journal, 18, 99–132. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f92a/f0a61718efaca853d456c1edec6817dfee31.pdf?_ga=2.174320491.838978140.1577727629-127502483.1577727629.

Jiao, L. (2019). Analysis of Relationship between Arts Education and Spread of Modern Culture. Journal of Social Science Studies, Volume 3. doi: 10.35532/JSSS.V3.189. Google scholar

Kieran, M. (2012). For love of art: artistic values and appreciative virtues. In Sherman, A. & Morrissey, C. (2017). What Is Art Good For? The Socio-Epistemic Value of Art. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11:411. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00411.

Kolbe, U. (2002). Rapunzel’s supermarket: All about young children and their art. Paddington, NSW: Peppinot Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Rapunzel_s_Supermarket.html?id=zMqiAAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y.

Law, S. S. M. (2010). An Interdisciplinary Approach to Art Appreciation. New Horizons in Education, 58(2). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ966652.pdf.

Leder, H. & Nadal, M. (2014). Ten years of a model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments: The aesthetic episode – Developments and challenges in empirical aesthetics. British Journal of Psychology, 105(4), 443-464. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12084.

Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489–508. doi:10.1348/0007126042369811.

Leder, H., Carbon, C. C., & Ripsas, A. L. (2006). Entitling art: influence of title information on understanding and appreciation of paintings. Acta Psychologica, 121, 176–198. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.005.

Leder, H., Gerger, G., Dressler, S., & Schabmann, A. (2012). How art is appreciated. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(1): 2-10. doi:10.1037/a0026396.

Maneen, C. A. (2016). A case study of arts integration practices in developing the 21st century skills of critical thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration. Gardner-Webb University, Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.gardner-webb.edu/education_etd/182

McArdle, F. & Wright, S. (2014). First literacies: art, creativity, play, constructive meaning making. In G. Barton (Ed.), Literacy in the Arts: Retheorising learning and teaching. In Lye, J. W. Y., Garces-Bacsal, R. M., & Wright, S. K. (2017). Young children’s responses to artworks: The eye, the mind, and the body. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 18(30). Retrieved from http://www.ijea.org/v18n30/.

Mulcahey, C. (2009). Providing rich art activities for young children. Young Children, 64(4), 107-112. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ868189.

Munsinger, H., Kessen, W., & Kessen, M.L. (1964). Age and uncertainty: Developmental variation in preference for variability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1(1):1-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(64)90002-5.

Novaković, S. (2015). Preschool teacher's role in the art activities of early and preschool age children. Croatian Journal of Education, 17(0). doi:10.15516/cje.v17i0.1497.

Palmer, S. E., Schloss, K. B., & Sammartino, J. (2013). Visual aesthetics and human preference. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 77–107. doi: 10.1146/annurevpsych-120710-100504.

Perkins, D. (2003). Making thinking visible. Harvard Project Zero. Retrieved from http://www.pz.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/MakingThinkingVisible_DP.pdf.

Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4):364–82. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3.

Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45–48. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280. 00008.

Rudolf, S. & Wright, S. (2015). Drawing out the value of the visual: children and young people theorizing time through art and narrative. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(4), 486-507. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2015.1006685.

Savva, A. (2003). Young Pupil’s Responses to Adult Works of Art. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4(3). doi: 10.2304/ciec.2003.4.3.6.

Savva, A. & Trimis, E. (2005). Responses of young children to contemporary art exhibits: The role of artistic experiences. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 6(13). Retrieved from http://ijea.asu.edu/v6n13/

Schabmann, A., Gerger, G., Schmidt, B. M., & Wogerer, E. (2015). Where does it come from? Developmental aspects of art appreciation. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 1-11, ijbd.sagepub.com. doi:10.1177/0165025415573642.

Terreni, L. (2016). Visual arts education for young children in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journal of Childhood Studies, 41(4). doi:10.18357/jcs. v41i4.16718.

Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., & Catty, S. (2006). Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological Science, 17(9):799–806. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006. 01785.x.

Winston, A. S. & Cupchik, G. C. (1992). The evaluation of high art and popular art by naive and experienced viewers. Visual Arts Research, 18(1), 1–14. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20715763.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejlll.v4i4.235

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Lilly K. V., Sudhakar Venukapalli

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.

Copyright © 2017-2023. European Journal of Literature, Language and Linguistics Studies (ISSN 2559 - 7914 / ISSN-L 2559 - 7914). All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and  Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.