In Aleem et al.’s article, “Is Beauty in the Eye of the Beholder or an Objective Truth? A Neuroscientific Answer,” what is addressed is the idea of how beauty can be a subjective or objective experience and that it could be supported by various philosophical and psychological theories, such as the processing fluency theory. The processing fluency theory is linked to a cognitive process in which our liking of something is directly related to how easy our brains can compute something and understand it. The processing fluency theory suggests that simpler things are easier to understand as opposed to abstract concepts. This theory was emphasized in the article with the idea of how symmetry and other elements of an object such as complexity or its fluency can influence the beauty of it. A more obscure philosophical approach also reflected the idea of symmetry and how it can influence good health; therefore, symmetry can influence both external and internal beauty. Different neural circuits were mentioned in the article and how the neural circuitry of viewing something as beautiful is similar to the neural circuitry of appraisal. This is something that we can all connect to, because when we see a photogenic, Instagram-worthy plate of food, we receive visual stimuli that in turn ends up anticipatory satisfaction, which is what means by the term “we eat first with our eyes.” The integration of different stimuli and appraisal of the food is achieved by the orbital prefrontal cortex (OFC) and other supporting brain regions involved in appraisal, such as the anterior insula, and basal ganglia areas involved in reward.
What was tested in this article were the difference in responses in regards to different images, such as a spontaneous photograph, a Renaissance piece, and a person posing. Participants were then asked to describe how well-balanced the image. This could include concepts such as symmetry and how intentional the image is in (e.g. a posed picture versus a spontaneous picture). These responses were all quantified in the end and what was found were that spontaneous photographs of a person had the highest index of imbalance. What was interesting about the results was that although the Renaissance-era painting was completely intentional, it still showed a higher index of imbalance when compared to the posed photograph. This raises questions such as what contributes to the balance in an image?
In Brown et al.’s article, “Naturalizing aesthetics: Brain areas for aesthetic appraisal across sensory modalities,” the researchers investigated appraisal networks, and they delve deeper into the processing of different valenced emotions and built off some of the concepts presented in Aleema et al.’s article such as appraisal of food and other forms that are not considered art. Brown et al. measured if there are any differences in appraisal processing between art and non-art objects. Art objects involve stimuli such as portraits and posed pictures, whereas non-art objects are ordinary and not considered to be “artistic.” Examples of non-art objects would include ordinary objects such as cell phones and houses. These are objects that are not considered to be “artistic” by nature. Therefore, the researchers used these art and non-art objects in order to determine if there are differences in appraisal processings for both objects. What the researchers found was that both art objects and non-art objects involve activation of the orbital prefrontal cortex, which suggests that general appraisal processing of objects is dependent on the orbital prefrontal cortex (OFC). Brown et al. also tested if there is a difference in brain activation between positive and negative valence emotions. What they found was that the anterior insula is responsible for processing positive valenced emotions, which is something that the researchers were not expecting. Additionally, the researchers discovered that the insula in general is notorious for processing negative valence emotions. The reason why they tested the valence of emotions is because they want to determine the connection between objection and emotional appraisal. For example, some objects can make someone feel a negatively-valenced emotion such as disgust, and these results help to understand the connection between different brain regions involved in the appraisal, specifically the OFC and anterior insula. Additionally, the researchers discovered that the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) is associated with positive valence and lateral prefrontal cortex (lPFC) is associated with negative valence. Since the lPFC is closest to the insula, this makes sense that they both participate in processing of negative valence. With the interconnection between the PFC and insula, this highlights the relation that emotional processing has to object appraisal, which explains why we feel a certain emotion when we look at specific objects.
Some of the similarities between both studies (Aleema et al., 2019 and Brown et al., 2011) both of them came to the conclusion that both the orbital prefrontal cortex is important for appraisal processing. Additionally, both integrated how different factors can play a role in the appraisal process. Aleema et al. focused on how balance in an image can help influence activation of the orbital prefrontal cortex, while Brown et al. investigated how appraisal and emotional processing are intertwined. Some of the key differences include that in Aleema et al.’s study, their approach was more philosophical based and went into concepts such as symmetry contributes to both internal and external beauty. Also, the theory that supported their hypothesis, the processing fluency theory, suggests that simplicity contributes to greater fluency, the process of how easily something can be interpreted, and this contributes to more beauty. Brown et al. formulated their hypothesis based on the theory of appraisal (object-related) and emotional processing (outcome-related) are intertwined. The prime example that was presented was that aesthetic pleasure is object-related emotion and happiness is the outcome-related emotion. Because Brown et al. helped to set up this connection between emotion and object appraisal, they were able to determine more brain regions that are associated with emotions, such as the mPFC, lPFC, and anterior insula. Aleema et al. linked together object appraisal and anticipatory satisfaction with an emphasis on the reward system. They discovered that more beautiful objects have greater anticipatory satisfaction, which is primarily focused on regions located in the basal ganglia, such as the striatum. In summary, both of these studies show how appraisal processing can be a complex process that influences other brain circuits involved in different functions. A prime example being the orbital prefrontal cortex having an impact on both emotional processing areas (Brown et al., 2011) and areas involved in reward systems (Aleema et al., 2019). Overall, both of these papers provide insightful information on the appraisal network and how it can influence our perception of seeing beauty in an object while simultaneously being influenced by a multitude of factors, such as viewing art vs. non-art objects and symmetry in images.
No comments:
Post a Comment