Menus Subscribe Search

Follow us


A Chimp Couldn’t Have Created That Painting

• March 08, 2011 • 11:49 AM

New research finds even nonexperts can differentiate between masterful abstract art and similar works painted by a child or an animal. See for yourself with our enclosed art quiz.

Angry dismissals of abstract art are commonly framed by the assertion. “A (blank) could have done that.” The key word in the clichéd complaint is often “child,” “monkey” or “elephant.”

But Jumbo, you’re no Rothko. Newly published research finds that, in spite of our protestations, nonexperts can tell the difference among acclaimed abstract paintings, colorful canvasses created by a nursery school students or residents of the zoo.

“People untrained in visual art see more than they realize when looking at abstract expressionist paintings,” Boston College psychologists Angelina Hawley-Dolan and Ellen Winner report in the journal Psychological Science. Non-aficionados might not like a particular artwork, but in a direct-comparison test, they can usually identify it as the product of human creativity.

The researchers conducted an experiment in which 72 undergraduates — 40 psychology majors and 32 studio art majors — looked at a series of paintings placed side by side. Each pair featured one image taken from an art history textbook (the artists included Mark Rothko and Cy Twombly), and one created by either a young child or one of four types of animal (a monkey, gorilla, chimpanzee or elephant).

“We matched professional and nonprofessional paintings according to various attributes (color, line quality, brushstroke and medium),” Hawley-Dolan and Winner write. “Paired images were presented side by side in PowerPoint on a laptop; as much as possible, the images were equated in size and resolution.”

The first 10 pairs of paintings were presented without labels. For the remaining 20 pairs, the paintings were labeled (“artist,” “child,” “monkey” or “elephant”), but half of those labels were deliberately incorrect.

After viewing each pair of images, the participants were asked “Which do you like more? Why?” and “Which image do you think is the better work of art? Why?” The questions were phrased to obtain separate results for personal preference (which is based in one’s immediate emotional response) and judgment (which is based on cognitive evaluation). Some of the participants then explained how they justified their decisions.

“Both groups chose the professional work significantly more often than would be predicted by chance,” the researchers write. “As predicted, art students preferred professional works more often than did non-art students. However, the two groups’ judgments did not differ.”

When there was no label attached, nonexperts preferred the professional artwork 56 percent of the time; art students did so 62 percent of the time. But when it came to judging which was the better piece of art, the two groups were very much of one mind: The art students chose the professional piece 67.5 percent of the time, the nonart students 65.5 percent of the time.

“In the aesthetic domain,” the researchers note, “people can recognize that a work is good, but still not like it.”

The strength of that recognition was evident from the almost-nonexistent impact of the labels. When the works were correctly labeled, nonexperts preferred the professional work 79 percent of the time. But when the labels were incorrect, the nonart students (like their art student counterparts) tended to discard them, judging the professional (but wrongly labeled) work as their preferred piece 62.5 percent of the time.

“Analysis of the justifications revealed that when participants preferred the professional works, and judged them as better, they did so because they saw more intention, planning and skill in those works than those done by nonprofessionals,” Hawley-Dolan and Winner write.

This suggests a blue squiggle created by an artist as a means of expression is fundamentally different than a blue squiggle created randomly by a monkey holding a paint brush — and more often than not, viewers can make the distinction. (One wonders whether this will also hold true for the computer-generated music created by David Cope’s software.)

“People may say that a child could have made a work by a recognized abstract expressionist,” the researchers note, “but when forced to choose between a work by a child and one by a master such as Rothko, they are drawn to the Rothko.” This suggests that, for all the sneering done by cynics such as Morley Safer, nonrepresentational art truly does communicate — even if not everyone likes the message.

“People untrained in visual art see more then they realize when looking at abstract expressionist paintings,” the researchers conclude. “People see the mind behind the art.”

 

“Like” Miller-McCune on Facebook.

Follow Miller-McCune on Twitter.

Add Miller-McCune.com news to your site.

Subscribe to Miller-McCune

Tom Jacobs
Staff writer Tom Jacobs is a veteran journalist with more than 20 years experience at daily newspapers. He has served as a staff writer for The Los Angeles Daily News and the Santa Barbara News-Press. His work has also appeared in The Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and Ventura County Star.

More From Tom Jacobs

A weekly roundup of the best of Pacific Standard and PSmag.com, delivered straight to your inbox.

Recent Posts

December 18 • 8:00 AM

Gendering #BlackLivesMatter: A Feminist Perspective

Black men are stereotyped as violent, while black women are rendered invisible. Here’s why the gendering of black lives matters.


December 18 • 7:06 AM

Apparently You Can Bring Your Religion to Work

New research says offices that encourage talk of religion actually make for happier workplaces.


December 18 • 6:00 AM

The Very Weak and Complicated Links Between Mental Illness and Gun Violence

Vanderbilt University’s Jonathan Metzl and Kenneth MacLeish address our anxieties and correct our assumptions.


December 18 • 4:00 AM

Should Movies Be Rated RD for Reckless Driving?

A new study finds a link between watching films featuring reckless driving and engaging in similar behavior years later.


December 17 • 4:00 PM

How to Run a Drug Dealing Network in Prison

People tend not to hear about the prison drug dealing operations that succeed. Substance.com asks a veteran of the game to explain his system.


December 17 • 2:00 PM

Gender Segregation of Toys Is on the Rise

Charting the use of “toys for boys” and “toys for girls” in American English.


December 17 • 12:41 PM

Why the College Football Playoff Is Terrible But Better Than Before

The sample size is still embarrassingly small, but at least there’s less room for the availability cascade.


December 17 • 11:06 AM

Canadian Kids Have a Serious Smoking Problem

Bootleg cigarette sales could be leading Canadian teens to more serious drugs, a recent study finds.


December 17 • 10:37 AM

A Public Lynching in Sproul Plaza

When photographs of lynching victims showed up on a hallowed site of democracy in action, a provocation was issued—but to whom, by whom, and why?


December 17 • 8:00 AM

What Was the Job?

This was the year the job broke, the year we accepted a re-interpretation of its fundamental bargain and bought in to the push to get us to all work for ourselves rather than each other.


December 17 • 6:00 AM

White Kids Will Be Kids

Even the “good” kids—bound for college, upwardly mobile—sometimes break the law. The difference? They don’t have much to fear. A professor of race and social movements reflects on her teenage years and faces some uncomfortable realities.



December 16 • 4:00 PM

How Fear of Occupy Wall Street Undermined the Red Cross’ Sandy Relief Effort

Red Cross responders say there was a ban on working with the widely praised Occupy Sandy relief group because it was seen as politically unpalatable.


December 16 • 3:30 PM

Murder! Mayhem! And That’s Just the Cartoons!

New research suggests deaths are common features of animated features aimed at children.


December 16 • 1:43 PM

In Tragedy, Empathy Still Dependent on Proximity

In spite of an increasingly connected world, in the face of adversity, a personal touch is most effective.


December 16 • 12:00 PM

The ‘New York Times’ Is Hooked on Drug du Jour Journalism

For the paper of record, addiction is always about this drug or that drug rather than the real causes.


December 16 • 10:00 AM

What Is the Point of Academic Books?

Ultimately, they’re meant to disseminate knowledge. But their narrow appeal makes them expensive to produce and harder to sell.


December 16 • 8:00 AM

Unjust and Unwell: The Racial Issues That Could Be Affecting Your Health Care

Physicians and medical students have the same problems with implicit bias as the rest of us.


December 16 • 6:00 AM

If You Get Confused Just Listen to the Music Play

Healing the brain with the Grateful Dead.


December 16 • 4:00 AM

Another Casualty of the Great Recession: Trust

Research from Britain finds people who were laid off from their jobs expressed lower levels of generalized trust.


December 15 • 4:00 PM

When Charter Schools Are Non-Profit in Name Only

Some charters pass along nearly all their money to for-profit companies hired to manage the schools. It’s an arrangement that’s raising eyebrows.


December 15 • 2:00 PM

No More Space Race

A far cry from the fierce Cold War Space Race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, exploration in the 21st century is likely to be a much more globally collaborative project.


December 15 • 12:32 PM

The Hidden Psychology of the Home Ref

That old myth of home field bias isn’t a myth at all; it’s a statistical fact.


December 15 • 12:00 PM

Gluttony and Global Warming: We’re Eating Ourselves to a Warmer Planet

Forget your car. Our obsession with beef and dairy has a far more devastating effect on the climate.


December 15 • 10:00 AM

The 2016 Presidential Race Has Already Started

And this is the most exciting part.


Follow us


Apparently You Can Bring Your Religion to Work

New research says offices that encourage talk of religion actually make for happier workplaces.

Canadian Kids Have a Serious Smoking Problem

Bootleg cigarette sales could be leading Canadian teens to more serious drugs, a recent study finds.

The Hidden Psychology of the Home Ref

That old myth of home field bias isn’t a myth at all; it’s a statistical fact.

A Word of Caution to the Holiday Deal-Makers

Repeat customers—with higher return rates and real bargain-hunting prowess—can have negative effects on a company’s net earnings.

Crowdfunding Works for Science

Scientists just need to put forth some effort.

The Big One

One in two United States senators and two in five House members who left office between 1998 and 2004 became lobbyists. November/December 2014

Copyright © 2014 by Pacific Standard and The Miller-McCune Center for Research, Media, and Public Policy. All Rights Reserved.