Have a personal or library account? Click to login
If I knew they were the expression of creativity in people with blindness, I would rate them higher - Bias in Evaluating the Work of People with Blindness Cover

If I knew they were the expression of creativity in people with blindness, I would rate them higher - Bias in Evaluating the Work of People with Blindness

Open Access
|Apr 2020

References

  1. Antonak, R. F., & Livneh, H. (1995). Direct and indirect methods to measure attitudes toward persons with disabilities, with an exegesis of the error-choice test method. Rehabilitation Psychology, 40(1), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.40.1.310.1037/0090-5550.40.1.3
  2. Belke, B., Leder, H., & Augustin, M. D. (2006). Mastering style - Effects of explicit style-related information, art knowledge and affective state on appreciation of abstract paintings. Psychology Science, 48, 115-34.
  3. Bock, R. D. (1975). Multivariate statistical methods in behavioural research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Carbon, C.-C. (2017). Art perception in the museum: How we spend time and space in art exhibitions. i-Perception, 8(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/204166951769418410.1177/2041669517694184
  5. Chatterjee, A., Widick, P., Sternschein, R., Smith, W. B., II, & Bromberger, B. (2010). The assessment of art attributes. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 28, 207-222. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.28.2.f10.2190/EM.28.2.f
  6. Cleeremans, A., Ginsburgh, V., Klein, O., & Noury, A. (2016). What’s in a name? The effect of an artist’s name on aesthetic judgments. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 34(1), 126-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/027623741562119710.1177/0276237415621197
  7. Czerwińska, K. (2011). Osoby niewidome według dzieci w wieku wczesnoszkolnym [Blind people according to children in early school age]. Niepełnosprawność i Rehabilitacja, 1(1), 42-54.
  8. D’Angiulli, A., & Maggi, S. (2003). Development of drawing abilities in a distinct population: Depiction of perceptual principles by three children with congenital total blindness. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 193-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/0165025024400019110.1080/01650250244000191
  9. Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning, Journal of Consumer Research, 20(2), 303-315. https://doi.org/10.1086/20935110.1086/209351
  10. Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2015). Titles change the aesthetic appreciations of paintings. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.0046410.3389/fnhum.2015.00464
  11. Graham, S., & Dwyer, A. (1987). Effects of the learning disability label, quality of writing performance, and examiner’s level of expertise on the evaluation of written products. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 317-318.10.1177/002221948702000513
  12. Jucker, J.-L., Barrett, J. L., & Wlodarski, R. (2014). “I just don’t get it”: Perceived artists’ intentions affect art evaluations. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 32(2), 149-182. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.32.2.c10.2190/EM.32.2.c
  13. Kasof, J. (1995). Explaining creativity: The attributional perspective. Creativity research journal, 8(4), 311-366. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj0804_110.1207/s15326934crj0804_1
  14. Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Agars, M. D., & Loomis, D. (2010). Creativity stereotypes and the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 22(2), 200-20510.1080/10400419.2010.481529
  15. Kennedy, J. M. (1993). Drawing and the blind: Pictures to touch. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  16. King, J. L. (1998). The effects of gender bias and errors in essay grading. Educational Research Quarterly, 22, 13-25.
  17. Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in psychology, 4, 863.10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
  18. Landy, D., & Sigall, H. (1974). Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer’s physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 299-304. doi: 10.1037/h003601810.1037/h0036018
  19. Lebuda, I., & Karwowski, M. (2013). Tell me your name and I’ll tell you how creative your work is: Author’s name and gender as factors influencing assessment of products’ creativity in four different domains. Creativity Research Journal, 25(1), 137-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.75229710.1080/10400419.2013.752297
  20. Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712604236981110.1348/0007126042369811
  21. Leder, H., Carbon, C.-C., & Ripsas, A.-L. (2006). Entitling art: Influence of title information on subjective understanding and appreciation of paintings. Acta Psychologica, 121(2), 176-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.00510.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.005
  22. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.1208410.1111/bjop.12084
  23. Lundy, D. E. (2016). Decontaminating taste: Minimizing nonaesthetic biases in aesthetic appraisal. Review of Arts and Humanities, 5, 8-26.10.15640/rah.v5n1a2
  24. Malouff, J. M., & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2016). Bias in grading: A meta-analysis of experimental research findings. Australian Journal of Education, 60(3), 245-256.10.1177/0004944116664618
  25. Mastandrea, S., & Crano, W. D. (2019). Peripheral factors affecting the evaluation of artworks. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 37(1), 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/027623741879091610.1177/0276237418790916
  26. Millis, K. (2001). Making meaning brings pleasure: The influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. Emotion, 1(3), 320-329. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.32010.1037/1528-3542.1.3.320
  27. Muth, C., & Carbon, C.-C. (2013). The Aesthetic Aha: On the pleasure of having insights into Gestalt. Acta Psychologica 144(1), 25-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.05.00110.1016/j.actpsy.2013.05.001
  28. Muth, C., Ebert, S., Marković, S., & Carbon, C.-C. (2019). “Aha”ptics: Enjoying an Aesthetic Aha During Haptic Exploration. Perception, 48(1), 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/030100661881801410.1177/0301006618818014
  29. Muth, C., Pepperell, R., & Carbon, C.-C. (2013). Give me Gestalt! Preference for cubist artworks revealing high detectability of objects. Leonardo, 46(5), 488-489. https://doi.org/10.1162/LEON_a_0064910.1162/LEON_a_00649
  30. Muth, C., Raab, M. H., & Carbon, C.-C. (2015). The stream of experience when watching artistic movies. Dynamic aesthetic effects revealed by the Continuous Evaluation Procedure (CEP). Frontiers in Psychology, 6:365. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.0036510.3389/fpsyg.2015.00365
  31. Muth, C., Raab, M. H., & Carbon, C.-C. (2016). Semantic stability is more pleasurable in unstable episodic contexts. On the relevance of perceptual challenge in art appreciation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10,43. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.0004310.3389/fnhum.2016.00043
  32. Niestorowicz, E. (2017). The world in the mind and sculpture of deafblind people. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  33. Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. London: Mcmillan Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20895-110.1007/978-1-349-20895-1
  34. Ostrowska, A. (1994). Niepełnosprawni w społeczeństwie. Postawy społeczeństwa polskiego wobec ludzi niepełnosprawnych [Disabled in society. Attitudes of Polish society towards people with disabilities]. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Filozofii i Socjologii PAN.
  35. Palak, Z. (2000). Uczniowie niewidomi i słabowidzący w szkołach ogólnodostępnych [Blind and visually impaired students in public schools]. Lublin: UMCS Publishing House.
  36. Pelowski, M., Gerger, G., Chetouani, Y., Markey, P. S., & Leder, H. (2017). But is it really art? The classification of laboratory-presented images as “art”/ “not art” and correlations with appraisal and viewer interpersonal differences. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1729. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.0172910.3389/fpsyg.2017.01729
  37. Rochefort-Maranda, G. (2017, December 21). Inflated Effect Sizes and Underpowered Tests: How the Severity Measure of Evidence is Affected by the Winner’s Curse. Retrieved from http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/14237/1/inflated_sev.pdf
  38. Russell, P. A. (2003). Effort after meaning and the hedonic value of paintings. British Journal of Psychology, 94 (Pt 1), 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1348/00071260376284213810.1348/000712603762842138
  39. Russell, P. A., & Milne, S. (1997). Meaningfulness and the hedonic value of paintings: Effects of titles. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.2190/EHT3-HWVM-52CB-8QHJ10.2190/EHT3-HWVM-52CB-8QHJ
  40. Sękowski, A. E. (1994). Psychospołeczne determinanty postaw wobec inwalidów [Psychosocial determinants of attitudes towards invalids]. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
  41. Smith, L. F., Bousquet, S. G., Chang, G., & Smith, J. K. (2006). Effects of time and information on perception of art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 24(2), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.2190/DJM0-QBDW-03V7-BLRM10.2190/DJM0-QBDW-03V7-BLRM
  42. Smith, R. K., & Newman, G. E. (2014). When multiple creators are worse than one: The bias toward single authors in the evaluation of art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 303-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a003692810.1037/a0036928
  43. Specht, S. M. (2010). Artists’ statements can influence perceptions of artwork. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 28(2), 193-206. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.28.2.e10.2190/EM.28.2.e
  44. Swami, V. (2013). Context matters: Investigating the impact of contextual information on aesthetic appreciation of paintings by Max Ernst and Pablo Picasso. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(3), 285-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a003096510.1037/a0030965
  45. Symeonidou, S., & Loizou, E. (2018). Disability studies as a framework to design disability awareness programs: no need for ‘magic’ to facilitate children’s subjective understanding. Disability & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2018.148867710.1080/09687599.2018.1488677
  46. Szubielska, M. (2018a). People with sight impairment in the world of visual arts: does it make any sense? Disability & Society, 33(9), 1533-1538. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2018.148026110.1080/09687599.2018.1480261
  47. Szubielska, M. (2018b). Wpływ zajęć edukacyjnych prowadzonych w galerii na odbiór abstrakcyjnej sztuki współczesnej przez uczniów młodszych klas szkoły podstawowej [The influence of educational workshops held in a gallery on the reception of abstract contemporary art by primary education students]. Przegląd Badań Edukacyjnych [Educational Studies Review], 26(1), 21-44. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/PBE.2018.00210.12775/PBE.2018.002
  48. Szubielska, M., Bałaj, B., & Fudali-Czyż, A. (2012). Estetyczny odbiór fotografii poprzez stereotyp umysłowej niepełnosprawności twórcy [Aesthetic evaluation of photographs through the stereotype of author with intellectual disability]. Psychologia Społeczna, 7, 372-378.
  49. Szubielska, M., Imbir, K., & Szymańska, A. (2019). The influence of the physical context and knowledge about artworks on the aesthetic experience of interactive installations. Manuscript under review.
  50. Szubielska, M., Niestorowicz, E., Marek, B. (2016). Drawing without eyesight. Evidence from congenitally blind learners. Annals of Psychology, 19, 681-700. https://doi.org/10.18290/rpsych.2016.19.4-2en10.18290/rpsych.2016.19.4-2en
  51. Szubielska, M., Pasternak, K., Wójtowicz, M., Szymańska, A. (2018). Evaluation of art of visually impaired people by children and adults. Interdyscyplinarne Konteksty Pedagogiki Specjalnej, 22, 161-177.
  52. Szubielska, M., Ratomska, M., Wójtowicz, M., & Szymańska, A. (2018). The effect of educational workshops in an art gallery on children’s evaluation and interpretation of contemporary art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 0276237418790917.
  53. Szubielska, M., Wójtowicz, M., Szymańska, A., Ratomska, M., & Sztorc, A. (2018). Zajęcia edukacyjne towarzyszące wystawie a odbiór sztuki współczesnej przez dzieci przedszkolne i wczesnoszkolne [The impact of educational classes accompanying the exhibition on the reception of contemporary art by pre-school and early-school children]. EDUKACJA Quarterly, 145(2).
  54. Szuman, W. (1967). O dostępności rysunku dla dzieci niewidomych [On drawing availability for blind children]. Warsaw: Państwowe Zakłady Wydawnictw Szkolnych.
  55. Tschacher, W., Kirchberg, V., van den Berg, K., Greenwood, S., Wintzerith, S., & Tröndle, M. (2012). Physiological correlates of aesthetic perception of artworks in a museum. Psychology of Aesthctics, Crcativity, and the Arts, 6(1), 96-103. https://doi.org/10.1037/a002384510.1037/a0023845
  56. Vinter, A., Bonin, P., & Morgan, P. (2018). The severity of the visual impairment and practice matter for drawing ability in children. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 78, 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2018.04.02710.1016/j.ridd.2018.04.027
  57. Wolińska, J. (2015). Percepcja społeczna, stereotyp niepełnosprawności - perspektywa aktora i obserwatora [Social perception, the stereotype of disability - actor-observer perspective]. Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska. Sectio J, Paedagogia-Psychologia, 28(1), 45-66.10.17951/j.2015.28.1.45
Language: English
Page range: 182 - 197
Submitted on: Sep 24, 2019
Accepted on: Jan 3, 2020
Published on: Apr 9, 2020
Published by: University of Białystok
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2020 Magdalena Szubielska, Agnieszka Fudali-Czyż, published by University of Białystok
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.