Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T09:26:51.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Individual differences in embracing negatively valenced art: The roles of openness and sensation seeking

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2017

Kirill Fayn  and
Peter Kuppens
Kirill Fayn
Affiliation:
Research Group Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. [email protected]@kuleuven.behttps://ppw.kuleuven.be/okp/people/Kirill_Fayn/https://ppw.kuleuven.be/okp/people/Peter_Kuppens/
Peter Kuppens
Affiliation:
Research Group Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. [email protected]@kuleuven.behttps://ppw.kuleuven.be/okp/people/Kirill_Fayn/https://ppw.kuleuven.be/okp/people/Peter_Kuppens/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We elaborate on the role of individual differences in the processing mechanisms outlined by the Distancing-Embracing model. The role of openness is apparent in appreciating meaning-making art that elicits interest, feeling moved, and mixed emotions. The influence of sensation seeking is likely to manifest in thrill-chasing art that draws on the arousing interplay of positive and negative emotions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e360
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aluja-Fabregat, A. (2000) Personality and curiosity about TV and films violence in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences 29(2):379–92.Google Scholar
Barford, K., Fayn, K., Silvia, P. J. & Smilie, L. (in press) Individual differences in conflicting stimulus evaluations: Openness/intellect predicts mixed-valenced appraisals of visual art. Journal of Research and Personality.Google Scholar
Barford, K. A. & Smillie, L. D. (2016) Openness and other Big Five traits in relation to dispositional mixed emotions. Personality and Individual Differences 102:118–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotter, K. N., Silvia, P. J. & Fayn, K. (2017) What does feeling like crying when listening to music feel like? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts. DOI: 10.1037/aca0000108.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2014) Openness/Intellect: A dimension of personality reflecting cognitive exploration. In: The APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Personality processes and individual differences, vol. 3, ed. Larsen, R. J. & Cooper, M. L.. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Fayn, K., MacCann, C., Tiliopoulos, N. & Silvia, P. J. (2015) Aesthetic emotions and aesthetic people: Openness predicts sensitivity to novelty in the experiences of interest and pleasure. Frontiers in Psychology 6:1877.Google Scholar
Fayn, K., Silvia, P. J., Erbas, Y., Tiliopoulos, N. & Kuppens, P. (in press-a) Nuanced aesthetic emotions: Emotion differentiation is related to knowledge of the arts and curiosity. Cognition and Emotion. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1322554.Google Scholar
Fayn, K., Silvia, P. J., MacCann, C. & Tiliopoulos, N. (in press-b) Interested in different things or in different ways? Exploring the engagement distinction between openness and intellect. Journal of Individual Differences.Google Scholar
Furnham, A. & Bunyan, M. (1988) Personality and art preferences. European Journal of Personality 2(1):67–74.Google Scholar
Ladinig, O. & Schellenberg, E. G. (2012) Liking unfamiliar music: Effects of felt emotion and individual differences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 6(2):146.Google Scholar
Oliver, M. B. & Raney, A. A. (2011) Entertainment as pleasurable and meaningful: Identifying hedonic and eudaimonic motivations for entertainment consumption. Journal of Communication 61(5):984–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, M. J. (1987) How we understand art: A cognitive developmental account of aesthetic experience. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rawlings, D. (2003) Personality correlates of liking for ‘unpleasant’ paintings and photographs. Personality and Individual Differences 34(3):395–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silvia, P. J., Fayn, K., Nusbaum, E. C. & Beaty, R. E. (2015) Openness to experience and awe in response to nature and music: Personality and profound aesthetic experiences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 9(4):376–84. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000028.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. & Nusbaum, E. C. (2011) On personality and piloerection: Individual differences in aesthetic chills and other unusual aesthetic experiences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 5(3):208–14.Google Scholar
Tamborini, R. & Stiff, J. (1987) Predictors of horror film attendance and appeal. An analysis of the audience for frightening films. Communication Research 14(4):415–36. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365087014004003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, S. A. Jr. & Silvia, P. J. (2006) Must interesting things be pleasant? A test of competing appraisal structures. Emotion 6(4):670–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vuoskoski, J. K., Thompson, W. F., McIlwain, D. & Eerola, T. (2012) Who enjoys listening to sad music and why? Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal 29(3):311–17.Google Scholar
Weibel, D., Wissmath, B. & Mast, F. W. (2010) Immersion in mediated environments: The role of personality traits. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 13(3):251–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed