A neural mechanism for aesthetic experience
NeuroReport, ISSN: 0959-4965, Vol: 23, Issue: 5, Page: 310-313
2012
- 46Citations
- 114Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations46
- Citation Indexes46
- 46
- CrossRef25
- Captures114
- Readers114
- 114
- Mentions1
- References1
- Wikipedia1
Article Description
Aesthetic experience associated with viewing art has been hypothesized to depend on both low-level sensory processing and high-level conceptual processing. To test these hypotheses, we used functional MRI to evaluate the magnitude of activity in sensory motion processing region MT+ and in the prefrontal cortex while participants viewed van Gogh paintings that evoked a range of motion experience. In support of the sensory hypothesis of aesthetic experience and the conceptual hypothesis of aesthetic experience, MT+ activity was correlated to the degree of motion experience (but not the experience of pleasantness) and activity in the right anterior prefrontal cortex was associated with the experience of pleasantness (but not motion experience). These findings provide a neural mechanism for aesthetic experience that depends on sensory processing and conceptual processing. The techniques employed in the current study will serve as a framework for future studies to investigate the neural basis of aesthetic experience associated with other visual and nonvisual art forms such as sculpture, architecture, or music. © 2012 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84859434259&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/wnr.0b013e328351759f; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22357395; https://journals.lww.com/00001756-201203280-00009; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/wnr.0b013e328351759f; https://journals.lww.com/neuroreport/Abstract/2012/03280/A_neural_mechanism_for_aesthetic_experience.9.aspx
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know