Neuroaesthetics Now-Development and Prospect

미적 경험에 대한 영향력있는 이론적 모델과 fMRI를 이용한 다수의 실험적 연구가 발표된 2004년 이후 지난 10년 간, 신경미학 분야는 눈부신 성장을 이뤄왔다. 본 개관논문은, 신경미학에 대한 국내외적인 관심에 부응하며, 그간 놀라운 속도로 축적된 다양한 연구 성과들에 대한 이해를 도모한다. 이를 위해 첫째, 초기 신경미학의 주요 연구 성과들을 간단히 논의하고, 그 바탕 위에서 둘째, 최근 신경미학의 새로운 경향에 대해 다음과 같은 측면에서 논의한다. 먼저 최근 연구들은 예술 감상의 하위과정들을 세분화하여, 연구를 좀 더 정교하게 계획하려고 한다. 이는 미적 판단 과제와 대비되는 통제 과제를 도입하고, 표현 대상보다 예술적 표현 그 자체에 주목하며, 학습과 전문성 등 미적 경험에 영향을 미치는 인지과정과 그 뇌 기전을 탐구하고, 미적 경험을 조절하는 맥락효과와 이에 따른 신경반응을 검토하고, 지각과 정서(보상) 처리 관련 신경 네트워크 이외에 디폴트모드 네트워크가 예술작품의 감상에서 수행하는 역할에 대해 검토함으로써 구체화된다. 이어 본 논문은 미술 이외의 예술장르와 연관된 최근 신경미학 연구들을 검토하고, 연구 방법의 다각화 경향을 소개한다. 마지막으로, 신경미학에서 ‘아름다움’에 대한 좁은 정의와 주관적 경험에 의존하는 경향에 대한 비판에 대해 논의한다. 이를 바탕으로 향후 신경미학 분야에서 기대되는 새로운 연구 방향을 제시하고자 한다.

keywords: neuroaesthetics, fMRI, art, appreciation, perception, emotion, reward, DMN, 신경미학, fMRI, 예술, 감상, 지각, 정서, 보상, 디폴트모드 네트워크

Abstract

The field of neuroaesthetics has developed rapidly for last ten years or so, since the advent of an influential theoretical model of artistic appreciation and multiple primary research papers in 2004. This review responds to the growing interest in neuroaesthetics in and outside Korea, and seeks for a better understanding of accumulated research outcomes. For that, this review discusses major findings from several early neuroaesthetics works and moves on to the new tendencies of recent neuroaesthetics as follows; 1) classification of the sub-processes of art appreciation and more careful experimental design by introducing control tasks, by focusing on artistic expression more than portrayed objects, by exploring the neural substrates of moderating factors of aesthetic experience such as learning and expertise, by considering the contextual effect modulating aesthetic experience, and by examining what DMN does for art appreciation. Tendencies such as 2) extension to the other types of art including dance and architecture, and 3) usage of various research methods will also be discussed. Next, this review considers some potential limitations of neuroaesthetics in terms of the narrow definition of ‘beauty’ and the tendency of relying on subjective experiences. Based on these, this review seeks for an updated research direction of neuroaesthetics.

keywords: neuroaesthetics, fMRI, art, appreciation, perception, emotion, reward, DMN, 신경미학, fMRI, 예술, 감상, 지각, 정서, 보상, 디폴트모드 네트워크

참고문헌

김나리 (2012). 뇌로 보는 춤 - 춤과 신경학의 만남. 한국무용학회지, 12(2), 47-56.

김지은, 신은혜, 김채연 (2014). 미술에 대한 전문성과 화가의 표현 의도에 대한 자각이 운동성을 묘사한 추상화 지각 시 안구 운동 패턴에 미치는 영향. 인지과학, 25(3), 259-276.

김채연 (2007). 예술에 대한 신경과학적 접근. 미학대계간행회 (편) 한국의 미학대계 Ⅲ. 서울: 서울대학교 출판부.

김채연 (2014). 뇌와 미술: 나의 뇌는 피카소의 뇌와 통할까, 김성일, 김채연, 성영신 (편) 뇌로 통하다. 파주: 21세기북스.

석영중 (2011). 뇌를 훔친 소설가: 문학이 공감을 주는 과학적 이유. 고양: 예담.

손정우, 이승복, 정우현, 지상현, 정성훈 (2013). 신경미학이란 무엇인가? 정신의학에서의 새로운 패러다임. 대한신경정신의학회지, 52, 3-16.

양서윤 (2012). 로고 브랜드의 생성과 신경미학에 관한 연구. 한국디자인문화학회지, 18(2), 224-238.

양서정 (2007). 피크이동원리의 신경미학적 연구. 한국디자인포럼, 15, 353-363.

이미경 (2008). 신경미학과 음악미학의 아름다운 만남. 음악학, 16, 181-209.

10.

이승복, 정우현, 손정우, 조성우 (2011). 프랙탈 이미지를 이용하여 본 미적 경험의 뇌 활성화: 기능적 자기공명영상 연구. 감성과학, 14(3), 403-414.

11.

정혜윤 (2014). 음악과 정서, 그리고 몸: 신경미학적 접근. 한국미학회지, 80, 303-344.

12.

지상현 (2005). 뇌, 아름다움을 말하다. 파주: 해나무.

13.

Allison, T., Puce, A., & McCarthy, G. (2000). Social perception from visual cues: role of the STS region. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(7), 267-278.

14.

Brown, S., Gao, X., Tisdelle, L., Eickhoff, S. B., & Liotti, M. (2011). Naturalizing aesthetics: Brain areas for aesthetic appraisal across sensory modalities. Neuroimage, 58, 250-258. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.06.012

15.

Buckner R. L., Andrews-Hanna J. R., Schacter D. L. (2008). The brain's default network: anatomy, function, and relevance to disease. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1124, 1-38. 10.1196/annals.1440.011

16.

Bundgaard, P. F. (2014). Feeling, meaning, and intentionality-a critique of the neuroaesthetics of beauty. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1-21.

17.

Calvo-Merino, B., Jola, C., Glaser, D. E., & Haggard, P. (2008). Towards a sensorimotor aesthetics of performing art. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(3), 911-922.

18.

Calvo-Merino, B., Urgesi, C., Orgs, G., Aglioti, S. M., & Haggard, P. (2010). Extrastriate body area underlies aesthetic evaluation of body stimuli. Experimental Brain Research, 204(3), 447-456.

19.

Cattaneo, Z., Lega, C., Flexas, A., Nadal, M., Munar, E., & Cela-Conde, C. J. (2013). The world can look better: enhancing beauty experience with brain stimulation. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, nst165.

20.

Cattaneo, Z., Lega, C., Gardelli, C., Merabet, L. B., Cela-Conde, C. J., & Nadal, M. (2014). The role of prefrontal and parietal cortices in esthetic appreciation of representational and abstract art: A TMS study. Neuroimage, 99, 443-450.

21.

Chatterjee, A. (2003). Prospects for a cognitive neuroscience of visual aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 4, 55–60.

22.

Cela-Conde, C. J., Marty, G., Maestú, F., Ortiz, T., Munar, E., Fernández, A., Roca, M., Rosselló, J., & Quesney, F. (2004). Activation of the prefrontal cortex in the human visual aesthetic perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 101(16), 6321-6325. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0401427101

23.

Conway, B. R., & Rehding, A. (2013). Neuroaesthetics and the trouble with beauty. PLoS biology, 11(3), e1001504.

24.

Cross, E. S., Kirsch, L., Ticini, L. F., & Schütz-Bosbach, S. (2011). The impact of aesthetic evaluation and physical ability on dance perception. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 5, 102. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2011.00102

25.

Cross, E. S., & Ticini, L. F. (2012). Neuroaesthetics and beyond: new horizons in applying the science of the brain to the art of dance. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 11(1), 5-16.

26.

Cupchik, G. C., Vartanian, O., Crawley, A., & Mikulis, D. J. (2009). Viewing artworks: contributions of cognitive control and perceptual facilitation to aesthetic experience. Brain and Cognition, 70(1), 84-91.

27.

Di Dio, C., Macaluso, E., & Rizzolatti, G. (2007). The golden beauty: brain response to classical and renaissance sculptures. PloS one, 2(11), e1201.

28.

Downing, P. E., Jiang, Y., Shuman, M., & Kanwisher, N. (2001). A cortical area selective for visual processing of the human body. Science, 293(5539), 2470-2473.

29.

Fairhall, S. L., & Ishai, A. (2007). Effective connectivity within the distributed cortical network for face perception. Cerebral Cortex, 17(10), 2400-2406.

30.

Freedberg, D., & Gallese, V. (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5), 197-203.

31.

Gandiga, P. C., Hummel, F. C., & Cohen, L. G. (2006). Transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS): a tool for double-blind sham-controlled clinical studies in brain stimulation. Clinical Neurophysiology, 117(4), 845-850.

32.

Grill-Spector, K. (2003). The neural basis of object perception. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13(2), 159-166.

33.

Huang, M., Bridge, H., Kemp, M. J., & Parker, A. J. (2011). Human cortical activity evoked by the assignment of authenticity when viewing works of art. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 5.

34.

Ishizu, T., & Zeki, S. (2013). The brain's specialized systems for aesthetic and perceptual judgment. European Journal of Neuroscience, 37(9), 1413-1420.

35.

Jacobson, L., Koslowsky, M., & Lavidor, M. (2012). tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: a meta-analytical review. Experimental Brain Research, 216, 1-10.

36.

Jacobsen, T., Schubotz, R. I., Hofel, L., & Cramon, D. Y. (2006). Brain correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty. Neuroimage, 29(1), 276-285.

37.

Kawabata, H., & Zeki, S. (2004). Neural correlates of beauty, Journal of Neurophysiology, 91, 1699- 1705.

38.

Kim, J., Shin, E., Kang, H., & Kim, C-Y. (2015). Sad but beautiful; Brain responses to aesthetic judgment andemotion appraisal of visual art. Korean Journal of Boiological and Cognitive Psychology, 27(2), 231-251.

39.

Kirk, U., Skov, M., Hulme, O., Christensen, M. S., & Zeki, S. (2009). Modulation of aesthetic value by semantic context: an fMRI study. Neuroimage, 44(3), 1125-1132.

40.

Kirk, U., Skov, M., Christensen, M. S., & Nygaard, N. (2009). Brain correlates of aesthetic expertise: a parametric fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 69(2), 306-315.

41.

Kirsch, L. P., Dawson, K., & Cross, E. S. (2015). Dance experience sculpts aesthetic perception and related brain circuits. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1337(1), 130-139.

42.

Krentz, U. C., & Earl, R. K. (2013). The baby as beholder: Adults and infants have common preferences for original art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(2), 181.

43.

Lacey, S., Hagtvedt, H., Patrick, V. M., Anderson, A., Stilla, R., Deshpande, G., Hu, X., Sato, J. R., Reddy, S., & Sathian, K. (2011). Art for reward's sake: Visual art recruits the ventral striatum. Neuroimage, 55(1), 420-433.

44.

Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508.

45.

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, 443-364.

46.

Livingstone, M. (2002). Vision and art: the biology of seeing. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

47.

Mecklinger, A., Kriukova, O., Mühlmann, H., & Grunwald, T. (2014). Cross-cultural differences in processing of architectural ranking: Evidence from an event-related potential study. Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(1), 45-53.

48.

Mizokami, Y., Terao, T., Hatano, K., Hoaki, N., Kohno, K., Araki, Y., Kodama, K., Makino, M., Izumi, T., Shimomura, T., Fujiki, M., & Kojiyama, T. (2014). Difference in brain activations during appreciating paintings and photographic analogs. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8, 478. doi: 10.3389/fnhum. 2014.00478

49.

Northoff G., Heinzel A., de Greck M., Bermpohl F., Dobrowolny H., & Panksepp J. (2006). Self-referential processing in our brain-a meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self. Neuroimage, 31, 440-457. 10.1016/ j.neuroimage.2005.12.002

50.

Oppenheim, I., Vannucci, M., Mühlmann, H., Gabriel, R., Jokeit, H., Kurthen, M., Krämer, G., & Grunwald, T. (2010). Hippocampal contributions to the processing of architectural ranking. Neuroimage, 50(2), 742-752.

51.

Pang, C. Y., Nadal, M., Müller-Paul, J. S., Rosenberg, R., & Klein, C. (2013). Electrophysiological correlates of looking at paintings and its association with art expertise. Biological psychology, 93(1), 246-254.

52.

Ramachandran, V. S., & Hirsch, W. (1999). The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(6-7), 15-51.

53.

Shulman G. L., Fiez J. A., Corbetta M., Buckner R. L., Miezin F. M., Raichle M. E., & Petersen, S. E. (1997). Common blood flow changes across visual tasks.2. Decreases in cerebral cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 648-663. 10.1162/jocn.1997.9.5.648

54.

Skov, M., & Vartanian, O. (2009). Neuroaesthetics, foundations and frontiers in aesthetics. Amityville: Baywood.

55.

Tyler, C. W. (1998). Painters centre one eye in portraits. Nature, 392(6679), 877-878.

56.

Vannucci, M., Gori, S., & Kojima, H. (2014). The spatial frequencies influence the aesthetic judgment of buildings transculturally. Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(3-4), 143-149. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/17588928.2014.976188

57.

Vartanian, O., & Goel, V. (2004). Neuroanatomical correlates of aesthetic preference for paintings. NeuroReport, 15(5), 893.

58.

Vartanian, O., Navarrete, G., Chatterjee, A., Fich, L. B., Leder, H., Modronõ, C., Nadal, M., Rostrup, N., & Skov, M. (2013). Impact of contour on aesthetic judgments and approach- avoidance decisions in architecture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 110, 10446-10453. doi/10.1073/pnas. 1301227110

59.

Vartanian, O., Navarrete, G., Chatterjee, A., Fich, L. B., Gonzalez-Mora, J. L., Leder, H., Modronõ, C., Nadal, M., Rostrup, N., & Skov, M. (2015). Architectural design and the brain: Effects of ceiling height and perceived enclosure on beauty judgments and approach- avoidance decisions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 41, 10-18.

60.

Vartanian, O., & Skov, M. (2014). Neural correlates of viewing paintings: Evidence from a quantitative meta-analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data. Brain and Cognition, 87, 52-56.

61.

Vessel, E. A., Starr, G. G., & Rubin, N. (2012). The brain on art: intense aesthetic experience activates the default mode network. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 6, 66. doi: 10.3389/ fnhum.2012.00066

62.

Vessel, E. A., Starr, G. G., & Rubin, N. (2013). Art reaches within: aesthetic experience, the self and the default mode network. Frontiers in neuroscience, 7, 258. doi: 10.3389/fnins. 2013.00258

63.

Wiesmann, M., & Ishai, A. (2010). Training facilitates object recognition in cubist paintings. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 4, 11.

64.

Zeki, W. (1999). Inner Vision: an exploration of art and the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

바로가기메뉴

논문 상세

Vol.27 No.3

신경미학의 현황-발전과 전망

Neuroaesthetics Now-Development and Prospect

초록

Abstract

참고문헌

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물