學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 幾何圖像的平衡度與偏好度知覺歷程研究
The Study of Perceptual Process of Balance and Aesthetic Preference in Geometric Images作者 林幸蓉 貢獻者 黃淑麗
林幸蓉關鍵詞 構圖
平衡
美感偏好
對稱
明暗對比
灰階
composition
balance
aesthetic preference
symmetry
contrast
grayscale日期 2013 上傳時間 3-Mar-2014 15:31:25 (UTC+8) 摘要 平衡是視覺藝術中一項重要的構圖原則，因為它能將畫面中分散的元素統整起來，使得各個元素所造成的知覺強度或張力（tensions）能在平衡中心相互制衡，進而成為一個有秩序的整體，因此以往文獻對於平衡與美感偏好的關係有諸多論述。本研究目的在於以幾何圖像探討平衡性與美感偏好的知覺歷程。參考Wilson與Chatterjee（2005）的研究成果，本研究以幾何圖像為對象，除了對其實驗加以重複驗證，以及進行更深入的分析，並進一步將畫面元素的明暗納進來一併探討。本研究包括四項實驗，實驗一和實驗二皆採用二值化圖像探討平衡度及美感偏好度，實驗三和實驗四則是採用灰階圖像探討平衡度。實驗一探討圖像中元素位置的分布如何影響個體知覺到的整體平衡度，並根據分析結果以改進Wilson與Chatterjee的算則。實驗二探討圖像中元素分布位置之不同如何影響個體的美感偏好度，並探討偏好度與各項平衡指標的關係。實驗三探討圖像中元素的不同灰階是否影響個體知覺平衡度。實驗四則是以實驗三為基礎，進一步操弄畫面中元素的灰階變化，以觀察元素分布位置與灰階對整體平衡度知覺所造成的影響，並檢視改進後的算則是否更能有效預測主觀平衡度。結果指出，採用二值化圖像探討平衡度及美感偏好時，重心偏離度指標和四項軸對稱指標平均對於主觀平衡度均有極佳的預測力。然而，八項對稱指標平均對於主觀美感偏好有較佳的預測力。灰階的主要效果達顯著，支持先前灰階會影響主觀平衡度的想法。最後，將灰階權重納入算則後，大部分客觀平衡性指標對於主觀平衡度的預測力均有增加，然而其差異僅在重心偏離度指標達顯著。基於本研究結果，各分項指標對於主觀平衡度的預測力不盡相同，因此在發展預測主觀平衡度的指標時，應對各分項指標賦予不同的權重。然而，在尚無足以預測美感偏好之最佳指標的情況下，Wilson 與Chatterjee （2005）所發展出的八項對稱指標平均對其的預測力仍是最佳的。最後，研究者建議未來在從事相關研究時，應將影響平衡的因子一併納入考慮。
Balance is an important compositional principle in visual arts. Balance gives unity to an image with separate elements, allowing them to produce visual forces and tensions that compensate for each other, and then becoming a whole with order. Previous research has provided plenty of discussions on the relationship between balance and aesthetic preference. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptual process of balance and aesthetic preference in geometric images. Based on Wilson and Chatterjee (2005), geometric images were used again to reexamine their proposal more thoroughly and study the balance and aesthetic preference further taking grayscale into consideration. In this study, four experiments were conducted. Binary images were used in Experiments 1 and 2. Experiment 1 was aimed to test the effects of element distribution on perception of balance and further improve the algorithm proposed by Wilson and Chatterjee (2005). Experiment 2 was intended to investigate how element distribution affects aesthetic preferences and how each measure of balance is related to aesthetic preferences. In the Experiments 3 and 4, grayscale images were used instead. The goal of Experiment 3 was to test whether grayscale affects the perception of balance. Experiment 4 manipulated grayscale levels based on the results of Experiment 3. The goal of this experiment was to observe the effects of element distribution and grayscale levels on balance perception and examine whether introducing the grayscale weight into the algorithm could help predict subjective perception of balance. Results showed that for binary images, deviation of center of weight and the average of symmetry measures along four principal axes were good predictors for subjective balance rather than the average of eight symmetry measures. In contrast, aesthetic preferences were better predicted by the average of the eight measures of symmetry. The main effect of grayscale was significant, supporting the hypothesis that grayscale contributes to the subjective perception of balance. Finally, after the grayscale weight was included in the algorithm, most objective measures of balance improved predicting power for subjective perception of balance, but the difference was significant only for deviation of center of balance. According to the findings of this research, it is suggested that the weight of four measures of inner and outer symmetry should be reduced when applying to predict the perceived balance because including them lowered the predicting power. As to aesthetic preferences, the average of the eight measures of symmetry introduced by Wilson and Chatterjee (2005) was still a better index for predicting aesthetic preferences. Finally, this study suggested that future researchers should consider other factors which also affecting balance perception and evaluate their effects respectively.參考文獻 中文部分：安海姆（1984）。藝術與視覺心理學（李長俊譯）。台北：雄獅圖書股份有限公司（原著出版年：1974）。安伯托‧艾可（2006）。美的歷史（彭淮棟譯）。台北：聯經出版事業股份有限公司。（原著出版年：2004）。呂滋益、戴孟宗（2008）。西方藝術流派的分析與應用。2008數位科技與創新管理研討會。陸韜（1993）。平面構形基礎，台南：大孚書局有限公司。袁金塔（1995）。中西繪畫構圖之比較。台北：藝風堂出版社（原著出版年：1987）。陳進成（2007）。安海姆視知覺理論：畫面左右平衡感之驗證。南華大學社會學研究所「網路社會學通訊期刊」，64。朝創直巳（1993）。藝術．設計的平面構成（呂清夫譯）。台北：梵谷圖書出版事業有限公司（原著出版年：1984）。劉思量（2001）。中國美術思想新論。台北：藝術家出版社。蔡明勳（2004）。設計繪畫。台北：全華科技圖書股份有限公司。 英文部分：Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and Visual Perception. Berkeley: University of California Press.Arnheim, R. (1988). The Power of the Center: A Study of Composition in the Visual Arts. California: University of California Press.Attneave, F. (1957). Physical determinants of the judged complexity of shapes.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 221-227.Birkhoff, G. D. (1933). Aesthetic Measure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Berlyne, D. E. (1963). Complexity and incongruity variables as determinants ofexploratory choice and evaluative ratings. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 17, 274-290.Berlyne, D. E., Ogilvie, J. C., & Parham, L. C. C. (1968). The dimensionality ofvisual complexity, interestingness, and pleasingness. Canadian Journal ofPsychology, 22, 376-387.Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts Press.Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps toward and Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation. Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Bouleau, C. (1980). The Painter’s Secret Geometry. New York: Hacker Books.Boselie, F., & Leeuwenberg, E. (1985). Birkhoff revisited: Beauty as a function ofeffect and means. American Journal of Psychology, 98, 1-39.Bourdieu, P. (1985). Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: University of Harvard Press.Bauerly, M., & Liu, Y. (2006). Computational modeling and experimental investigation of effects of compositional elements on interface and design aesthetics. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 64(8), 670–682.Cela-Conde, C. J., Marty, G., Munar, E., Nadal, M., & Burges, L. (2002). The "stylescheme" grounds perception of paintings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 91-100.Chatterjee, A. (2002). Portrait profiles and the notion of agency. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 20, 33-41.Chatterjee, A. (2003). Prospects for a Cognitive Neuroscience of Visual Aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology of the Arts, 4, 55-60.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.Crozier, W. R., & Chapman, A. J. (1981). Aesthetic preferences, prestige, and social class in Psychology and the Arts. Brighton: Harvester.Cupchik, G. C. (1986). A decade after Berlyne. New directions in ExperimentalAesthetics. Poetics, 15, 345-369.Eysenck, H. J. (1941a). Personality factors and preference judgments. Nature, 148(3751), 346.Eysenck, H. J. (1941b). The empirical determination of an aesthetic formula.Psychological Review, 48, 83-92.Eysenck, H. J., & Castle, M. (1970). Training in art as a factor in the determinationof preference judgments for polygons. British Journal of Psychology, 61, 65-81.Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der Ästhetik. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel.Funch, B. S. (1997). The Psychology of Art Appreciation. Copenhagen: University of Museum Tusculanum Press.Garner, W. R. (1974). The Processing of Information Structure. Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Gershoni, S., & Hochstein, S. (2011). Measuring pictorial balance perception at first glance using Japanese calligraphy. i-Perception, 2, 508-527 Gombrich, E. H. (1984). A Sense of Order. London: Phaidon. Gombrich, E. H. (1995). The Story of Art. London: Phaidon. Golomb, C. (1987). The development of compositional strategies in children’sdrawings. Visual Arts Research, 13, 42-52.Graves, M. (1946). Design Judgment Test. New York: Psychological Corp.Götz, K. O., Borisy, A. R., Lynn, R., & Eysenck, H. J. (1979). A new visual aesthetic sensitivity test: I. Construction and psychometric properties. Perceptual & MotorSkills, 49(3), 795-802.Harris, L. J., Cardenas, R. A., Spradlin Jr, M. P., Almerigi J. B. (2009). Adults` preferences for side-of-hold as portrayed in paintings of the Madonna and Child. Laterality, 14, 590-617.Hekkert, P., & Wieringen, P. C. W. v. (1996). Beauty in the eye of the expert andnonexpert beholders: A study in the appraisal of art. American Journal ofPsychology, 109, 389-407.Humphrey, D. (1997). Preferences in symmetries and symmetries in drawings: Asymmetries between ages and sexes. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(1), 41-60. Isen, A. M. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1122-1131.Jacobsen, T. (2006). Bridging the arts and sciences: A framework for the psychology of aesthetics. Leonardo, 39, 155-162.Kandinsky, V. (1979). Point and Line to Plane. (Dearstyne, H. Rebay, Trans.), New York: Dover (original work published 1926).Kartiko, I., Kavakli, M., & Cheng, K. (2010). Learning science in a virtualreality application: the impacts of animated-virtual actors’ visualcomplexity, Computers and Education, 55, 881-891.Kozbelt, A. (2001). Artists as experts in visual cognition. Visual Cognition, 8, 705-723.Kurosu, M., & Kashimura, K. (1995). Apparent Usability vs. Inherent Visability: on Experimental Analysis on the Determinants of the Apparent Usability. Paper presented at the CHI’95 MOSAIC OF CREATIVITY.Lai, C., Chen, P., Shih, S., Liu, Y., Hong, J. (2010). Computational models and experimental investigations of effects of balance and symmetry on the aesthetics of text-overlaid images. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68, 41-56.Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508. Leyssen, M. H. R., Linsen, S., Sammartino, J., & Palmer, S. E (2012). Aesthetic preference for spatial composition in multi-object pictures. i-Perception, 3, 25-49.Locher, P., Cornelis, E., Wagemans, J., Stappers, P. J. (2001). Artists` use of compositional balance for creating visual displays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19, 213-227.Locher, P. J. (2003). An empirical investigation of the Visual Rightness Theory of picture perception. Acta Psychologica, 114, 147-164.Locher, P., Overbeeke, K., & Stappers, P. J. (2005). Spatial balance of color triads in the abstract art of Piet Mondrian. Perception, 34, 169-189.Maass, A., & Russo, A. (2003). Directional bias in the mental representation of spatial events: Nature or culture? Psychological Science, 14, 296-301.Margolis, J. (1980). Prospects for a Science of Aesthetic Perception. Philadelphia, P A: Temple University Press.McManus, I. C., & Kitson, C. M. (1995). Compositional Geometry in Pictures. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 13(1), 73-94.McManus, I. C. (2005). Symmetry and asymmetry in aesthetics and the arts. European Review, 13, 157-180.McManus, I. C., Stöver, K., & Kim, D. (2011). Arnheim’s Gestalt theory of visual balance: Examining the compositional structure of art photographs and abstract images. i-Perception, 2, 615-647.Metzger, W. (1965). The foundations of artistic experience. Acta Psychologica, 24, 409-422.Ngo, D. C. L., Teo L. S., & Byrne, J. G. (2000). Formalising guidelines for thedesign of screen layouts. Displays, 21, 3-15.Nodine, C. F., Locher, P. J., & Krupinski, E. A. (1993). The role of formal arttraining on perception and aesthetic judgment of art compositions. Leonardo,26, 219-227.Parsons, M. (1987). How we understand art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmer, S. E., Gardner, J. S., & Wickens, T. D. (2008). Aesthetic issues in spatialcomposition: Effects of position and direction on framing single objects. Spatial Vision, 21, 421-449.Roberts, M. N. (2008). Complexity and aesthetic preference for diverse visual stimuli. Unpublished doctoral Paper, Universitat de les Illes Balears-TDR.Ross, D. W. (1907). A Theory of Pure Design: Harmony, Balance, Rhythm. Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin.Samuel, F., & Kerzel, D. (2013). Judging whether it is aesthetic: Does equilibrium compensate for the lack of symmetry ? i-Perception, 4, 57-77.Shimamura, A. P., & Palmer, E. S.(2012). Aesthetic Science. New York: University of Oxford Press.Silvia, P. J. (2005). Cognitive appraisals and interest in visual art: Exploring anappraisal theory of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 23, 119-133.Tatarkiewicz, W. (1970). History of Aesthetics. The Hague: Mouton.Tyler, C. W. (2007). Some principles in the spatial organization of art. Spatial Vision,20, 509-530.Vartanian, O., Martindale, C., Podsiadlo, J., Overbay, S., & Borkum, J. (2005) Thelink between composition and balance in masterworks vs.paintings of lower artistic quality. British Journal of Psychology, 96, 493-503.Welsh, G. S., & Barron, F. (1963). Barron-Welsh Art Scale. San Diego, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Wilson, A., & Chatterjee, A. (2005). The assessment of preference for balance: Introducing a new test. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 23(2), 165-180. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
心理學研究所
99752010
102資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099752010 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 黃淑麗 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) 林幸蓉 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) 林幸蓉 zh_TW dc.date (日期) 2013 en_US dc.date.accessioned 3-Mar-2014 15:31:25 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 3-Mar-2014 15:31:25 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Mar-2014 15:31:25 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0099752010 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/64326 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 心理學研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 99752010 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 102 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 平衡是視覺藝術中一項重要的構圖原則，因為它能將畫面中分散的元素統整起來，使得各個元素所造成的知覺強度或張力（tensions）能在平衡中心相互制衡，進而成為一個有秩序的整體，因此以往文獻對於平衡與美感偏好的關係有諸多論述。本研究目的在於以幾何圖像探討平衡性與美感偏好的知覺歷程。參考Wilson與Chatterjee（2005）的研究成果，本研究以幾何圖像為對象，除了對其實驗加以重複驗證，以及進行更深入的分析，並進一步將畫面元素的明暗納進來一併探討。本研究包括四項實驗，實驗一和實驗二皆採用二值化圖像探討平衡度及美感偏好度，實驗三和實驗四則是採用灰階圖像探討平衡度。實驗一探討圖像中元素位置的分布如何影響個體知覺到的整體平衡度，並根據分析結果以改進Wilson與Chatterjee的算則。實驗二探討圖像中元素分布位置之不同如何影響個體的美感偏好度，並探討偏好度與各項平衡指標的關係。實驗三探討圖像中元素的不同灰階是否影響個體知覺平衡度。實驗四則是以實驗三為基礎，進一步操弄畫面中元素的灰階變化，以觀察元素分布位置與灰階對整體平衡度知覺所造成的影響，並檢視改進後的算則是否更能有效預測主觀平衡度。結果指出，採用二值化圖像探討平衡度及美感偏好時，重心偏離度指標和四項軸對稱指標平均對於主觀平衡度均有極佳的預測力。然而，八項對稱指標平均對於主觀美感偏好有較佳的預測力。灰階的主要效果達顯著，支持先前灰階會影響主觀平衡度的想法。最後，將灰階權重納入算則後，大部分客觀平衡性指標對於主觀平衡度的預測力均有增加，然而其差異僅在重心偏離度指標達顯著。基於本研究結果，各分項指標對於主觀平衡度的預測力不盡相同，因此在發展預測主觀平衡度的指標時，應對各分項指標賦予不同的權重。然而，在尚無足以預測美感偏好之最佳指標的情況下，Wilson 與Chatterjee （2005）所發展出的八項對稱指標平均對其的預測力仍是最佳的。最後，研究者建議未來在從事相關研究時，應將影響平衡的因子一併納入考慮。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Balance is an important compositional principle in visual arts. Balance gives unity to an image with separate elements, allowing them to produce visual forces and tensions that compensate for each other, and then becoming a whole with order. Previous research has provided plenty of discussions on the relationship between balance and aesthetic preference. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptual process of balance and aesthetic preference in geometric images. Based on Wilson and Chatterjee (2005), geometric images were used again to reexamine their proposal more thoroughly and study the balance and aesthetic preference further taking grayscale into consideration. In this study, four experiments were conducted. Binary images were used in Experiments 1 and 2. Experiment 1 was aimed to test the effects of element distribution on perception of balance and further improve the algorithm proposed by Wilson and Chatterjee (2005). Experiment 2 was intended to investigate how element distribution affects aesthetic preferences and how each measure of balance is related to aesthetic preferences. In the Experiments 3 and 4, grayscale images were used instead. The goal of Experiment 3 was to test whether grayscale affects the perception of balance. Experiment 4 manipulated grayscale levels based on the results of Experiment 3. The goal of this experiment was to observe the effects of element distribution and grayscale levels on balance perception and examine whether introducing the grayscale weight into the algorithm could help predict subjective perception of balance. Results showed that for binary images, deviation of center of weight and the average of symmetry measures along four principal axes were good predictors for subjective balance rather than the average of eight symmetry measures. In contrast, aesthetic preferences were better predicted by the average of the eight measures of symmetry. The main effect of grayscale was significant, supporting the hypothesis that grayscale contributes to the subjective perception of balance. Finally, after the grayscale weight was included in the algorithm, most objective measures of balance improved predicting power for subjective perception of balance, but the difference was significant only for deviation of center of balance. According to the findings of this research, it is suggested that the weight of four measures of inner and outer symmetry should be reduced when applying to predict the perceived balance because including them lowered the predicting power. As to aesthetic preferences, the average of the eight measures of symmetry introduced by Wilson and Chatterjee (2005) was still a better index for predicting aesthetic preferences. Finally, this study suggested that future researchers should consider other factors which also affecting balance perception and evaluate their effects respectively. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論-----1第一節 構圖藝術與平衡的關係-----2 一、構圖之定義與類型-----2 二、平衡之內涵與類型-----12 三、影響平衡的因素-----17 四、小結-----26第二節 美感偏好理論-----27 一、心理-物理取向-----29 二、認知取向-----32 三、心理分析-----37 四、情緒觀點-----38 五、社會文化-----40 六、小結-----41第三節 美感偏好與平衡-----42第四節 客觀平衡度指標預測主觀平衡度與偏好度的可能性-----47第二章 研究目的與架構-----59 第三章 二值化圖像之平衡度及其美感偏好-----63第一節 實驗一-----63 一、實驗目的-----63 二、實驗方法-----63 三、結果與討論 -----66第二節 實驗二-----77 一、實驗目的-----77 二、實驗方法-----77 三、結果與討論 -----79第四章 灰階圖像之平衡度-----89第一節 實驗三-----89 一、實驗目的-----89 二、實驗方法-----89 三、結果與討論 -----92第二節 實驗四------100 一、實驗目的-----100 二、實驗方法-----100 三、結果與討論-----103第五章 綜合討論-----134第一節 主觀平衡度之最佳預測指標-----134第二節 美感偏好度之最佳預測指標-----140第三節 灰階對主觀平衡度的影響-----143第四節 本研究貢獻與未來方向-----146第六章 結論-----149參考文獻-----150附錄A：實驗一各組圖像在八種分項平衡性指標下的分布情形-----157附錄B：實驗一各種情況下之簡單直線迴歸分析-----159附錄C：實驗一各種情況下之逐步迴歸分析-----162附錄D：實驗一截距與斜率（即迴歸係數）的差異顯著性考驗結果-----166附錄E：實驗二兩個作業之間的相關係數-----167附錄F：實驗二各種情況下之簡單直線迴歸分析-----168附錄G：實驗二各種情況下之逐步迴歸分析-----171附錄H：實驗二灰階知覺作業分析之結果-----175附錄I：實驗三各距離指標下，每種大圓位置灰階之平均比例與標準誤------176附錄J：實驗三各種距離指標之事後比較-----178附錄K：實驗四不考慮灰階權重之簡單直線迴歸分析-----180附錄L：實驗四考慮灰階權重之簡單直線迴歸分析-----184附錄M：實驗四不考慮與考慮灰階權重之逐步迴歸分析比較-----188附錄N：實驗四函數擬合之結果-----197附錄O：實驗一指導語------205附錄P：實驗二指導語-----206附錄Q：實驗三指導語 -----207附錄R：實驗四指導語 -----210 zh_TW dc.format.extent 6257056 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099752010 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 構圖 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 平衡 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 美感偏好 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 對稱 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 明暗對比 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 灰階 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) composition en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) balance en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) aesthetic preference en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) symmetry en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) contrast en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) grayscale en_US dc.title (題名) 幾何圖像的平衡度與偏好度知覺歷程研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Study of Perceptual Process of Balance and Aesthetic Preference in Geometric Images en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分：安海姆（1984）。藝術與視覺心理學（李長俊譯）。台北：雄獅圖書股份有限公司（原著出版年：1974）。安伯托‧艾可（2006）。美的歷史（彭淮棟譯）。台北：聯經出版事業股份有限公司。（原著出版年：2004）。呂滋益、戴孟宗（2008）。西方藝術流派的分析與應用。2008數位科技與創新管理研討會。陸韜（1993）。平面構形基礎，台南：大孚書局有限公司。袁金塔（1995）。中西繪畫構圖之比較。台北：藝風堂出版社（原著出版年：1987）。陳進成（2007）。安海姆視知覺理論：畫面左右平衡感之驗證。南華大學社會學研究所「網路社會學通訊期刊」，64。朝創直巳（1993）。藝術．設計的平面構成（呂清夫譯）。台北：梵谷圖書出版事業有限公司（原著出版年：1984）。劉思量（2001）。中國美術思想新論。台北：藝術家出版社。蔡明勳（2004）。設計繪畫。台北：全華科技圖書股份有限公司。 英文部分：Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and Visual Perception. Berkeley: University of California Press.Arnheim, R. (1988). The Power of the Center: A Study of Composition in the Visual Arts. California: University of California Press.Attneave, F. (1957). Physical determinants of the judged complexity of shapes.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 221-227.Birkhoff, G. D. (1933). Aesthetic Measure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Berlyne, D. E. (1963). Complexity and incongruity variables as determinants ofexploratory choice and evaluative ratings. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 17, 274-290.Berlyne, D. E., Ogilvie, J. C., & Parham, L. C. C. (1968). The dimensionality ofvisual complexity, interestingness, and pleasingness. Canadian Journal ofPsychology, 22, 376-387.Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts Press.Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps toward and Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation. Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Bouleau, C. (1980). The Painter’s Secret Geometry. New York: Hacker Books.Boselie, F., & Leeuwenberg, E. (1985). Birkhoff revisited: Beauty as a function ofeffect and means. American Journal of Psychology, 98, 1-39.Bourdieu, P. (1985). Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: University of Harvard Press.Bauerly, M., & Liu, Y. (2006). Computational modeling and experimental investigation of effects of compositional elements on interface and design aesthetics. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 64(8), 670–682.Cela-Conde, C. J., Marty, G., Munar, E., Nadal, M., & Burges, L. (2002). The "stylescheme" grounds perception of paintings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 91-100.Chatterjee, A. (2002). Portrait profiles and the notion of agency. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 20, 33-41.Chatterjee, A. (2003). Prospects for a Cognitive Neuroscience of Visual Aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology of the Arts, 4, 55-60.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.Crozier, W. R., & Chapman, A. J. (1981). Aesthetic preferences, prestige, and social class in Psychology and the Arts. Brighton: Harvester.Cupchik, G. C. (1986). A decade after Berlyne. New directions in ExperimentalAesthetics. Poetics, 15, 345-369.Eysenck, H. J. (1941a). Personality factors and preference judgments. Nature, 148(3751), 346.Eysenck, H. J. (1941b). The empirical determination of an aesthetic formula.Psychological Review, 48, 83-92.Eysenck, H. J., & Castle, M. (1970). Training in art as a factor in the determinationof preference judgments for polygons. British Journal of Psychology, 61, 65-81.Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der Ästhetik. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel.Funch, B. S. (1997). The Psychology of Art Appreciation. Copenhagen: University of Museum Tusculanum Press.Garner, W. R. (1974). The Processing of Information Structure. Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Gershoni, S., & Hochstein, S. (2011). Measuring pictorial balance perception at first glance using Japanese calligraphy. i-Perception, 2, 508-527 Gombrich, E. H. (1984). A Sense of Order. London: Phaidon. Gombrich, E. H. (1995). The Story of Art. London: Phaidon. Golomb, C. (1987). The development of compositional strategies in children’sdrawings. Visual Arts Research, 13, 42-52.Graves, M. (1946). Design Judgment Test. New York: Psychological Corp.Götz, K. O., Borisy, A. R., Lynn, R., & Eysenck, H. J. (1979). A new visual aesthetic sensitivity test: I. Construction and psychometric properties. Perceptual & MotorSkills, 49(3), 795-802.Harris, L. J., Cardenas, R. A., Spradlin Jr, M. P., Almerigi J. B. (2009). Adults` preferences for side-of-hold as portrayed in paintings of the Madonna and Child. Laterality, 14, 590-617.Hekkert, P., & Wieringen, P. C. W. v. (1996). Beauty in the eye of the expert andnonexpert beholders: A study in the appraisal of art. American Journal ofPsychology, 109, 389-407.Humphrey, D. (1997). Preferences in symmetries and symmetries in drawings: Asymmetries between ages and sexes. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(1), 41-60. Isen, A. M. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1122-1131.Jacobsen, T. (2006). Bridging the arts and sciences: A framework for the psychology of aesthetics. Leonardo, 39, 155-162.Kandinsky, V. (1979). Point and Line to Plane. (Dearstyne, H. Rebay, Trans.), New York: Dover (original work published 1926).Kartiko, I., Kavakli, M., & Cheng, K. (2010). Learning science in a virtualreality application: the impacts of animated-virtual actors’ visualcomplexity, Computers and Education, 55, 881-891.Kozbelt, A. (2001). Artists as experts in visual cognition. Visual Cognition, 8, 705-723.Kurosu, M., & Kashimura, K. (1995). Apparent Usability vs. Inherent Visability: on Experimental Analysis on the Determinants of the Apparent Usability. Paper presented at the CHI’95 MOSAIC OF CREATIVITY.Lai, C., Chen, P., Shih, S., Liu, Y., Hong, J. (2010). Computational models and experimental investigations of effects of balance and symmetry on the aesthetics of text-overlaid images. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68, 41-56.Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508. Leyssen, M. H. R., Linsen, S., Sammartino, J., & Palmer, S. E (2012). Aesthetic preference for spatial composition in multi-object pictures. i-Perception, 3, 25-49.Locher, P., Cornelis, E., Wagemans, J., Stappers, P. J. (2001). Artists` use of compositional balance for creating visual displays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19, 213-227.Locher, P. J. (2003). An empirical investigation of the Visual Rightness Theory of picture perception. Acta Psychologica, 114, 147-164.Locher, P., Overbeeke, K., & Stappers, P. J. (2005). Spatial balance of color triads in the abstract art of Piet Mondrian. Perception, 34, 169-189.Maass, A., & Russo, A. (2003). Directional bias in the mental representation of spatial events: Nature or culture? Psychological Science, 14, 296-301.Margolis, J. (1980). Prospects for a Science of Aesthetic Perception. Philadelphia, P A: Temple University Press.McManus, I. C., & Kitson, C. M. (1995). Compositional Geometry in Pictures. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 13(1), 73-94.McManus, I. C. (2005). Symmetry and asymmetry in aesthetics and the arts. European Review, 13, 157-180.McManus, I. C., Stöver, K., & Kim, D. (2011). Arnheim’s Gestalt theory of visual balance: Examining the compositional structure of art photographs and abstract images. i-Perception, 2, 615-647.Metzger, W. (1965). The foundations of artistic experience. Acta Psychologica, 24, 409-422.Ngo, D. C. L., Teo L. S., & Byrne, J. G. (2000). Formalising guidelines for thedesign of screen layouts. Displays, 21, 3-15.Nodine, C. F., Locher, P. J., & Krupinski, E. A. (1993). The role of formal arttraining on perception and aesthetic judgment of art compositions. Leonardo,26, 219-227.Parsons, M. (1987). How we understand art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmer, S. E., Gardner, J. S., & Wickens, T. D. (2008). Aesthetic issues in spatialcomposition: Effects of position and direction on framing single objects. Spatial Vision, 21, 421-449.Roberts, M. N. (2008). Complexity and aesthetic preference for diverse visual stimuli. Unpublished doctoral Paper, Universitat de les Illes Balears-TDR.Ross, D. W. (1907). A Theory of Pure Design: Harmony, Balance, Rhythm. Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin.Samuel, F., & Kerzel, D. (2013). Judging whether it is aesthetic: Does equilibrium compensate for the lack of symmetry ? i-Perception, 4, 57-77.Shimamura, A. P., & Palmer, E. S.(2012). Aesthetic Science. New York: University of Oxford Press.Silvia, P. J. (2005). Cognitive appraisals and interest in visual art: Exploring anappraisal theory of aesthetic emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 23, 119-133.Tatarkiewicz, W. (1970). History of Aesthetics. The Hague: Mouton.Tyler, C. W. (2007). Some principles in the spatial organization of art. Spatial Vision,20, 509-530.Vartanian, O., Martindale, C., Podsiadlo, J., Overbay, S., & Borkum, J. (2005) Thelink between composition and balance in masterworks vs.paintings of lower artistic quality. British Journal of Psychology, 96, 493-503.Welsh, G. S., & Barron, F. (1963). Barron-Welsh Art Scale. San Diego, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Wilson, A., & Chatterjee, A. (2005). The assessment of preference for balance: Introducing a new test. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 23(2), 165-180. zh_TW
