TY - JOUR
T1 - Does an emotional connection to art really require a human artist? Emotion and intentionality responses to AI- versus human-created art and impact on aesthetic experience
AU - Demmer, Theresa Rahel
AU - Kühnapfel, Corinna
AU - Fingerhut, Joerg
AU - Pelowski, Matthew
N1 - Funding Information:
The writing of this study was funded by a grant to MP and JF from the EU Horizon 2020 TRANSFORMATIONS-17-2019, Societal Challenges and the Arts (870827—ARTIS, Art and Research on Transformations of Individuals of Society).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
PY - 2023/11
Y1 - 2023/11
N2 - AI has captured the artworld, and, and, progressively, is reshaping the way humans interact with various forms of media. Computer-generated art sells for millions at auctions; artists routinely use algorithms to generate aesthetic materials. However, to capture the impact of such works and our relationships with them, we need to better understand the kinds of responses we make to AI/computer-generated images. Here, we consider whether and, if so, to what extent humans report feeling emotions when engaging computer-generated art, or even ascribe intentionality behind those feelings. These are emerging—and also long-standing—points of controversy, with critical arguments that this should not occur, thus marking potential distinctions between artificial and ‘real’ human productions. We tested this by employing visually similar abstract, black-and-white artworks, made by a computer (RNG) or by human artists intentionally aiming at transmitting emotions. In a 2 × 2 design, participants (N = 48) viewed the art, preceded by primes about human/computer provenance (true, 50% of cases). Contrary to critical suggestions, participants almost always not only reported emotions but also ascribed intentionality, independent of the prime given. Interestingly, they did report stronger emotions when the work actually was made by a human. We discuss implications for our understanding of art engagements and future developments regarding computer-generated digital interactions.
AB - AI has captured the artworld, and, and, progressively, is reshaping the way humans interact with various forms of media. Computer-generated art sells for millions at auctions; artists routinely use algorithms to generate aesthetic materials. However, to capture the impact of such works and our relationships with them, we need to better understand the kinds of responses we make to AI/computer-generated images. Here, we consider whether and, if so, to what extent humans report feeling emotions when engaging computer-generated art, or even ascribe intentionality behind those feelings. These are emerging—and also long-standing—points of controversy, with critical arguments that this should not occur, thus marking potential distinctions between artificial and ‘real’ human productions. We tested this by employing visually similar abstract, black-and-white artworks, made by a computer (RNG) or by human artists intentionally aiming at transmitting emotions. In a 2 × 2 design, participants (N = 48) viewed the art, preceded by primes about human/computer provenance (true, 50% of cases). Contrary to critical suggestions, participants almost always not only reported emotions but also ascribed intentionality, independent of the prime given. Interestingly, they did report stronger emotions when the work actually was made by a human. We discuss implications for our understanding of art engagements and future developments regarding computer-generated digital interactions.
KW - Anthropomorphizing
KW - Computer-art
KW - Computer-human-interaction
KW - Emotion-transmission
KW - Empirical aesthetics
KW - Intentionality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85166736735&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.chb.2023.107875
DO - 10.1016/j.chb.2023.107875
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85166736735
SN - 0747-5632
VL - 148
JO - Computers in Human Behavior
JF - Computers in Human Behavior
M1 - 107875
ER -