Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Behav Brain Sci. 2017 Jan;40:e380. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X17001947.

Negative emotions in art reception: Refining theoretical assumptions and adding variables to the Distancing-Embracing model.

Author information

1
Department of Language and Literature,Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics,60322 Frankfurt am Main,Germany.w.m@aesthetics.mpg.devalentin.wagner@aesthetics.mpg.deeugen.wassiliwizky@aesthetics.mpg.dehttps://www.aesthetics.mpg.de/en/the-institute/people/prof-dr-winfried-menninghaus.htmlhttps://www.aesthetics.mpg.de/en/the-institute/people/dr-valentin-wagner.htmlhttps://www.aesthetics.mpg.de/en/the-institute/people/e-wassiliwizky.html.
2
Department of Arts,Culture and Media,University of Groningen,9700 AB Groningen,The Netherlands.j.hanich@rug.nlhttp://www.rug.nl/staff/j.hanich/.
3
Experimental Psychology Unit,Helmut Schmidt University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg,22043 Hamburg,Germany.jacobsen@hsu-hh.dehttps://www.hsu-hh.de/allgpsychologie/index_FPDCF8Hp1Z8V4KmF.html.
4
University of Bergen,5020 Bergen,Norway.stefan.koelsch@uib.nohttp://www.uib.no/en/persons/Stefan.K%C3%B6lsch.

Abstract

While covering all commentaries, our response specifically focuses on the following issues: How can the hypothesis of emotional distancing (qua art framing) be compatible with stipulating high levels of felt negative emotions in art reception? Which concept of altogether pleasurable mixed emotions does our model involve? Can mechanisms of predictive coding, social sharing, and immersion enhance the power of our model?

Comment on

PMID:
29342806
DOI:
10.1017/S0140525X17001947
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Cambridge University Press
Loading ...
Support Center