Poon and his teammates have determined that nature images can be used to combat aggression; their findings can be applied in a range of spaces where aggressive activities might be anticipated. As they report “Prior studies have consistently shown that ostracism promotes aggression. The present research investigated the role of nature in reducing aggressive responses following ostracism. Three studies provided . . . support to the prediction that nature exposure can weaken the relationship between ostracism and aggression.
Not all views produce the same effects
Seeing eyes alters thoughts and behaviors
Reactions to images depend on what we're told about them
A comprehensive, technical review of an important topic
How do image content and hue influence our emotional response to what we’re looking at? Kuzinas and colleagues set out to answer this question by showing people photographs of urban and nature scenes, either in their original states or modified to be in grayscale, red, or green: “natural content [images showing nature] elicited more positive and less arousing emotions compared to the urban one [images showing urban places]. Green images were less arousing compared to red ones, and original images [those appearing in their original colors] elicited the most pleasant emotions.
Viewing images supports training
Research by Lauring and his team confirms that multiple factors influence evaluations of art and that art has a special, social role. They found that when participants in their study “were primed [i.e., led to think] that a certain social group (fellow students, art museum curators/art experts, or low-education/income youth) had rated the painting positively or negatively (social prime, . . .) or with a fictitious sales price of the artwork (monetary prime) . . . . Paintings with high monetary primes or with high ratings by peers and art experts led to higher participant liking ratings.
Research indicates that seeing certain sorts of sculptures influences what we eat. Stampfli and Brunner share that previous studies have determined that seeing “Thin, human-like sculptures by the artist Alberto Giacometti . . . facilitate[s] dieting by reducing chocolate intake and promoting healthy snack choices. . . . [In this study, however] the sculptures reduced chip intake only when the participants liked the chips. The sculptures could thus exert their influence when individuals were motivated to eat and the dieting cues were useful.”
Pearce and his team carefully detail variations in aesthetic evaluations across time and place, i