Brain Topography

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 1001–1013 | Cite as

Two-Stage Processing of Aesthetic Information in the Human Brain Revealed by Neural Adaptation Paradigm

  • Miho Iwasaki
  • Yasuki NoguchiEmail author
  • Ryusuke Kakigi
Original Paper


Some researchers in aesthetics assume visual features related to aesthetic perception (e.g. golden ratio and symmetry) commonly embedded in masterpieces. If this is true, an intriguing hypothesis is that the human brain has neural circuitry specialized for the processing of visual beauty. We presently tested this hypothesis by combining a neuroimaging technique with the repetition suppression (RS) paradigm. Subjects (non-experts in art) viewed two images of sculptures sequentially presented. Some sculptures obeyed the golden ratio (canonical images), while the golden proportion were impaired in other sculptures (deformed images). We found that the occipito-temporal cortex in the right hemisphere showed the RS when a canonical sculpture (e.g. Venus de Milo) was repeatedly presented, but not when its deformed version was repeated. Furthermore, the right parietal cortex showed the RS to the canonical proportion even when two sculptures had different identities (e.g. Venus de Milo as the first stimulus and David di Michelangelo as the second), indicating that this region encodes the golden ratio as an abstract rule shared by different sculptures. Those results suggest two separate stages of neural processing for aesthetic information (one in the occipito-temporal and another in the parietal regions) that are hierarchically arranged in the human brain.


Repetition suppression Neuroaesthetics Magnetoencephalography (MEG) Golden ratio 



We thank Mr. Y. Takeshima for his technical supports. This work was supported by KAKENHI Grants (22680022 and 26700011) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). The authors declare no competing financial interests.


  1. Barron HC, Garvert MM, Behrens TE (2016) Repetition suppression: a means to index neural representations using BOLD? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 371:20150355CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis 10:433–436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Buckner RL et al (1998) Functional-anatomic correlates of object priming in humans revealed by rapid presentation event-related fMRI. Neuron 20:285–296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cela-Conde CJ et al (2009) Sex-related similarities and differences in the neural correlates of beauty. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:3847–3852CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cela-Conde CJ, Agnati L, Huston JP, Mora F, Nadal M (2011) The neural foundations of aesthetic appreciation. Prog Neurobiol 94:39–48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chatterjee A (2011) Neuroaesthetics: a coming of age story. J Cognit Neurosci 23:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chatterjee A, Vartanian O (2014) Neuroaesthetics. Trends Cognit Sci 18:370–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cichy RM, Pantazis D, Oliva A (2014) Resolving human object recognition in space and time. Nat Neurosci 17:455–462CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Cupchik GC, Vartanian O, Crawley A, Mikulis DJ (2009) Viewing artworks: contributions of cognitive control and perceptual facilitation to aesthetic experience. Brain Cogn 70:84–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Di Dio C, Gallese V (2009) Neuroaesthetics: a review. Curr Opin Neurobiol 19:682–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Di Dio C, Macaluso E, Rizzolatti G (2007) The golden beauty: brain response to classical and renaissance sculptures. PLoS ONE 2:e1201CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Downing PE, Chan AW, Peelen MV, Dodds CM, Kanwisher N (2006) Domain specificity in visual cortex. Cereb Cortex 16:1453–1461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Friston K et al (2008) Multiple sparse priors for the M/EEG inverse problem. Neuroimage 39:1104–1120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fujita I, Tanaka K, Ito M, Cheng K (1992) Columns for visual features of objects in monkey inferotemporal cortex. Nature 360:343–346CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Furnham A, Walker J (2001) The influence of personality traits, previous experience of art, and demographic variables on artistic preference. Personal Individ Differ 31:997–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gagnepain P, Chetelat G, Landeau B, Dayan J, Eustache F, Lebreton K (2008) Spoken word memory traces within the human auditory cortex revealed by repetition priming and functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci 28:5281–5289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Grill-Spector K, Kushnir T, Edelman S, Avidan G, Itzchak Y, Malach R (1999) Differential processing of objects under various viewing conditions in the human lateral occipital complex. Neuron 24:187–203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hayashi MJ et al (2015) Time adaptation shows duration selectivity in the human parietal cortex. PLoS Biol 13:e1002262CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Hekkert P, VanWieringen PCW (1996) Beauty in the eye of expert and nonexpert beholders: a study in the appraisal of art. Am J Psychol 109:389–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Henson R, Shallice T, Dolan R (2000) Neuroimaging evidence for dissociable forms of repetition priming. Science 287:1269–1272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Höge H (1997) The golden section hypothesis—its last funeral. Empir Stud Arts 15:233–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jacobsen T (2013) On the electrophysiology of aesthetic processing. Prog Brain Res 204:159–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Jacobsen T, Schubotz RI, Hofel L, Cramon DY (2006) Brain correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty. Neuroimage 29:276–285CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Jenkins AC, Macrae CN, Mitchell JP (2008) Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:4507–4512CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kawabata H, Zeki S (2004) Neural correlates of beauty. J Neurophysiol 91:1699–1705CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kida T, Tanaka E, Kakigi R (2015) Multi-dimensional dynamics of human electromagnetic brain activity. Front Hum Neurosci 9:713PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kirk U, Skov M, Hulme O, Christensen MS, Zeki S (2009) Modulation of aesthetic value by semantic context: an fMRI study. Neuroimage 44:1125–1132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Komatsu H, Ideura Y (1993) Relationships between color, shape, and pattern selectivities of neurons in the inferior temporal cortex of the monkey. J Neurophysiol 70:677–694CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kourtzi Z, Kanwisher N (2001) Representation of perceived object shape by the human lateral occipital complex. Science 293:1506–1509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lacey S et al (2011) Art for reward’s sake: visual art recruits the ventral striatum. Neuroimage 55:420–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Langlois JH, Roggman LA (1990) Attractive faces are only average. Psychol Sci 1:115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lau T, Cikara M (2017) fMRI repetition suppression during generalized social categorization. Sci Rep 7:4262CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Livio M (2003) The golden ratio: the story of phi, the world’s most astonishing number. Broadway Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Maris E, Oostenveld R (2007) Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data. J Neurosci Methods 164:177–190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Miller EK, Li L, Desimone R (1991) A neural mechanism for working and recognition memory in inferior temporal cortex. Science 254:1377–1379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Mizokami Y et al (2014) Difference in brain activations during appreciating paintings and photographic analogs. Front Hum Neurosci 8:478CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Nadal M (2013) The experience of art: insights from neuroimaging. Prog Brain Res 204:135–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Nadal M, Pearce MT (2011) The Copenhagen Neuroaesthetics Conference: prospects and pitfalls for an emerging field. Brain Cognit 76:172–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nakamura S (2002) Fibonacci-suu no microcosmos (Microcosmos of Fibonacci constant). Nippon Hyoron sha, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  40. Nichols TE, Holmes AP (2002) Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: a primer with examples. Hum Brain Mapp 15:1–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Nishitani N, Hari R (2002) Viewing lip forms: cortical dynamics. Neuron 36:1211–1220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Noguchi Y, Murota M (2013) Temporal dynamics of neural activity in an integration of visual and contextual information in an esthetic preference task. Neuropsychologia 51:1077–1084CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Noguchi Y, Inui K, Kakigi R (2004) Temporal dynamics of neural adaptation effect in the human visual ventral stream. J Neurosci 24:6283–6290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Noguchi Y, Yokoyama T, Suzuki M, Kita S, Kakigi R (2012) Temporal dynamics of neural activity at the moment of emergence of conscious percept. J Cogn Neurosci 24:1983–1997CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Noguchi Y, Kimijima S, Kakigi R (2015) Direct behavioral and neural evidence for an offset-triggered conscious perception. Cortex 65:159–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Palmer SE, Griscom WS (2013) Accounting for taste: individual differences in preference for harmony. Psychon Bull Rev 20:453–461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Park J, Shimojo E, Shimojo S (2010) Roles of familiarity and novelty in visual preference judgments are segregated across object categories. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:14552–14555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Pelli DG (1997) The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spat Vis 10:437–442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Schacter DL, Buckner RL (1998) Priming and the brain. Neuron 20:185–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Schmid K, Marx D, Samal A (2008) Computation of a face attractiveness index based on neoclassical canons, symmetry, and golden ratios. Pattern Recogn 41:2710–2717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Suzuki M, Noguchi Y, Kakigi R (2014) Temporal dynamics of neural activity underlying unconscious processing of manipulable objects. Cortex 50:100–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Vessel EA, Starr GG, Rubin N (2013) Art reaches within: aesthetic experience, the self and the default mode network. Front Neurosci 7:258CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Wiggs CL, Martin A (1998) Properties and mechanisms of perceptual priming. Curr Opin Neurobiol 8:227–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Winkielman P, Halberstadt J, Fazendeiro T, Catty S (2006) Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychol Sci 17:799–806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Winston AS, Cupchik GC (1992) The evaluation of high art and popular art by naive and experienced viewers. Vis Arts Res 18:1–14Google Scholar
  57. Zajonc RB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J Pers Soc Psychol 9:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zeki S (1999) Art and the brain. J Conscious Stud: Controvers Sci Humanit 6:76–96Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Graduate School of HumanitiesKobe UniversityKobeJapan
  2. 2.Department of Integrative PhysiologyNational Institute for Physiological SciencesOkazakiJapan

Personalised recommendations