• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Martin Lindauer

State University of New York (SUNY)
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    15
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    2

 More details
  • State University of New York (SUNY)
    Regular Faculty
Areas of Interest
Aesthetics
  • All publications (15)
  •  58
    The meanings of the physiognomic stimuli taketa and maluma
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 28 (1): 47-50. 1990.
    Physiognomic properties refer to the nonliteral sensory, perceptual, and affective connotations evoked by an object: a mountain, for example, is big as well as “quiet, looming, and threatening.” In this study (N = 58), the three types of meanings carried by meaningless stimuli were examined. Four equally unfamiliar stimuli, which were either physiognomically evocative (maluma and taketa) or neutral, were rated on 15 perceptual, affective, and sensory scales. Taketa and maluma were distinguished …Read more
    Physiognomic properties refer to the nonliteral sensory, perceptual, and affective connotations evoked by an object: a mountain, for example, is big as well as “quiet, looming, and threatening.” In this study (N = 58), the three types of meanings carried by meaningless stimuli were examined. Four equally unfamiliar stimuli, which were either physiognomically evocative (maluma and taketa) or neutral, were rated on 15 perceptual, affective, and sensory scales. Taketa and maluma were distinguished on 21 of the 30 endpoints of the scales, whereas the neutral stimuli were distinguished on only 8. Subjects’ physiognomy and sex did not play a role. The implications of these findings are discussed.
    Aspects of ConsciousnessEmotions, Misc
  •  47
    The effects of the physiognomic stimuli taketa and maluma on the meanings of neutral stimuli
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 28 (2): 151-154. 1990.
    In physiognomy, sensory, perceptual, and affective connotations are suggested by an object. For example, a mountain, in addition to being literally big, may also seem “quiet, looming, and threatening.” The capacity of physiognomically endowed but meaningless stimuli (like taketa and maluma) to transfer these meanings to similarly unfamiliar but neutral stimuli was examined on 15 perceptual, affective, and sensory rating scales (N = 118). The meanings of the two neutral stimuli were influenced in…Read more
    In physiognomy, sensory, perceptual, and affective connotations are suggested by an object. For example, a mountain, in addition to being literally big, may also seem “quiet, looming, and threatening.” The capacity of physiognomically endowed but meaningless stimuli (like taketa and maluma) to transfer these meanings to similarly unfamiliar but neutral stimuli was examined on 15 perceptual, affective, and sensory rating scales (N = 118). The meanings of the two neutral stimuli were influenced in 26 instances (vs. 8 cases in which the neutral stimuli followed one other); most changes were affective and sensory rather than perceptual; and the shifts in meanings were noncongruent—taketa’s “aggressiveness,” for example, led to a “peaceful” rating of the two neutral shapes. The implications of these findings are discussed.
  •  69
    Exorcising the ghosts in the study of eidetic imagery
    Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2 (4): 609-610. 1979.
  •  79
    Brightness differences and the perception of figure-ground
    with Judith G. Lindauer
    Journal of Experimental Psychology 84 (2): 291. 1970.
    Aspects of Consciousness
  •  48
    Preferences for figural complexity as a function of cognitive style
    with Alan G. Frost
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 16 (3): 221-224. 1980.
    Cognitive Sciences
  •  27
    Woher, wozu, wohin?: Fragen nach dem menschlichen Leben: viertes Symposium der Universität Würzburg (edited book)
    with Winfried Böhm and Andreas Benk
    E. Klett. 1990.
  •  62
    The Psychological Study of Literature by Martin A. Lindauer
    Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 34 (1): 87-88. 1975.
    AestheticsPhilosophy of Literature, Misc
  • Imagery and the arts
    In Anees A. Sheikh (ed.), Imagery: Current Theory, Research, and Application, Wiley. pp. 468--506. 1983.
    Mental States and ProcessesMental Imagery
  •  57
    Expectation and satiation accounts of ambiguous figure-ground perception
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 27 (3): 227-230. 1989.
    Aspects of Consciousness
  •  50
    Size and distance perception of the physiognomic stimulus “taketa”
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 26 (3): 217-220. 1988.
    Aspects of Consciousness
  •  62
    Seeing and touching aesthetic objects: I. Judgments
    with Eleni A. Stergiou and David L. Penn
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 24 (2): 121-124. 1986.
    Aesthetic Judgment
  •  53
    Artistic and nonartistic backgrounds as determinants of the cognitive response to the arts
    with Joseph Bilotta
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 15 (5): 354-356. 1980.
    AestheticsThe Value of ArtAesthetics and Ethics
  •  50
    Seeing and touching aesthetic objects: II. Descriptions
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 24 (2): 125-126. 1986.
  •  55
    A failure to find an effect of perceptual set on creativity
    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 28 (1): 33-36. 1990.
    Philosophy of Mind
  •  125
    Toward a liberalization of experimental aesthetics
    Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 31 (4): 459-465. 1973.
    Aesthetics
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback