Primary data on the study "Smooth as glass and hard as stone? On the conceptual structure of the aesthetics of materials"

Cognitive Psychology

Authors(s) / Creator(s)



Abstract

Following Fechner’s (1876) “aesthetics from below,” this study examines the conceptual structure of the aesthetics of various materials—for instance, leather, metal, and wood. Adopting a technique used by Jacobsen et al. (2004), we asked 1,956 students to write down adjectives that could be used to describe the aesthetics of materials within a given time limit. A second subsample of a broader cross-section of the population (n = 496) replicated the findings obtained with the first subsample. A joint analysis of both subsamples identified the term “smooth” as by far the most relevant term, followed by the other core terms “hard,” “rough,” “soft,” and “glossy.” Furthermore, sensorial qualities—for example, “warm” and “see-through”—constituted the main elements of the aesthetics of materials, and the great majority of these were haptic qualities—for example, “cold” and “heavy.” The terms offered were mostly descriptive and of rather neutral valence, according to an additional valence rating study that we conducted with 94 participants. Comparisons between the terms offered for different materials revealed commonalities as well as material specificity of the conceptual structure of the aesthetics. In addition, the word “beautiful,” although by no means representing one of the most relevant terms in this study, still proved its preeminence in aesthetics in general. The results of this study contribute to the corpus of existing studies of the conceptual structure of aesthetics.

Persistent Identifier

https://doi.org/10.5160/psychdata.mkba21pr17

Year of Publication

Funding

Citation

Marschallek, B. E., Wagner, V. & Jacobsen, T. (2022). Primary data on the study "Smooth as glass and hard as stone? On the conceptual structure of the aesthetics of materials" (Version 1.0.0) [Data and Documentation]. Trier: Research Data Center at ZPID. https://doi.org/10.5160/psychdata.mkba21pr17

Study Description

Research Questions/Hypotheses:

Research Design:

Partially standardized survey instrument (predefined question wording; open response format); single measurement

Measurement Instruments/Apparatus:

A detailed description of the methods can be found in the associated publication. The study was conducted in paper-pencil format at different times either at the universities (Subsample 1) or at citizen centers and vehicle registration authorities (Subsample 2). A between-subjects design was used, meaning that participants were randomly assigned to one of the ten material categories. For Subsample 1, the study was conducted at the beginning or end of a lecture. Sealed questionnaires were handed collectively to the participants, assuring that all participants began the survey at the same time. For Subsample 2, participants completed the study in individually administered surveys. These participants received clipboards and pens to enhance the writing quality. In both subsamples, the instructions were presented aurally by the experimenter as well as visually, either by a projection on a screen (Subsample 1) or with laminated prints (Subsample 2), and these remained visible throughout the task to ensure that participants could reread them. The instructions were adopted from Jacobsen et al. (2004), as follows: “Please write down terms that could be used to describe the aesthetics of . . . as a material. Please use adjectives only. You now have 2 minutes.” Depending on the specific category, the instructions included one of the words “ceramics,” “glass,” “leather,” “metal,” “paper,” “plastic,” “stone,” “textiles,” “wood,” or “materials” (in the last case, the phrase “as material” was omitted from the instructions). After 2 minutes, participants were instructed to stop writing and asked to answer questions on the back of the questionnaire regarding demographic data.

Data Collection Method:

Survey in the presence of an investigator

Population:

Students and visitors of citizen centers and vehicle registration authorities

Survey Time Period:

The data were obtained between September 2018 and June 2019 inclusive. The surveys took place at different times in the respective premises.

Sample:

Convenience sample

Gender Distribution:

Age Distribution: 16-92 years

Spatial Coverage (Country/Region/City): Germany/-/-

Subject Recruitment:

The participants of Subsample 1 were acquired via the lectures. For this purpose, contact was made in advance with the lecturers to request permission. The participants were then asked to participate in the study at the beginning or end of the lecture period. Participants in Subsample 2 were approached directly at citizen centers and vehicle registration authorities. For this purpose, permission was obtained in advance from the respective authorities.

Sample Size:

2452 participants

Return/Drop Out:

mkba21pr17_readme.txt
Text file - 3 KB
Sharing Level 1 (Scientific Use)
Description: Description of the files

mkba21pr17_pd.txt
Text file - 318 KB
MD5: 66aef324f67c6d4da8157b738d4451c3
Sharing Level 1 (Scientific Use)
Description: Primary data file

mkba21pr17_kb.txt
Text file - 8 KB
Sharing Level 1 (Scientific Use)
Description: Codebook for the primary data file mkba21pr17_pd.txt