List of figures and tables Acknowledgments Prologue Part I. Theory and Function: 1. The structure of emotions 2. Intuitive and empirical approaches to understanding 3. Rationality and emotions 4. Mutual plans and social emotions Part II. Conflict and Unpredictability: 5. Plans and emotions in fictional narrative 6. Stress and distress 7. Freud's cognitive psychology of intention: the case of Dora Part III. Enjoyment and Creativity: 8. Happiness 9. Putting emotions into words Epilogue Notes References Author index Subject index.

Best-Laid Schemes: A Psychology of Emotions.

Research seeking a scientific foundation for the theory of art appreciation has raised controversies at the intersection of the social and cognitive sciences. Though equally relevant to a scientific inquiry into art appreciation, psychological and historical approaches to art developed independently and lack a common core of theoretical principles. Historicists argue that psychological and brain sciences ignore the fact that artworks are artifacts produced and appreciated in the context of unique historical situations and artistic intentions. After revealing flaws in the psychological approach, we introduce a psycho-historical framework for the science of art appreciation. This framework demonstrates that a science of art appreciation must investigate how appreciators process causal and historical information to classify and explain their psychological responses to art. Expanding on research about the cognition of artifacts, we identify three modes of appreciation: basic exposure to an artwork, the artistic design stance, and artistic understanding. The artistic design stance, a requisite for artistic understanding, is an attitude whereby appreciators develop their sensitivity to art-historical contexts by means of inquiries into the making, authorship, and functions of artworks. We defend and illustrate the psycho-historical framework with an analysis of existing studies on art appreciation in empirical aesthetics. Finally, we argue that the fluency theory of aesthetic pleasure can be amended to meet the requirements of the framework. We conclude that scientists can tackle fundamental questions about the nature and appreciation of art within the psycho-historical framework.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0140525X12000489

The artful mind meets art history: toward a psycho-historical framework for the science of art appreciation.

Most accounts of affect and motivation in the science education literature have discussed them as relevant to, but distinct from, disciplinary pursuits. These include Pintrich’s seminal work on affective and motivational factors in learning science (P. R. Pintrich, 1999, 2003; P. R. Pintrich & E. De Groot, 1990; P. R. Pintrich, R. W. Marx, & R. A. Boyle, 1993). Our purpose here is to build on those ideas, drawing as well on accounts of scientists’ practices (e.g., H. E. Gruber, 1974; E. F. Keller, 1983) and of students’ taking up of disciplinary pursuits (R. A. Engle & F. R. Conant, 2002; R. Lehrer, 2009; M. Scardamalia & C. Bereiter, 1991, 2006) to propose that affect and motivation are inherent in the disciplinary practices of science. Thus, we introduce notions of epistemic affect and epistemic motivation, and we illustrate how these are evident in a case study of a student we have followed from 4th to 7th grade. We consider how this perspective aligns with and contributes to research on interest (e.g....

Engaging in Science: A Feeling for the Discipline

Phenomenology as rhetoric

The literature on ‘nursing phenomenology’ is driven by a range of ontological and epistemological considerations, intended to distance it from conventionally scientific approaches. However, this paper examines a series of discrepancies between phenomenological rhetoric and phenomenological practice. The rhetoric celebrates perceptions and experience; but the concluding moment of a research report almost always makes implicit claims about reality. The rhetoric insists on uniquely personal meanings; but the practice offers blank, anonymous abstractions. The rhetoric invites us to believe that knowing is subjective and involved, but at the same time it recommends a technique (bracketing) which can only represent a crude, and entirely misconceived, gesture towards objectivity. Finally, the rhetoric claims that generalisation is beside the point; but the majority of researchers generalise anyway. In quietly ignoring their own rhetoric, ‘phenomenologists’ appropriate scientific prerogatives illegitimately. For their methods do not entitle them to lay claim to anything resembling ‘objectivity’, or generalisability, or ‘reality’, or theoretical abstraction. Like other researchers, they want to talk in generalisable terms about reality; they want to be objective, they want to do theory. But they are saddled with a philosophy that is disabling, because it says they can only talk about perceptions, and meanings, and uniqueness.

Phenomenology as rhetoric.

16. Mad Pain and Martian Pain

The Cognitive Basis of Science: Emotions and epistemic evaluations

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Christopher Hookway

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

The Cognitive Basis of Science: Emotions and epistemic evaluations