This article presents evidence for reliability and validity for the Aesthetic Judgment Ability (AJA) test. The test is a relatively easy to administer measure of aesthetic ability in judging paintings. Initial findings demonstrate strong evidence for test stability and acceptable internal consistency. It appears to be sensitive in discriminating between groups with clear evidence of criterion-group validity and discriminant validity. The cognitive-developmental perspective of the instrument provides a viable basis for explaining differences in aesthetic judgment. It is potentially useful as a pre-posttest assessment in courses of art education and, in conjunction with other measures, may also be useful in improving understanding of reactions to art.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChildI. L., Esthetics, LindseyG. and AronsonE. (eds.), Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, pp. 142–189, 1969.
2.
PickfordR. W., Psychology and the Visual Aesthetics, Hutchinson Press, London, 1972.
3.
JohnsonO., Aesthetic Objectivity and the Analogy with Ethics and the Art, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures, Macmillan, London, 1972.
4.
BerlyneD. E., Studies in the New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps Toward an Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation, Hemisphere, Washington, D.C., 1974.
5.
ChildI. L., Personal Preferences as an Expression of Aesthetic Sensitivity, Journal of Psychology, 30: 3, pp. 496–512, 1962.
6.
ChildI. L., Observations of the Meaning of Some Measures of Esthetic Sensitivity, Journal of Psychology, 57, first half, pp. 49–64, 1964.
7.
BerlyneD. E., Arousal and Reinforcement, in Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, LevineD. (ed.), University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Nebraska, pp. 40–72, 1967.
8.
BerlyneD. E., Aesthetics and Psycholobiology, Appleton, New York, 1971.
9.
BeardsleyM. C., Aesthetic Problems in the Philosophy of Criticism, Harcourt, Brace and World, New York, 1958.
10.
CollingwoodR. G., The Principles of Art, Oxford University Press, London, 1938.
11.
LangerS., Feeling and Form, Charles Scribner and Sons, New York, 1953.
12.
DantoA. C., The Transfiguration of the Commonplace: A Philosophy of Art, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1981.
13.
MolesA., Information Theory and Esthetic Perception, University of Illinois Press, Champaign, Illinois, 1966.
14.
MorrisC., Signs, Language and Behavior, Prentice-Hall, New York, 1946.
15.
OsgoodC. E., The Nature of Meaning and Measurement, Psychology Bulletin, 49:3, pp. 197–237, 1952.
16.
PiagetJ., The Psychology of Intelligence, Routledge, Kegan, Paul, London, 1948.
17.
PiagetJ., The Construction of Reality in the Child, Basic Books, New York1954.
18.
PiagetJ., Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child, Orion Press, New York, 1970.
19.
KohlbergL., Stage and Sequence: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Socialization, in Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research, GoslinD. A. (ed.), Rand McNally, Chicago, pp. 347–481, 1969.
20.
KohlbergL., Essay on Moral Development, Vol. 1, Harper and Row, San Francisco, 1981.
21.
CupchikG. C. and HeinricksR. W., Toward an Integrated Theory of Aesthetic Perception in the Visual Arts, in Advances in Intrinsic Motivation and Aesthetics, DayH. I. (ed.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 463–485, 1981.
22.
SmithR. A., The Philosophical Literature of Aesthetic Education, in Toward an Aesthetic Education, ReimanB. (ed.), Music Educators Conference, Washington, D.C., pp. 46–73, 1971.
23.
GravesM., What Is Your I.Q. in Design?, Art Instructor, 4: 1, pp. 11–14, 1939.
24.
ThorndikeE. L., Tests for Aesthetic Appreciation, Journal of Education Psychology, 7:10, pp. 509–523, 1926.
25.
National Assessment of Art, National Assessment of Education Progress, (NAEP), Educational Commission of the States, Denver, 1981.
26.
FechnerG. T., Vorschule der Aesthetik, Breitkpok and Haertel, Leipzig, 1876.
27.
GordonK., A Study of Aesthetic Judgments, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 6: 1, pp. 36–43, 1923.
28.
PepperS. C., The Basis of Criticism in the Arts, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1945.
29.
MeierN. C., The Meier Art Tests, Art Judgment, Bureau of Educational Research and Service, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 1940.
30.
WilsonB., Relationship Among Art Teacher's, Art Critic's and Historian's, and Non-Art-Trained Individual's Statements About Guernica, Studies in Art Education, 12: 1, pp. 31–39, 1970.
31.
MorrisJ. W., Alternative Methodology for Researching Art Attitudes and Values, Studies in Art Education, 17:1, pp. 25–31, 1975.
32.
BaldwinJ. M., Social and Ethical Interpretations in Mental Development, Macmillan, New York, 1906.
33.
OakeshottM., Experience and Its Modes, Cambridge University Press, England, 1933.
34.
KohlbergL., The Philosophy of Moral Development, Vol. 2, Harper and Row, San Francisco, in press.
35.
FlavellH., The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget, Van Nostrand, Princeton, New Jersey, 1963.
36.
RestJ., Developmental Judging Moral Issues, University of Minnesota, 1979.
37.
LoevingerJ. and WesslerR., Measuring Ego Development, Vol. 1 and 2, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 1978.
38.
ParsonsM.JohnstonM., and DurhamR., Developmental Stages of Children's Aesthetic Response, The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 12: 1, pp. 83–104, 1978.
39.
ParsonsM.JohnstonM., and DurhamR., A Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Aesthetic Experience, in Adolescents Development and Education: A Janus Knot, MosherR. L. (ed.), McCutchan Publishing Corp., Berkeley, California, pp. 209–235, 1979.
40.
KerlingerF. N., Foundations of Behavioral Research (2nd edition), Holt, Reinhart and Winston, New York, 1973.
41.
SchroederH. M.DriverM. J., and StreufertS., Human Information Processing, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1967.
42.
CampbellD. T. and DiskeD. W., Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix, Psychology Bulletin, 56:2, pp. 81–105, 1959.
43.
BamossyG. J., Aesthetic Judgment and Arts Patronage of Adolescents, in Advances in Nonprofit Marketing, Vol. 1, BelkR. W. (ed.), JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 89–112, 1984.
