Does Group Contact Shape Styles of Pictorial Representation? A Case Study of Australian Rock Art

Human Nature 33 (3):237-260 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Image-making is a nearly universal human behavior, yet the visual strategies and conventions to represent things in pictures vary greatly over time and space. In particular, pictorial styles can differ in their degree of figurativeness, varying from intersubjectively recognizable representations of things to very stylized and abstract forms. Are there any patterns to this variability, and what might its ecological causes be? Experimental studies have shown that demography and the structure of interaction of cultural groups can play a key role: the greater the degree of contact with other groups, the more recognizable and less abstract are the representations. Here we test this hypothesis on a real-world dataset for the first time. We constructed a balanced database of Indigenous Australian rock art motifs from both isolated and contact Aboriginal groups (those often in contact with other groups). We then ran a survey asking participants to judge the recognizability of the motifs and to provide interpretations. Results show that motifs from contact Aboriginal groups were more likely to be judged as inter-subjectively recognizable and also elicited more convergent descriptions than motifs from isolated groups. This is consistent with the idea that intergroup contact is likely to be an important factor in the cultural evolution of pictorial representation. We discuss the implications of these findings for the archaeology and anthropology of art, and the parallels with language evolution.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,682

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

By What Criteria Are Pictorial Styles Individuated?Hoyeon Lim - 2022 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 80 (1):31-41.
The Naturalism of Pictorial Representation.Douglas John Dempster - 1983 - Dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Picture, image and experience. [REVIEW]Sonia Sedivy - 2001 - Philosophical Review 110 (3):472-475.
Pictorial Representation And Moral Knowledge.Katerina Bantinaki - 2004 - Postgraduate Journal of Aesthetics 1 (2):69-76.
A Semantics for Pictures.Gary Malinas - 1991 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (3):275 - 298.
Pictorial perception as illusion.Katerina Bantinaki - 2007 - British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (3):268-279.
Depiction, Pictorial Experience, and Vision Science.Robert Briscoe - 2016 - Philosophical Topics 44 (2):43-81.
Pictorial representation: When cognitive science meets aesthetics.Mark Rollins - 1999 - Philosophical Psychology 12 (4):387 – 413.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-16

Downloads
7 (#1,403,593)

6 months
2 (#1,240,952)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Jeff Kendal
Biola University
Carmen Granito
Università degli Studi di Bologna

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations