When multiple creators are worse than one: The bias toward single authors in the evaluation of art

Rosanna K. Smith, George E. Newman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The present studies investigate whether people perceive the same work of art to be of lower quality if they learn that it was a collaborative work (resulting from the efforts of multiple artists) versus the work of a single artist. Study 1 finds that indeed, as the number of authors increases, the perceived quality of an artwork decreases. Study 2 finds that this effect occurs because people tend to assess quality in terms of the effort put forth by each author, rather than the total amount of effort required to create the work. Study 3 further demonstrates that this bias toward single authors appears to be driven by people's beliefs, rather than by any inherent differences between individual versus collaborative work. These results broaden our understanding of how perceptions of effort drive evaluative judgments, and are consistent with a more general notion that art is not evaluated as a static entity, but rather as an endpoint in a "creative performance.".

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)303-310
Number of pages8
JournalPsychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts
Volume8
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2014
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Effort
  • Heuristics and biases
  • Judgment and decision-making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Visual Arts and Performing Arts
  • Applied Psychology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When multiple creators are worse than one: The bias toward single authors in the evaluation of art'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this