実物体への行為可能性と操作に伴うリスクが創作物への印象評価と創造的思考に与える影響

Translated Abstract

This study aims to elucidate the impact and nature of the actability of tangible objects on creative thinking. We investigated how the ability to interact with physical objects influences creativity evaluation and the creative utilization of these objects through experimentation. Our hypothesis posits that the degree of actability affects the creative use of objects and the evaluation of created works. The experiment involved three conditions of actability: (1) tangible objects within reach without obstructions, (2) tangible objects out of reach without obstructions, and (3) tangible objects within reach but obstructed by a case. We compared the impression evaluations when participants viewed images of the same objects to those under the aforementioned conditions. Additionally, we administered an idea generation task and compared the number of ideas generated across conditions. The results demonstrated that the condition with tangible objects within reach without obstructions yielded a higher number of ideas and better evaluations compared to the other conditions. These findings suggest that actability influences creative thinking and provides insights into the presentation methods of artworks in contexts such as exhibitions.

References

• 阿部慶賀(2010). 創造的アイデア生成過程における身体と環境の相互作用　認知科学, 17 (4), 599–610. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.17.599
•  Brieder,  D.,  Nadal,  M.,  Leder,  H., &  Rosenberg,  R. (2014). Art in time and space: Context modulates the relation between art experience and viewing time. Plos One, 9 (6), e99019. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099019
•  Calvo-Merino,  B.,  Glaser , D. E.,  Grèzes,  J.,  Passingham , R. E., &  Haggard,  P. (2005). Action observation and acquired motor skills: An fMRI study with expert dancers. Cerebral Cortex, 15 (8), 1243–1249. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhi007
• 土居 裕和・小俣 貴宣・栗原 貴之・山岸 和子・柏井 美貴子・植田 一博 (2023). 実物体が誘導するフランカー干渉効果は自律神経活動と関連する　日本認知科学会第 40 回大会論文集, 41–44.
• Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. The MIT Press. (フィンク, R. A.・ウォード, T. B.・スミス, S. M.　小橋 康章(訳) (1999). 創造的認知：実験で探るクリエイティブな発想のメカニズム　森北出版)
•  Freedberg,  D., &  Gallese,  V. (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11 (5), 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.003
•  Gibson , J. J. (1966). The sense considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin.
•  Glăveanu , V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17 (1), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029528
•  Gomez , M. A.,  Skiba , R. M., &  Snow , J. C. (2018). Graspable objects grab attention more than images do. Psychological Science, 29 (2), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617730599
•  Grüner,  S.,  Specker,  E., &  Leder,  H. (2019). Effects of context and genuineness in the experience of art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 37 (2), 138–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237418822896
•  Guilford , J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGrew-Hill.
• 開 一夫・鈴木 宏昭 (1998). 表象変化の動的緩和理論：洞察メカニズムの解明に向けて　認知科学, 5 (2), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.5.2_69
• 廣瀬 直哉 (1998). 行為可能性知覚の（再）調整過程　京都大学教育学部紀要, 44, 128–140.
• 石黒 千晶・横地 早和子・岡田 猛 (編著) (2023). 触発するアート・コミュニケーション：創造のための鑑賞ワークショップのデザイン　あいり出版
•  Kai-Kee,  E.,  Latina,  L., &  Sadoyan,  L. (2020). Activity-based teaching in the art museum: Movement, embodiment, emotion. J. Paul Getty Museum.
•  Kirsch , L. P.,  Drommelschmidt , K. A., &  Cross , E. S. (2013). The impact of sensorimotor experience on affective evaluation of dance. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 521. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00521
•  Knoblich,  G.,  Seigerschmidt,  E.,  Flach,  R., &  Prinz,  W. (2002). Authorship effects in the prediction of handwriting strokes: Evidence for action simulation during action perception. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 1027–1046. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980143000631
•  Leung , A. K.,  Kim,  S.,  Polman,  E.,  Ong ,  L. S.,  Qiu, L.,  Goncalo ,  J. A., &  Sanchez-Burks, J. (2012). Embodied metaphors and creative “acts”. Psychological Science, 23 (5), 502–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611429801
•  Mednick,  S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69 (3), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850
• 三浦 慎司・川合 伸幸 (2020). 日本刀の印象評価は身体感覚に左右されるのか　認知科学, 27 (1), 18–22. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.27.18
• 永井 聖剛・山田 陽平 (2013). クリエイティブになりたい？ならば腕を大きく回そう：身体運動と拡散的創造性との関係　日本認知心理学会第 11 回大会論文集, 27. https://doi.org/10.14875/cogpsy.2013.0_27
• 岡田 猛 (2013). 芸術表現の捉え方についての一考察：「芸術の認知科学」特集号の序に代えて　認知科学, 20 (1), 10–18. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.20.10
• 岡田 猛・縣 拓充 (2020). 芸術表現の創造と鑑賞，およびその学びの支援 教育心理学年報, 59, 144–169.
• https://doi.org/10.5926/arepj.59.144
•  Reed , E. S. (1996). Encountering the world: Toward an ecological psychology. Oxford University Press.
•  Rhodes,  M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42 (7), 305–311.
• 佐々木 健一 (2019). 美学への招待　増補版　中央公論新社
• 清水 裕士 (2016). フリーの統計分析ソフトHAD：機能の紹介と統計学習・教育，研究実践における利用方法の提案　メディア・情報・コミュニケーション研究, 1, 59–73. http://hdl.handle.net/11150/10815
• 鈴木 宏昭・宮崎 美智子・開 一夫 (2003). 制約論から見た洞察問題解決における個人差　心理学研究, 74 (4), 336–345. https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.74.336
•  Ticini , L. F.,  Urgesi,  C., &  Calvo-Merino,  B. (2015). Embodied aesthetics: Insight from cognitive neuroscience of performing arts. In A. Scarinzi (Ed.), Aesthetics and the embodied mind: Beyond art theory and the Cartesian mind-body dichotomy (Vol. 73, pp. 147–161). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9379-7_7
•  Turvey , M. T.,  Fitch , H. L., &  Tuller,  B. (1982). The Bernstein perspective I: The problem of degrees of freedom and context-conditioned variability. In J. A. S. Kelso (Ed.), Human motor behavior: An introduction (pp. 239–252). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
•  Turvey , M. T., &  Shaw , R. E. (1979). The primacy of perceiving: An ecological reformulation of perception for understanding memory. In L. G. Nilsson (Ed.), Perspectives on memory research (pp. 167–222). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
•  Turvey , M. T.,  Shaw , R. E.,  Reed , E. S., &  Mace , W. M. (1981). Ecological laws of perceiving and acting: In replay to Fodor and Pylyshyn (1981). Cognition, 9 (2), 237–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(81)90002-0
•  Warren , W. H. (1984). Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10 (5), 683–703. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.10.5.683
•  Warren , W. H. (2018). Constructing an econiche. In J. Flach, P. Hancock, J. Caired, & K. Vicente (Eds.), Global perspectives on the ecology of human-machine systems (pp. 210–237). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.