Abstract
A series of random-shaped polygons varying in number of sides in approximately even logarithmic steps from four to 160 sides was generated. Ss were required to compare all possible pairs of figures on one of three scales-subjective complexity, pleasingness and interestingness. Subjective evaluations of complexity continued to increase with informational content. Pleasingness evaluations described a bimodal function, peafeing at the 6-sided and 28-sided levels then falling rapidly with increased complexity. Interestingness efaluations rosé to a peafe at the 28-sided figure and remained high throughout the rest of the series.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Attneave, F., &Atnoult, M. The quantitative study of shape and pattern perception.Psyckol. Buil.. 1956, 53, 452–471.
Berlyne, D. E. The influence of complexity and novelty in Visual figures on orienting responses.J. exp. Psychol., 1958, 55, 289–296.
Berlyne, D. E.Conflict arousal and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
Berlyne, D. E. Complexity and incongruity variables as determinants of exploratory cholce and evaluative ratings.Canad. J. Psychol.. 1963, 17, 274–290.
Day, H. Brief note on the Berlyne-Heekhausen controversy.Psychol. Rep., 1965a, 17, 225–226.
Day, H. Exploratory behavior as a function of individual differences and level of arousal. Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1965b, Microfilm #66–1064, University Microfilms Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Day, H. Looking time as a function of stimulus variables and individual differences.Percept. mot. Skills, 1966, 22, 423–428.
Edwards, A. L.TechniQues of attitude scale constructions. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.
Heckhausen, H. Complexity in perception: phenomenal criteria and information theoretic calculus—A note on D. E. Berlyne’s “Complexity effects”.Canad. J. Psychol., 1964, 18, 168–173.
Looft, W. R. An investigation of the preference function for visual random shape patterns. Paper presented at the Midwestern Psychological Association annual meeting, May, 1966.
McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., &Lowell, E. L.The achievement motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1953.
Michels, K. M., & Zusne, L. Metrics of visual form.Psychol. Bull., 1965.
Munsinger, H. Multivariate analysis of preference for variability.J. exp. Psychol.. 1966, 71, 889–895.
Munsinger, H., & Kessen, W. Uncertainty, structure and preference.Psychol. Monogr., 1964, 78, No. 9 (Whole No. 586).
Munsinger, H., &Kessen, W. stimulus variability and cognitive change.Psychol. Keu., 1966, 73, 164–178.
Munsinger, H., Kessen, W., &Kessen, Marion L. Age and uncertainty: Developmental variations in preference for variability.J. exp. child Psychol., 1964, 1, 1–15.
Terwilliger, R. R. Patterns complexity and affective arousal.Percept. mot. Skills, 1963, 17, 387–395.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Day, H. Evaluations of subjective complexity, pleasingness and interestingness for a series of random polygons varying in complexity. Perception & Psychophysics 2, 281–286 (1967). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211042
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211042