Art And Aggression A Correlational Study

Pathak and Carvalho : Art and aggression 101
Indian Journal of Mental Health 2018;5(1)
Original Research Article
Art And Aggression: A Correlational Study
Anangsha Pathak1
, Jade Carvalho2
1
TYBA Psychology, Department of Psychology, K.C. College, Mumbai
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, K.C. College, Mumbai
Corresponding author: Ms. Anangsha Pathak
Email – anangsha.pathak@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Background: This paper explores the various psychological phenomena, especially those of aggression,
that, over the ages, have given rise to paintings which are considered works of worldly geniuses today. The
paper studies participants’ level of aggressiveness before and after viewing a set of paintings in depth and
measures to check whether there is any possible emotive or behavioral change.
Methods: With the administration of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (pre-test), followed by
exposure to paintings inviting in-depth, elaborative and qualitative responses, The Hostility Questionnaire
(post-test) was administered to the participants.
Results: Scores from both the set of questionnaires were correlated to check whether there lay any emotive
or behavioral differences between before and after in-depth exposure to the paintings, and the significance
of this difference was found out. Thus, exposure to paintings reflecting great negative emotions is expected
to provide a change in participants’ immediate emotive or behavioral responses.
Conclusion: This finding is of importance for how art is an effective means of channelizing one’s feelings
that leads to a change or shift in one’s current psychological state. Since this has been a locally bound
study, experimental evidences would be required to further confirm a causative role of exposure to art and
changes in levels of aggression.
Keywords: Art, Aggression, Emotive Change, Behavioural difference
(Paper received – 2nd
January 2018, Peer review completed – 6th
January 2018)
(Accepted – 10th
January 2018)
INTRODUCTION
Art, in any form, is so much a part of our lives. As a medium, art has the power to communicate
universally across all barriers and it is here that so many of what humankind has been through is portrayed
in its guises – in paintings we see everything from outcries of war and roaring revolutions to inner conflicts
which have turned into “madness” and splashed on the canvas. An era of art, called Expressionism, deals
with exactly this. According to Wikipedia, “Expressionism was a modernist movement, initially
in poetry and painting, originating in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century. Its typical trait is to
present the world solely from a subjective perspective, distorting it radically for emotional effect in order to
evoke moods or ideas [1]. Expressionist artists sought to express the meaning of emotional experience
rather than physical reality” [2].
The paper looks at psychological phenomena and its manifestation in visual art. Stalwart paintings like
The Scream by Edvard Munch, Guernica by Pablo Picasso, and The Face of War by Salvador Dali reflect
an upsurge of emotions that result into some form of psychological phenomena, leading to the making of
such masterpieces. Interesting anecdotes of artists like that of Vincent Van Gogh who cut his ear off as to
symbolize an end to a fight with friend and French artist, Paul Gauguin, intrigue me. The next day, as if

nothing changed, he began painting with a bandage over his ear. Throughout his life, several
psychodynamic factors may have contributed to his art work. “…Psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud viewed
art as a privileged form of neurosis where the analyst-critic explores the artwork in order to understand and
unearth the vicissitudes of the creator's psychological motivations. In this context van Gough’s art
represent a deep psychological sketch. He left a profound, soul-searching description of his jagged life in
his art work” [3]. He was later diagnosed with a tendency to engage in self-destruction that led to him
committing suicide.
The paper looks at paintings especially which have led researchers to deduce that their painters were
sufferers of mental illnesses, displaying abnormal behaviour in their lives. These paintings and their effects
on viewership is studied, measuring participants’ level of aggressiveness before and after viewing a set of
paintings in depth to check whether there is any possible emotive or behavioural change. With the
administration of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (pre-test), followed by exposure to paintings
inviting elaborative and qualitative responses, The Hostility Questionnaire [4] (post-test) was administered
to the participants. Scores from both the set of questionnaires were calculated to check the difference and
its significance was found out.
Art and emotion have since long been understood to be closely linked to each other. Art, in fact, is said to
be a good way to channel one’s emotion. To look at it another way, paintings also have the power to
portray those emotions and project it on to the viewer who is affected by the same. In a specific study, “it
has been discovered that the use of a specific shade of pink can have a moderating effect on subjects
experiencing feelings of anger or agitation. The calming effect of pink if appropriately applied, relaxes
hostile or agitated behaviour in approximately ten to fifteen minutes” [5-6].
Art and mental illness are said to be correlated. “Artwork and psychiatric disorders are often linked.
Accomplished artists with psychiatric disorders express themselves and their emotional distress through
their works, and art therapists use the visual arts to help clients understand their problems and cope with
them” [7]. “The thoughts, beliefs, values, and emotions of artists are inescapably represented in their work
– and on some occasions, intentionally depicted. (One) of the more familiar connections between art and
the functions of the mind are the ways in which artists express their own thoughts, feelings, and mental
distress in their paintings...” [8].
Painters like Franz Marc, Amedeo Modigliani, and Erich Heckel have led lives of unaccountable distress
that is revealed clearly in their paintings. One of the most prominent emotions portrayed is that of
aggression. The crux of the paper lies in exposure to a set of such paintings and analysing aggressive
behaviour before and after participants have provided in-depth qualitative responses.
Aggression has been tested with the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BP-AQ) as a pre-test measure.
Negative emotions and the three basic stress emotions in particular (anxiety, aggression and frustration)
have been tested as a post-test measure with The Hostility Questionnaire [4].
METHODOLOGY
The aim of the paper was to explore the links between paintings as a visual means of portraying art and its
effect on aggression.
The hypothesis was that there would be a difference in the level of aggression pre and post exposure to
paintings between participants who were shown paintings with high aggressiveness and those shown
paintings without high aggressiveness.
The independent variable was the set of paintings which were of two types – ones with a high content of
aggressiveness and ones without a high content of aggressiveness.
The dependent variable was change in the level of aggression pre and post exposure to the paintings,
measured by the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (pre-test) and The Hostility Questionnaire (post-
test). The scale of measurement was the ratio scale.
Experiment-related controls
All participants were given the same pre-test and post-test questionnaires to fill by themselves.
Each participant was either exposed to a set of 4 paintings which were high on aggressive content or a set
of 4 paintings which were not high on aggressive content.

Every participant was asked a list of 10 conversational questions during the exposure of each painting that
invited qualitative, in-depth and analytical responses.
Participants
The sample consisted of 30 participants (6 males and 24 females) between 19-21 years of age through
snowballing and randomisation techniques. As such, the participants hailed from diverse backgrounds,
native languages, native states and religion. Half of them (15) were in the control group (those who were
shown “neutral” paintings) and half of them (15) in the experimental group (those who were shown
“aggressive” paintings). All participants gave their consent prior to the data collection.
Measures
Aggression was measured in pre-test by the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire.
The Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire was designed by Arnold Buss and Mark Perry, the University of
Texas at Austin in a 1992 article for the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology [8].Participants rank
certain statements along a 5-point continuum from "extremely uncharacteristic of me" to "extremely
characteristic of me." The scores are normalized on a scale of 0 to 1, with 1 being the highest level of
aggression. The BPAQ has 29 items, subdivided in four factors (which resulted from factor analysis):
Physical aggression, Verbal aggression, Anger, Hostility
The post-test questionnaire administered was The Hostility Questionnaire. Cynicism, anger, and aggression
are the three categories that accurately measured harmful hostility on the Hostility scale. A total score of 0
- 10 indicates a low level of aggression and any score above that indicate a moderate to high level of
aggression.
For statistical calculations and data analysis, the Mann-Whitney U test for sample size 30 was used to find
out the significance of the difference between the two groups.
Procedure
A pilot study was conducted on 3 participants and after obtaining desired results, the main data collection
began. Participants took a minimum of 90 - 120 minutes for the exposure and analyses of the paintings,
providing in-depth and qualitative responses for 10 questions each of the 4 paintings. The pre-test and post-
test questionnaires were administered to them which they filled by themselves. After the questionnaires
were returned to the author, the participants were thoroughly debriefed which went on for more than a 150
minutes in cases where participants showed great fascination for the study.
The questionnaires were individually scored (with categorical scoring that was meant for individual
assessment) and total scores of both the questionnaires were recorded. The significance of the difference
will be calculated.
RESULTS
The findings of the experiment were in line with the hypothesis. The scores of pre-test from both the
groups (CG and EG) were compared and the difference between them was calculated. To check whether
this difference was statistically significant, a Mann-Whitney U test was carried out.
For a two-tailed (alternative non-directional) hypothesis, the U-value is 59. The critical value of U at p <
0.01 is 51. Therefore, the result is not significant at p < 0.01.
Also, the Z-Score is 2.19834. The p-value is 0.0278. The result is not significant at p < 0.01. The two
groups are equated on the baseline test of aggression and therefore, the comparison of their mean post-test
scores will be valid.
For a one-tailed (alternative directional) hypothesis, the U-value is 59. The critical value of U at p < 0.01 is
56. Therefore, the result is not significant at p < 0.01.
The Z-Score is 2.19834. The p-value is 0.0139. The result is not significant at p < 0.01.
In other words, the two groups are equated on the baseline test of aggression and therefore, the
comparison of their mean post-test scores will be valid.

Similarly, the post-test scores from both the groups (CG and EG) were compared and the difference
between them was found out. With the help of a Mann-Whitney U test, the statistical significance of the
difference was calculated.
For a two-tailed (alternative non-directional) hypothesis, the U-value is 41. The critical value of U at p <
0.01 is 51. Therefore, the result is significant at p < 0.01.
The Z-Score is 2.94494. The p-value is 0.00328. The result is significant at p < .01.
This show that the difference between the two groups in the post-test is statistically significant at 0.01 level.
For a one-tailed (alternative directional) hypothesis, the U-value is 41. The critical value of U at p < .01 is
56. Therefore, the result is significant at p < 0.01.
The Z-Score is 2.94494. The p-value is 0.00164. The result is significant at p < 0.01.
This show that the difference between the two groups in the post-test is statistically significant at 0.01 level.
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Participants who viewed paintings that were aggressive reported some blatant statements like “Take this
picture away, I don’t want to look at it”, “I am sure that I will dream about this tonight” and most of them
analysed the paintings with dilated pupils, suggesting a continuous state of high emotional arousal. This
set of paintings was often associated with night time as opposed to morning; noon and early evening for
the set of “neutral” paintings. Thirdly, these paintings were mostly associations with death, unpleasant

memories that participants personally connected with, whereas the neutral ones were comparatively
“happier” in appearance and induced more positive associations.
All participants were shown both the sets of paintings in debriefing and asked to interpret them however
they wanted. It was almost as if the neutral ones were a relief for the participants after analysing the
aggressive set. Many also linked these paintings with dark-tale characters like grim fairness, killings and
bloodshed (especially for Guernica), scary godmothers plotting to kill someone they know. Another point
that surfaced during the administrations was that participants reported that they would be more
comfortable to draw the “neutral” paintings themselves, compared to the “aggressive” ones. When asked
why, they said that the colours were brighter and evoked more positive feelings – “it feels nice looking at
them”.
DISCUSSION
The EG had higher scores of aggression than the CG after exposure to the paintings. Participants found
that the dark yet loud colours, confident brushstrokes and vivid, prominent features made the effects of
aggression long-lasting. This means that the violent and crass emotions depicted in the paintings really had
an effect on participants’ present emotional state.
The study can replicated with a bigger sample and in different locations. The author believes that the
sample characteristics should not be a cause of deep concern in terms of the variables being measured,
since it takes into consideration the intensity of psychological characteristics rather than their nature. Thus,
someone belonging to a particular ethnic background might feel the same amount of anger for an event in
their context as someone from a different cultural background in their respective context. Moreover,
differences among samples of varied backgrounds can be identified based on the qualitative analysis of the
responses.
One’s social position could determine how items in the questionnaires were perceived. For example, an
item “A teenager drives by my yard with the car stereo blaring acid rock” might be difficult for participants
of 19 years of age to judge because they might have certain assumptions or possibly even be biased about
their contemporaries as well as older adults, which may reflect on the scores.
Although the sample consisted of participants who spoke English as their first or second language,
language barriers would have to be taken into consideration. There were instances where some items in
the questionnaires were worded in ways that isn’t the conventional English one comes across daily - for
example, “Sometimes I fly off the handle for no good reason”, “At times I feel I have gotten a raw deal out
of life” and “Other people always seem to get the breaks.”
Further research for this paper will bring in more samples, thus opening up the possibility of finding the
data to be statistically significant at a higher level. Psychological characteristics other than aggression can
also be analysed, such as one’s personality traits, social and personal circumstances that might lead them
to perceive art in a unique way, etc.
CONCLUSION
It is, thus, the author’s conclusion that exposure to art plays a significant role in setting the psychological
basis for one’s immediate emotive and behavioural responses. In this case, levels of aggression were found
to have increased after associating and connecting events of one’s own life with the paintings shown. This
finding is of importance for how art is an effective means of channelizing one’s feelings that leads to a
change or shift in one’s current psychological state. Since this has been a locally bound study, experimental
evidences would be required to further confirm a causative role of exposure to art and changes in levels of
aggression. However, in order to holistically understand how one registers and perceives art in the form of
paintings, several more social factors like one’s social location will have to be taken into account, with
study and research in terms of richer qualitative analyses responses from a larger sample.

REFERENCES
1. Thompson B. Archived at the Wayback Machine. 2010.
2. Tejera V. Art and Human Intelligence. 1966; 85-140.
3. Jayatunge S, Ruwan M. Psychological Reflections of Vincent Van Gogh’s Art, Daily News. 1998.
4. Williams R. Anger kills: seventeen strategies for controlling hostility that can harm your health. Crown
2012, Nov 14.
5. Schauss AG. Tranquilizing effect of color reduces aggressive behavior and potential violence. J
Orthomol Psychiatry 1979;8(4):218-21.
6. Rustin TA. Using artwork to understand the experience of mental illness: Mainstream artists and
Outsider artists. GMS Psycho-Social Medicine 2008;5:30-6.
7. Buss AH, Perry M. The aggression questionnaire. J Perosonal Soc Psychol 1992;63(3):452-8.
8. Caine TM, Foulds GA, Hope K. Manual of the hostility and direction of hostility questionnaire.
University of London Press; 1967.
RECOMMENDED READING
1. Gerevich J, Bácskai E, Czobor P. The generalizability of the buss–perry aggression questionnaire. Int J
Methods Psychiatr Res 2007;16(3):124-36.
2. Kleinschmidt HJ. The angry act: The role of aggression in creativity. American Imago 1967;24(1):98-
106.
3. Pezenhoffer I, Gerevich J. Trait-aggression and suicide of Vincent van Gogh. Psychiatria Hungarica: A
Magyar Pszichiatriai Tarsasag tudomanyos folyoirata 2015;30(2):201-9.
4. Paleni A, Curri S. Biological aggression of works of art in Venice. In Biodeterioration of materials.
Proceedings of the 2nd international biodeterioration symposium. Lunteren, the netherlands, 13th-18th
september 1971 1972 (pp. 392-400). Applied Science Publishers Limited.
5. Cupchik GC, Winston AS, Herz RS. Judgments of similarity and difference between paintings. Visual
Arts Research 1992;1:37-50.
6. Manning TM. Aggression depicted in abused children's drawings. The Arts in Psychotherapy.
1987;14(1):15-24.
7. Konečni VJ, Sargent-Pollock D. Arousal, positive and negative affect, and preference for Renaissance
and 20th-century paintings. Motivation and Emotion 1977;1(1):75-93.
8. Weisberg RW. On structure in the creative process: A quantitative case-study of the creation of Picasso's
Guernica. Empirical Studies of the Arts 2004;22(1):23-54.
9. Kemp SW, Cupchik GC. The emotionally evocative effects of paintings. Visual Arts Research
2007;1:72-82.
**********************
Acknowledgements – Nil
Conflict of Interest – Nil
Funding – Nil

Art And Aggression A Correlational Study

More Related Content

Similar to Art And Aggression A Correlational Study (20)

More from Justin Knight (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Art And Aggression A Correlational Study