Neuroaesthetics: Science confirms what we have always intuited

Neuroaesthetics is a branch of science that explores how visual aesthetics can impact our brains and physiology. While since paleolithic times, human beings have used art to find meaning or manifest their thoughts and beliefs, since the late 1990s, scientific studies have increasingly confirmed the positive impact art appreciation and creation have on our brains and overall well-being. This article explores how the growing field of Neuroaesthetics has impacted the redefinition of the transformational potential of art and its inclusion in mental health initiatives, alongside museum practices.

Neuroaesthetics. Then and Now

While there were already some studies on this topic, the field took off in the late 1990s when Semir Zeki, a renowned neuroscientist and professor at the University College of London, coined the term Neuroaesthetics. While initial research looked into the neural bases of how we perceive art, explains neuroscientist Susan Magsamen founder of the Johns Hopkins International Arts + Mind Lab Center for Applied Neuroaesthetics  (IAM Lab), more recently the field has been able to generate a growing body of evidence that evidences the benefits art can have on our brains, physiology, and behavior. For instance, nowadays cutting-edge brain research has revealed how aesthetic experiences enter the brain through the portal of the senses impacting our biological circuit. Furthermore, researchers have been able to identify biomarkers that measure changes in the brain and are recurring to wearable sensors to explore modifications in temperature, respiration, and skin responses when creating or appreciating art.

Over time, as the field took off, specialists from diverse backgrounds have explored it from various angles, ranging from physiological to more holistic perspectives. Among the most influential publications is the seminal 2004 article Neural Correlates of Beauty (Hideaki Kawabata and Semir Zeki) which explores the impact engaging with paintings ordinary subjects consider beautiful has on the brain.  “The answer is yes—activity in the medial prefrontal cortex is stronger when you think something is more beautiful,” Zeki said years later. While there is an eclectic body of sources on this subject, more recently, the book Your Brain on Art: How The Arts Transform Us, (2023) by neuroscientist Susan Magsamen and Jewelry Designer/Vice President of Google Hardware Ivy Ross, has made waves for its accessible way of introducing the intersection of neuroscience, wellness and the arts across audiences. The book shares revolutionary research and offers practical ideas for engaging with the arts that anyone can put into action. It also touches upon awe, imagination, reverence and connection.

Neuroaesthetics: a field in constant redefinition

Neuroaesthetics is also in the process of redefining its reach. As Magsamen mentions, this redefinition involves “embracing not just the human response to the arts but also its broader implications and applications to society.” Thus, this transdisciplinary approach involves the interaction of neuroscience, neurology, cognitive science, engineering, psychology, psychiatry, public health, design, education, the humanities, and the arts to come up with strategies that connect with real-life problems. While this is a desired outcome, at present only a limited number of initiatives incorporate this inclusive approach. For example, in 2017, Nancy L. Etcoff, Assistant Clinical Professor in Psychology at Harvard Medical School, started teaching “Neuroaesthetics” initially drawing mixed responses from the campus for her crossover approach but attracting students from various fields including Neurobiology, History of Art and Architecture, Psychology, English, and the Graduate School of Design, described this The Harvard Crimson article.

The gap between the humanities and Neuroaesthetics stems from the initial reluctance of some humanities scholars to embrace neuroscience, something that is changing one step at a time. As Ruxi Rui explains in this article, one of the main concerns seems to be that reducing beauty or art to neurological facts fails to capture the richness and diversity of aesthetic experiences and the cultural or political implications of many artworks. At the core of this issue lie two areas of knowledge that have developed independently, but which, through varied means, have witnessed the transformational potential of art. “As we navigate these limits, scientists agree that a greater understanding of ourselves could pave the way for a deeper appreciation of all facets of the human experience,” Rui states.

With this in mind, Magsamen’s call for a transdisciplinary Neuroaesthetic community seems like a possible route of action. Mainly museums, art educators, and curators may lean toward this route as their work involves interacting with audiences which is only tangentially seen in academia where, in some instances, it could complement the analysis of a particular artist or style. The important thing to keep in mind is that one field does not intend to interfere with the other. It is all about collaboration only when appropriate depending on each project’s thesis, goals and limitations. Certainly, one of the first steps would be to implement a measurable approach to some of the ventures implementing this outlook which would contribute to their dissemination and amelioration. “We are in the age of integration where the strands of arts, sciences, and technology are coming together to create stronger solutions to complex problems,” states Magsamen. Next to the (IAM Lab), currently, this sort of integration is pursued by The NeuroArts Blueprint, launched in 2019 in partnership with (IAM Lab) and the Aspen Institute’s Health, Medicine & Society Program to build a community that understands the imperative of using art as a science-based tool to advance collective health.

Practical applications of Neuroaesthetics

Years before the emergence of this field, doctors, psychiatrists and psychologists started incorporating art into their practices mainly to treat people with depression, Alzheimer's, or Parkinson's, in a therapeutic setting seeing positive outcomes. In this framework, art therapy (AT), defined in this paper “as a form of therapy that uses art media as its primary mode of communication to enable the patients to develop their health by promoting their creative resources,” connects with the main interests of Neuroaesthetics when associated with its social impact. The latter acquired an unprecedented reach when, a 2019 report supporting evidence for the health benefits of the arts, launched the World Health Organization’s Arts and Health program to advance our understanding of Neuroaesthetics and the biochemistry of aesthetic engagement.

With time, some programs like “arts on prescription” or “social prescribing” have incorporated this outlook. As explained in this US Field Guide by Tasha Golden from International Arts + Mind Lab, and others, arts on prescription refers “to any program in which health and social care providers are enabled to prescribe arts, culture, or nature experiences to patients or clients to support their health and well-being.” The types of arts, culture, and nature experiences that arts on prescription programs offer can range from a one-time visit to an exhibit, zoo, or performance to workshops and visits to museums, parks or theaters. While initially launched in the UK in the 1980s, the program is expanding to the US and elsewhere and is now backed up by brain studies data.  Even if promising, it is necessary to point out there is still a long journey ahead to incorporate art-based protocols globally in the education and healthcare systems.

Remarkably, the intersection of brain studies and the arts has also reached the museum sector through innovative positions. For instance, in 2017, the Peabody Essex Museum (PEM) in Salem, Massachusetts, hired Tedi Asher as a neuroscientist researcher marking the first time ever a museum incorporated this field. “The basic idea of this position is to see whether we can use findings generated in the field of neuroscience research to inform the process of exhibition design in the museum,” Asher stated to ArtNet News at the time. In 2019, she published some of her findings in this American Alliance of Museums post concluding that by monitoring different manifestations of brain function it is possible to analyze the impact of specific exhibition elements which contribute to understanding audiences at a new level.

Another example of this approach was seen in the 2019 partnership between Google and the Milan Art Fair, to create A Space for Being featuring three rooms with varying lighting, sounds, scents and textures. Each space was designed using the principles of Neuroaesthetics to explore how design can impact physical responses. With the participation of IAM Lab, each visitor was given a wristband with four sensors to measure specific physical and physiological responses, such as heart rate and skin conductivity. At the end, visitors were given a report. The exercise showed that the physiological responses of the visitors were often not aligned with what they marked as their preferences. In a way, this shows how we often leave in our minds and disconnect from our bodies next to the complex and personalized elements that impact our overall experience.

In the coming years, Neuroaesthetics will surely continue impacting disciplines and practices and, hopefully, will contribute to creating and funding more initiatives that promote creativity and spread the power within the arts.  Importantly, this power is not about a particular knowledge or proficiency in drawing or painting techniques, what matters is experience, what changes us is opening up to its immensity. For many of us, this involves bringing back the doodling and drawings we made as kids and taking a refreshed look at the endless artistic inspirations surrounding us.