Click here to download

Reflectivity, graphic-pictorial activities and art: a virtuous circle
Journal Title: RICERCHE DI PSICOLOGIA  
Author/s: Gabriella Gilli 
Year:  2016 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  10 Pg. 423-432 FullText PDF:  174 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RIP2016-003011
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


The link between the reflective thought and enjoyment of works of art and other graphic-pictorial activities is examined in the light of the scientific literature, methodological issues and practical proposals. The art and graphic-pictorial productions are intended as mentalistic exercises, as they form an 'inter-mental reality’ that promotes a 'meeting of minds’ and trigger the hypotheses (mentalistic reasoning) about the relationship between the representations of the author of the artwork, the subject depicted in the artwork, the artwork and the viewer herself. They are therefore representational mediators for communication between minds. Their communicative function is presented in its crucial aspects: Indicate the external references and, at the same time, evoke the author’s state of mind, as well as suggesting aspects of the mind of the viewer himself. In educational practice, observing or producing expressive works, discussing them, enhancing the process of construction of meanings that emerges, helps to process the narrative and reflective tendency of children and adults. Psychological research confirms that these activities support the mentalistic ability, the reflectivity and intentionality attribution and can become the means to interpret and understand the world in an intersubjective perspective: the artist’s painting, but also the graphic and pictorial production of a child or an adult, are traces and clues that tell us something of their mind and of our own mind.
Keywords: Graphic-pictorial activities, art, reflective thought, mentalistic reasoning

  1. Argenton, A. (1996). Arte e cognizione. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  2. Bloom, P. (2004). Descartes’ baby: How the science of child development explains what makes us human. New York: Basic Books.
  3. Barrett, T. (2002). Interpreting art. Reflecting, Wondering, and Responding. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Bateson, G. (1976). Stile, grazia, informazione nell’arte primitiva. In G. Bateson, Verso un’ecologia della mente. Milano: Adelphi.
  5. Bruner, J.S. (1990). Il conoscere. Saggi per la mano sinistra. Roma: Armando
  6. Editore. Callaghan, T.C., & Rochat, P. (2003). Traces of the artist: sensitivity to the role of the artist in children’s pictorial reasoning. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 415-445., DOI: 10.1348/026151003322277784
  7. Chatterjee, A. (2004). Prospects for a cognitive neuroscience of visual aesthetics. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 4, 55-60.
  8. Conway, B.R., & Livingstone, M. (2007). Perspectives on science and art. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 17 , 1-7., DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2007.07.010
  9. Cupchick, G.C., Vartanian, O., Crawley, A., & Mikulis, D.J. (2009). Viewing artworks: contributions of cognitive control and perceptual facilitation to aesthetic experience. Brain and Cognition, 70, 84-91.
  10. 10.1016/j.bandc.2009.01.003.
  11. De Bartolomeis, F. (2002). Nuove esperienze di educazione artistica. Azzano SanPaolo: Edizioni Junior.
  12. Della Cagnoletta, M. (2010). Arte Terapia. La prospettiva psicodinamica. Roma: Carocci.
  13. Di Dio, C., Macaluso, E., & Rizzolatti, G. (2007). The Golden Beauty: Brain Response to Classical and Renaissance Sculptures. PLoS ONE, 2(11), e1201., DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001201
  14. Dostoevskij, F.M. (1873). I demoni. Parte III, cap. II (tr.it. I demoni. Milano: Rizzoli, 1981, p. 537).
  15. Freedberg, D. (1989). The power of images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press.
  16. Freeman, N.H. (2004). Aesthetic judgement and reasoning. In E.W. Eisner & M.D. Day (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art education. (pp. 359-378). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  17. Freeman, N.H., & Allen, M. (2013). Educating the design stance. Behavioral and Brain Science, 36, 141-142., DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X12001616
  18. Freeman, N.H. (2000). Communication and representation: Why mentalistic reasoning is a lifelong endeavour. In P. Mitchell & K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Children’s Reasoning and the Mind (pp. 349—366). London: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis
  19. Freeman, N.H. (2011). Varieties of pictorial judgement: a functional account. In E. Schellekens & P. Goldie (Eds.), The Aesthetic Mind: Philosophy and Psychology, (pp. 414-426). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  20. Freud, S. (1913) Totem e Tabu. O.S.F. vol. 7. Torino: Boringhieri.
  21. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  22. Gardner, H. (2011). Verita, bellezza, bonta. Educare alle virtu nel ventunesimo secolo. Milano: Feltrinelli.
  23. Gilli, G, & Colombo, L. (2005). Artista, quadro, mondo, fruitore. L’arte nella mente dei bambini. In A. Marchetti, O. Liverta Sempio, F. Lecciso (Eds.). Teoria della mente. Tra normalita e patologia (pp. 71-84). Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  24. Gilli, G., Colombo, L., Gatti, M., & Ruggi, S. (2007). Arte e bambini. Riflessioni tra teoria, metodo e laboratorio. Scuola Materna per l’Educazione dell’Infanzia, 2, Dossier centrale.
  25. Gilli, G., Gatti, M., Ruggi, S., & Freeman, N.H. (2016). How Children’s Mentalistic Theory Widens their Conception of Pictorial Possibilities. Frontiers Psychology, 26 February 2016., DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00177
  26. Gilli, G., & Ruggi, S. (2010). La comprensione dell’opera d’arte. In A. Marchetti & A. Valle (Eds.). Le relazioni sociali del bambino (pp.136-153). Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  27. Jacobsen, T., Schubotz, R.I., Hofel. L., & Von Cramon, DY. (2006). Brain correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty. NeuroImage. 29, 276-286.
  28. Jolley, R. (2010). Children and pictures: Drawing and understanding. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
  29. Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology., DOI: 10.1348/000712604236981
  30. McManus, I.C. (2011). Beauty is instinctive feeling: experimenting on aesthetics and art. In E. Schellekens & P. Goldie (Eds.), The Aesthetic Mind: Philosophy and Psychology (pp.169–189). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  31. Morelli, U. (2013). Mente e bellezza. Torino: Allemandi. Malchiodi, C.A. (Ed.) (2014). Artereapia e cura della salute. Milano: Red.
  32. Maridaki-Kassotaki, K., & Freeman, N.H. (2000). Concepts of pictures on display. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 18, 151-158., DOI: 10.2190/24Y7-2GDJAX1A-0RG2
  33. Massaro, D., Savazzi, F., Di Dio, C., Freedberg, D., Gallese, V., Gilli, G. & Marchetti, A. (2012) When Art Moves the Eyes: A Behavioral and Eye-Tracking Study. PLoS ONE, 7(5), e37285., DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037285
  34. Perniola, M. (2015). L’arte espansa. Torino: Giulio Einaudi Editore.
  35. Ruggi, S., Gilli, G., Colombo, L., Tagliabue, S., & Gatti, M. (2012). Contributo alla validazione italiana del Nuovo Test Estetico di Lindauer. Ricerche di Psicologia, 583-603.
  36. Savazzi, F., Massaro, D., Di Dio, C., Gallese, V., Gilli, G., & Marchetti, A. (2014) Exploring Responses to Art in Adolescence: A Behavioral and Eye-Tracking Study. PLoS ONE, 9(7), e102888., DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102888

Gabriella Gilli, Reflectivity, graphic-pictorial activities and art: a virtuous circle in "RICERCHE DI PSICOLOGIA " 3/2016, pp. 423-432, DOI:10.3280/RIP2016-003011

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content