Gestalt Psychology Gestalt psychology is a term referring to a theoretical approach that emerged in Germany in the early 20th Century. The root assumption of this group was that the primitive, basic level of experience was the organized percept and not the so-called sensory element. For many centuries, philosophers assumed that perceptual experience was constructed by associating separate sensations to form percepts of objects and of scenes. Rejecting this, the Gestaltists resorted to many demonstrations to make their case. For example, when you look at a building, they argued, you do not initially see light and dark patches that gradually resolve into bricks, mortar and windows. Instead you immediately see the building, architecturally graceful or imposing, a whole, organized entity. Perhaps their most persuasive demonstration was that of apparent motion, particularly the special case of the phi-phenomenon. Citizens of the late 20th Century encounter examples of apparent motion whenever they watch motion pictures. The movie is a string of still images of objects that are photographed while they move through space. When the film is shown at the right speed, the human perceives objects moving in a fashion that is indistinguishable from the real motion of those objects. The exploration of this technology was beginning in the late 19th century, but Max Wertheimer, the leader of the Gestalt group, was one of the first to systematically explore the specific stimulus conditions under which apparent motion was experienced. By alternating two stimuli, like flashing lights, placed near each other, he was able to measure the optimum on-time, off-time and spacing needed to produce the impression of a single light moving back and forth. While this was intriguing, one particular combination produced an experience that Wertheimer thought especially relevant for the theoretical assumption. Under certain conditions, Wertheimer experienced the perception of motion in the space between the lights without the accompanying perception of a light within the space. In other words, here was a perception of motion disassociated from the perception of an object. Since he had already described various versions of apparent movement, starting with alpha, ( beta movement was what you see in the movies ), this was labeled the phi-phenomenon. Wertheimer believed the traditional, associationistic theory of perception foundered on this rock. Nothing in that analysis could predict or explain how these experiences were produced. Buoyed by these findings and joined by students, notably Wolfgang Koehler and Kurt Koffka, Wertheimer began to document the stimulus conditions that promoted the perception of organized wholes and to speculate about the nature of the brain's activity as revealed by the perceptual work. It is from this work that some psychologists have constructed a theory of beauty. Indeed, there are claims that it is in this work that some artists have found inspiration (Teuber, 1976). The documentation of stimulus conditions resulted in what have become known as the Gestalt Laws of Organization. The general thrust of these laws is that certain stimulus features are likely to foster organized perceptions, but the general assumption is that the brain will always produce organized perception because of the nature of its activity. The next sections will descibe the Laws. Figure and Ground. This is an observation of the most basic feature of perceptual organization. We virtually always experience a thing (figure) against a background. If anything is segregated because of lightness or color differences, one part, ususally the smaller, will be perceived as the figure and the remainder of the field will be ground. Transposition. A shape is independent of its elements. A melody is independent of particular notes because it can be played in different keys. Proximity. If elements are close together in space or time, they will be perceived as a whole. Thus, in the example below, observers are more likely to perceive rows rather than columns. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Changing the separations promotes columns, as below. x x x x x x x x Similarity. If elements are similar to each other, they will be perceived as a whole. Consider this below. x o x x o o x xo o x o x o x xo o x x o o x o Do we have two diamonds ? Or do we have a much more complex figure that is difficult to describe ? Common Fate. If elements appear to be moving together or moving toward a common destination, they will be perceived as a whole. Think of the wild geese you might see in the autumn sky. Since they fly in groups, usually in a pointed formation, we have no trouble in using collective nouns to refer to them, e.g., a skein, or gaggle, of geese. Closure or Completion. If a figure is open or incomplete, it will be perceived as closed or complete. The best examples are found in our ability to read handwritten characters. A carelessly written zero, for example, might not be a completely closed circle, but we will see it that way. Meaningfulness. Experience with particular forms will make them easier to perceive. The differential ability to read words in a familiar or unfamiliar language would be an example. The ease of recognizing a face even though it is partially obscured by a fence is another. This law and the Closure law are examples of our tendency to see things as we know they are. Good Figure. A well-articulated or well-organized figure will be easily perceived. Simplicity or elegance can be a criterion here too. A circle is the prototype of a good figure. What does this set of ideas have to do with art ? Consider a painting by Paul Klee, called Mother and Child. Notice how few lines are used to suggest each of the figures. A minimum amount of line gives us faces, heads, bodies and emotional information. While Klee is a good example, many 20th Century artists have used this technique to make the observer an active participant in the painting's effect. Another way to think about it is that this is a variant of Op-art. The painter is capitalizing on the basic processes of form perception in the observer to create some specific effect. How many and which of the Gestalt laws seem to operate in Mother and Child ? Marianne Teuber (1976) has suggested that Paul Klee was an avid student of Gestalt psychology and that he used shapes from a paper by Wertheimer in some of his nonrepresentational works. For example, what does one see in the following shape ? x x x x x x x x x x A probable verbal description from an observer would be, "an arc with a straight line pointing up" or "a semicircle touching a straight line". An improbable one would be "a scythe with an extra curved segment". Wertheimer had been illustrating some of the Gestalt laws, pointing out that "good figure" would lead one to expect that the simple shapes of an arc and a straight line would be perceived rather than an uneconomical complex figure. When Klee wanted to divide and separate spaces on his surface, he used shapes that, basically, Wertheimer had guaranteed would be perceived in particular ways. Another interest that the Gestaltists had pursued was the representation of transparency. How can lines be drawn to suggest either opacity or transparency of surfaces ? Rendering opacity was something that artists had done successfully for centuries, but not so transparency. The psychologists demonstrated, for example, that for the illusion of transparency to occur, two surfaces had to overlap only partially. Compare the figure on the left with that on the right. Which gives the better illusion ? ______ _______ | | | ___ | | ___|___ | |___| | | | | | |_______| |__|___| | |_______| Artists like Klee and Josef Albers from the Bauhaus exploited the results of these experiments and demonstrations in their own sketches and paintings. A short digression is inspired here by these last observations. The Bauhaus was an art school, best known for its architects and painters. While its location changed a few times, it was located in Dessau, near Berlin, for some time. Berlin was also the primary location of the Gestalt psychologists at the same time. These people were not strangers to each other and knew the sort of work each was doing. In other words, Paul Klee was not a rarity in his familiarity with the psychological literature. This raises the question about some relations between science and art. In this specific case there is evidence that artists like Klee and Albers borrowed freely from the science of the day when they composed their paintings. That theme is extensively developed by Vitz and Glimcher (19 ) in their book. They document how the scientists and artists of the 19th Century traded information about color perception and aided each other in their understanding of those phenomena. The worlds of science and art, in other words, are not as separate, and have not been, as some may think. In the current period, of course, many artists are using computer graphics extensively. Indeed, there is a separate scholarly journal, Leonardo, devoted to the intersection of art and science. **Expression and physiognomics,symmetry,empathy,universal appeal** Returning to our consideration of Gestalt psychology, we must take up the issue of whether this psychological work leads to an understanding of aesthetic reactions. The claims that it does fall into two groups, one arguing that the laws, particularly "good figure", tell us something about what is appealing and the other that emotional communication is explained by the Gestaltists' theory of emotional expression. Let us take these up in turn. Both of these arguments depend upon the Gestaltists' theory of the operation of the brain. In their view, the brain was a medium through which electrical forces flowed and interacted. The path or shape of a particular current would isomorphically correspond to the shape of a perceived form in consciousness. Isomorphism is defined as a similarity in shape, so that corresponding points on the percept and the current would have the same topological relation to other points. For example, a point will be left of another point in the percept and in the current, but the distance between them might be different in the current and in the percept. An analogy that works for me is a pair of ink stains on a stretchable fabric. The stains might be a few inches apart, but when the fabric is stretched, they move farther apart. One stain, however, remains to the left of the other no matter how hard you pull on the fabric. So, the shape of things in perception tell us something about the shape of things in the brain and what happens to shapes in the brain will happen, isomorphically, to shapes in perception. The theory also held that the general tendency of the interactions in the brain was that the electrical forces would come into balance, i.e., a stable and simple pattern. This is the mechanism that causes the laws to work. Good Figure and Closure are examples of the results of currents "seeking" simple organizations. An incomplete or slightly distorted circle will get better because of the action of the corresponding electrical currents. This led the Gestaltists, particularly Koffka (1940), to argue that symmetry, balance and "goodness" of figure were contributors to a positive aesthetic response. The emphasis on symmetry and balance is also echoed loudly by Rudolf Arnheim (1974) in his analyses. Unfortunately, goodness of figure and even balance proved difficult to quantify, so that little experimental work on aesthetics grew from this approach. Also, logically, the Gestalt position would seem to lead to the prediction that the ultimate in symmetry, balance and goodness, a simple circle, would be judged most beautiful. That does not seem to square (sorry) with experience. The Gestalt position also claimed that isomorphism existed between brain currents and emotions. Emotional information in a painting was conveyed because the currents set up in the brain by the painting's design were the currents that would normally accompany some emotion. Thus, the willow conveys sadness because its drooping branches create the same currents that the emotion does. This point of view is conrasted with that of empathy theory. Empathy theory holds that the willow conveys sadness because the observer projects herself into the posture of the willow and understands how she would feel if she drooped like that. The Gestalt position is that things are much more immediately biological and do not require the cognitive acts. While the Gestalt brain theory has not received much support in the work of recent years, there are some data from the field of ethology that suggest a biological basis for emotional expression and communication. The data are photographic records of humans displaying gestures in particular emotional circumstances (Eibl-Eibisfeldt, 19 ). The records indicate that a given gesture, e.g., a sudden raising of both arms above the head, is observed in a given circumstance, victory, all over the world. The ubiquity offers the argument that this is due to something biological that transcends cultural differences. These data also show that sequences of actions, e.g., those involved in flirting, are similarly ubiquitous, so that expression and communication in the lively arts may also depend on some biological mechanisms.