The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.

Videos of moving faces are more flattering than static images of the same face, a phenomenon dubbed the Frozen Face Effect. This may reflect an aesthetic preference for faces viewed in a more ecological context than still photographs. In the current set of experiments, we sought to determine whether...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Malerie G McDowell, Jason Haberman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215813
id doaj-d3878893361447fd804039cf6fad989b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d3878893361447fd804039cf6fad989b2021-03-03T20:40:48ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01145e021581310.1371/journal.pone.0215813The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.Malerie G McDowellJason HabermanVideos of moving faces are more flattering than static images of the same face, a phenomenon dubbed the Frozen Face Effect. This may reflect an aesthetic preference for faces viewed in a more ecological context than still photographs. In the current set of experiments, we sought to determine whether this effect is unique to facial processing, or if motion confers an aesthetic benefit to other stimulus categories as well, such as bodies and objects-that is, a more generalized 'Frozen Effect' (FE). If motion were the critical factor in the FE, we would expect the video of a body or object in motion to be significantly more appealing than when seen in individual, static frames. To examine this, we asked participants to rate sets of videos of bodies and objects in motion along with the still frames constituting each video. Extending the original FFE, we found that participants rated videos as significantly more flattering than each video's corresponding still images, regardless of stimulus domain, suggesting that the FFE generalizes well beyond face perception. Interestingly, the magnitude of the FE increased with the predictability of stimulus movement. Our results suggest that observers prefer bodies and objects in motion over the same information presented in static form, and the more predictable the motion, the stronger the preference. Motion imbues objects and bodies with greater aesthetic appeal, which has implications for how one might choose to portray oneself in various social media platforms.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215813
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Malerie G McDowell
Jason Haberman
spellingShingle Malerie G McDowell
Jason Haberman
The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Malerie G McDowell
Jason Haberman
author_sort Malerie G McDowell
title The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
title_short The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
title_full The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
title_fullStr The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
title_full_unstemmed The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
title_sort frozen effect: objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Videos of moving faces are more flattering than static images of the same face, a phenomenon dubbed the Frozen Face Effect. This may reflect an aesthetic preference for faces viewed in a more ecological context than still photographs. In the current set of experiments, we sought to determine whether this effect is unique to facial processing, or if motion confers an aesthetic benefit to other stimulus categories as well, such as bodies and objects-that is, a more generalized 'Frozen Effect' (FE). If motion were the critical factor in the FE, we would expect the video of a body or object in motion to be significantly more appealing than when seen in individual, static frames. To examine this, we asked participants to rate sets of videos of bodies and objects in motion along with the still frames constituting each video. Extending the original FFE, we found that participants rated videos as significantly more flattering than each video's corresponding still images, regardless of stimulus domain, suggesting that the FFE generalizes well beyond face perception. Interestingly, the magnitude of the FE increased with the predictability of stimulus movement. Our results suggest that observers prefer bodies and objects in motion over the same information presented in static form, and the more predictable the motion, the stronger the preference. Motion imbues objects and bodies with greater aesthetic appeal, which has implications for how one might choose to portray oneself in various social media platforms.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215813
work_keys_str_mv AT maleriegmcdowell thefrozeneffectobjectsinmotionaremoreaestheticallyappealingthanobjectsfrozenintime
AT jasonhaberman thefrozeneffectobjectsinmotionaremoreaestheticallyappealingthanobjectsfrozenintime
AT maleriegmcdowell frozeneffectobjectsinmotionaremoreaestheticallyappealingthanobjectsfrozenintime
AT jasonhaberman frozeneffectobjectsinmotionaremoreaestheticallyappealingthanobjectsfrozenintime
_version_ 1714821207601184768