Comparison of the interpretation of ambiguity and aesthetic impression toward haiku poetry between experts and novices

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-5028885/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Comparison of the interpretation of ambiguity and aesthetic impression toward haiku poetry between experts and novices

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5028885/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Haiku, the world’s shortest form of poetry, has usually been deemed ambiguous owing to its length. However, studies have shown that ambiguity lowers the aesthetic evaluation of a haiku, which contradicts the belief that ambiguity is a characteristic of both the haiku and art in general. One reason for this contradiction may be the interaction with the readers’ attributes, in particular, their expertise—a theme considered important in the field of aesthetic psychology. Therefore, in this study, we had 20 experts and 20 novices evaluate 20 low- and 20 high-ambiguity haikus, which another group of novices had evaluated and distinguished in the pilot study. The results revealed that the novices exhibited a lower liking for high-ambiguity haikus, whereas the experts demonstrated the same degree of liking for both high- and low-ambiguity haikus. Additionally, the experts had lower perceived ambiguity for high-ambiguity haikus than novices. This suggests a higher degree of liking for ambiguous haikus than novices because they were able to process them more fluently based on their knowledge and experiences. Furthermore, interest mediated the relationship between perceived ambiguity and liking among experts only. In sum, the experts appreciated ambiguous haikus in different ways compared to the novices. The results have implications for the psychology and cognitive science of aesthetics and art, where ambiguity is important, as well as for expertise in school education, where haiku is part of the curriculum.

Psychology

Haiku

Aesthetic appreciation

Ambiguity

Liking

Expertise

Interest

1.1 Haikus and ambiguity

Haiku, the world’s shortest form of poetry, originated in Japan and consists of just 17 Japanese morae (Shirane, 2023). Its brief, simple structure reflects Japanese aesthetics as well as Japanese philosophies such as the spirit of Zen (Lomas et al., 2017; Suzuki, 1964). Simultaneously, the small amount of information provided can convey a sense of ambiguity, which is essential for imbuing a haiku with poetic quality (e.g., Gilbert, 2023; Kishimoto, 2008; Nitta, 2013). Here, ambiguity refers to a state where multiple possible interpretations are available, but it is not possible to ascertain which of these should be selected. In this sense, ambiguity is distinguished from opacity or incomprehensibility, where it is not at all possible to understand what the text means[1]. Within the field of psychology of aesthetics, ambiguity has remained an important topic, primarily in visual arts (e.g., Jakesch et al., 2013; Muth et al., 2015; Muth & Carbon, 2024; Nicki et al., 1981; Szubielska et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2023). However, the number of studies examining the role of ambiguity in verbal art is small compared to visual art, particularly with regard to haiku poetry.

A limited number of studies dealt with ambiguity and similar concepts in poetry. Blohm et al. (2018) found that grammatical deviations in poetry (which are supposed to produce ambiguity) reduced acceptability and the acceptability and poeticity showed a moderately negative correlation (r = -.43 to r = -.60). This indicates that poetry is characterized by ambiguity. Wallot and Menninghaus (2018) measured perceived ambiguity directly and found that the presence of abbreviations (brevitas) and rhymes enhanced ambiguity; however, no aesthetic evaluation was made. Hitsuwari and Nomura (2022) evaluated the ambiguity and beauty of haikus; they also made a cultural comparison between Japanese and German speakers. They found that ambiguity lowered aesthetic evaluation in both cultures, but there was also an interaction between culture and ambiguity: Japanese speakers did not lower their aesthetic evaluation as much as German speakers did, when ambiguity increased. However, Hitsuwari and Nomura’s result seems to contradict the idea that ambiguity can be enjoyed during poetry and haiku appreciation. A possible reason for this contradiction may be the interaction with the readers’ attributes. For example, interactions with culture (Hitsuwari & Nomura, 2022) and individual traits of ambiguity tolerance (Muth et al., 2015) have been important moderator variables regarding visual and verbal art forms. Of these, we focused on interactions with expertise in this study. In other words, while novices may not find an ambiguous haiku beautiful, experts may find it to be.

1.2 Expertise

Experts and novices differ in their appreciation of and experience with art. For example, experts prefer relatively complex and abstract works (Millis, 2001), and they implicitly or explicitly prefer paintings with missing or deficient elements, known as lacunae (Pazzaglia et al., 2021). When it comes to poetry, experts use more adjectives in their evaluations, and a factor analysis of those adjectives showed that experts tended to identify a four-factor structure, whereas non-experts tended to identify a two-factor structure (Nenadić et al., 2019). Related to ambiguity, Nenadić et al. (2019) also found that opacity (including incomprehensible and hermetic), a concept similar to ambiguity, was extracted as an independent factor by the experts, but not by the novices during factor analysis. Another poetry study recently showed the moderating impact of expertise on poem creativity ratings; felt valence predicted creativity in poetry for both experts and nonexperts, but the effect was stronger for nonexperts (Chaudhuri et al., 2024). In haikus, Sato (2007) demonstrated the influence of expertise on the appreciation and evaluation of haikus, with experts generally having a greater liking for haikus and a higher appreciation of haikus with negative content, as their knowledge and understanding deepened through the experience of writing haikus. In addition, recent haiku studies have also shown that compared to non-writers, haiku writers are more likely to experience self-transcendent emotions, such as awe, which is considered to be related to art appreciation (Kato & Hitsuwari, 2024). Thus, expertise has an impact on the way people appreciate and evaluate art, including haikus. The present study contends that experts, unlike novices, may increase or maintain the aesthetic evaluations of haikus even when the haikus are highly ambiguous. There are two possible reasons for this.

First, experts may perceive ambiguity but are quicker or more efficient in resolving it owing to their knowledge and experience, which may lead to a higher aesthetic evaluation. This is based on the mechanisms examined in terms of fluency theory in aesthetic experience (Reber et al., 2004; Maruyama & Ishizu, 2024 for poetry study), the aesthetic “aha moment” (Muth & Carbon, 2013), and the resolution of ambiguity (Hitsuwari & Nomura, 2023). In other words, fluent processing of information leads to pleasure, and the process of clarifying ambiguous information is seen as aesthetic. Second, experts may find beauty in a state of perceived ambiguity. Not only haiku but also artworks generally involve ambiguity in appreciation, and some studies showed that the higher the ambiguity, the greater the aesthetic evaluation (e.g., Muth et al., 2015). To explain the relationship between perceived ambiguity and aesthetic evaluation by participants, we focused on interest with reference to prior studies demonstrating that experts generally consider images (Silvia, 2013) and films (Silvia & Berg, 2011) as being more interesting than novices.

1.3 Interest

Interest is an aspect of aesthetic emotions, particularly epistemic or knowledge-based emotions (Schindler et al., 2017). It is often considered together with ambiguity (e.g., Boselie, 1983; Jakesch & Leder, 2015; Muth et al., 2015) as it attracts people to new and unfamiliar things (Silvia, 2008). For example, Muth et al. (2015) revealed that ambiguity leads to interest, whereas high resolvability lowers it. The influence of interest on appreciation has also been examined in haikus. Minagawa (2008) used the number of known haikus as an index of interest and then had participants evaluate haikus using the semantic differential technique. The results showed that the standard deviation (individual differences) was larger in the high-interest group than in the low-interest group; this suggests that those with a high interest in haikus had clear evaluation criteria and made discriminatory evaluations after analyzing the content in detail. Meanwhile, Hitsuwari and Nomura (2024) did not directly measure interest, but they observed increased recognition of the difficulty of creating haiku evoked awe (which is considered an epistemic emotion; Noordewier & Gocłowska, 2023; Takano & Nomura, 2023).

1.4 Aims and hypotheses

Based on the above, we examined the possibility that experts may appreciate and evaluate pre-distinguished highly ambiguous haikus (hereafter referred to as high-ambiguity haikus)[2] differently from novices. The first hypothesis (H1) is as follows:

H1: Experts make higher aesthetic evaluations of high-ambiguity haikus than novices.

We developed the following two hypotheses to explore the mechanisms involved:

H2-A: Experts make higher aesthetic evaluations of high-ambiguity haikus than novices because they are more likely to resolve issues of ambiguity.

H2-B: Experts make higher aesthetic evaluations of high-ambiguity haikus than novices in a state of perceived ambiguity.

Finally, we examined the influence of interest as a mediating variable, as previous studies on ambiguity and aesthetics have suggested the role of interest. This led us to formulate the third hypothesis:

H3: Among experts, ambiguity influences aesthetic evaluations through the mediation of interest in haikus.

[1] Although we are aware that other similar concepts such as uncertainty and hermeticity are used in poetry appreciation studies, we adopted ambiguity because this term has often been used in previous studies (especially in haiku studies), as discussed below.

[2] In this paper, the term “pre-distinguished highly ambiguous haikus” (i.e., high-ambiguity haikus) indicates highly ambiguous haikus that we selected as the experimental controls based on the results of a preliminary survey (detailed in the methods section). Likewise, there are “pre-distinguished low-ambiguity haikus.” The condition of prior distinction is denoted as the “ambiguity of haikus.” Otherwise, the ambiguity rated by each participant is referred to as “perceived ambiguity.” In line with past ambiguity-related research (e.g., Wallot & Menninghaus, 2018), we considered the ambiguity of stimuli and perceived ambiguity separately.

The relevant ethics board approved this study. The raw data and analysis scripts are available online (https://osf.io/8gxsu/?view_only=f7956cad7d0e411fb36de3872e4e08f9).

2.1 Participants

We performed a priori sample size estimation, assuming a two-factor mixed-design analysis of variance (ANOVA). The between-participants factor was expertise (haiku expert/non-expert). The within-participants factor was haikus’ ambiguity (high-ambiguity haiku/low-ambiguity haiku), and the dependent variable was the evaluation of the beauty or liking of a given haiku (see below). Assuming a medium effect size (f = .25), we set a power of .80 and a significance level of .05 and calculated them using G*Power (ver. 3.1.9.7; Faul et al., 2009). We needed 34 participants. Given the possibility of a 10% missing population in online platform surveys (Hoerger, 2010), we included 40 participants (20 per group) in this study. These participants provided written informed consent prior to the experiment. We deemed those who had taken part in haiku gatherings or submitted to haiku contests or haiku magazines for more than 10 years to be haiku experts (11 male and nine female, M_age = 44.55, SD_age = 9.16); we considered those who did not create haikus to be novices (16 male and four female, M_age = 39.95, SD_age = 7.50). Since all the haikus were presented in Japanese, all the participants were also fluent in Japanese. We recruited them using the online survey platform CrowdWorks (https://crowdworks.jp).

2.2 Materials

Using web scraping and covering the period from 2009 to 2015, we retrieved 910 accessible haikus that had been selected for the haiku contest run by the Haiku Poetry Association of Japan (https://www.haijinkyokai.jp/; excluding the Grand Prize and the Special Prize). As experts also participated, we employed a list of haikus with lower familiarity[3] and a high reputation. The 910 haikus were assessed in terms of kanji (Chinese characters; reporting whether there are any kanji they cannot read or do not understand the meaning of), and perceived ambiguity by 92 novices (58 male, 34 female; M_age = 43.38, SD_age = 8.91) recruited through CrowdWorks. In a preliminary survey, each participant rated 50 of these 910 haikus, meaning that each haiku was rated by approximately five participants. We asked them, “After reading the following haiku, how much ambiguity do you perceive? Please answer with an answer between ‘1. I don’t perceive any ambiguity at all’ and ‘4. I perceive a great deal of ambiguity.’ If the haiku contains kanji that you don’t know how to read, please choose ‘0. The haiku contains kanji that I don’t know how to read.’” After excluding a haiku that a respondent flagged for containing kanji whose meaning was unclear, for stimuli, we used 20 haikus rated as the most ambiguous (high-ambiguity haikus; M_ambiguity = 3.58, SD = .14, Range = 3.4–3.8) and 20 haikus rated as the least ambiguous (low-ambiguity haikus; M_ambiguity = 1.12, SD = 0.1, Range = 1.0–1.2).

2.3 Procedure

The participants read each haiku for seven seconds. After seven seconds, the evaluation items were presented based on six aspects (beauty, perceived ambiguity, interest, valence, arousal, and liking) using a seven-point Likert scale while the haiku remained on display. For example, they answered evaluation items such as “I felt beauty” on a scale from “1. Not at all” to “7. Very much.” The participants then rated the haiku while reading it. As in a self-paced reading paradigm, the next rating could be made by pressing a button. A total of 40 haikus were presented in by-participant random order and assessed. Subsequently, we administered the participants an open-ended survey (How do you think the ambiguity of a haiku relates to the evaluation of a haiku’s beauty?) and the Multidimensional Attitude toward Ambiguity Scale (Hitsuwari & Nomura, 2021; Lauriola et al., 2016). Whilst not a direct aim of this study, through this survey, we hope to provide a valuable reference for future research. The experts were asked about five features of their experience with haikus (i.e., the frequency of creation, the number of submissions to haiku contests run by haiku journals, the number of prizes received, whether they participated in haiku gatherings, and where they created their haikus); they optionally listed one of the haikus they had created and their original pen name for haiku creation. Finally, the participants answered a short questionnaire including four demographic questions (age, sex, academic history, and nationality) and three questions on art and creative experiences (experience of creative work, interest in art, and frequency of museum visits).

2.4 Data analysis

We performed all analyses using R (ver. 4.2.3; R Core Team, 2022). First, we performed ANOVA with a two-factor mixed design using the anovakun package (Iseki, 2021). In the ANOVA, the dependent variables were the six evaluation items and the independent variables were haiku’s ambiguity (within) and expertise (between). The Shaffer method was used for testing multiple comparisons with the anovakun package. Second, we examined the effect of low- and high-ambiguity haikus on aesthetic evaluation (beauty and liking) via a linear mixed model (corresponding to H1). The dependent variables were beauty and liking, and the independent variables were the two conditions of haiku’s ambiguity (within) and expertise (between) and their interactions. The participants and haikus were incorporated into a random-effects model. Third, we investigated how low- and high-ambiguity haikus related to perceived ambiguity using a linear mixed model, where the dependent variable was perceived ambiguity, the independent variables were haiku’s ambiguity and expertise, and haiku and participants were entered for random effects (H2-A). Fourth, we explored the influence of perceived ambiguity on aesthetic evaluation using a linear mixed model, where the dependent variables were beauty and liking, the independent variables were perceived ambiguity and expertise, and haiku and participants were entered for random effects (H2-B). We built the linear mixed models using the lmerTest (Kuznetsova et al., 2017) and emmeans (Lenth, 2023) packages. The Tukey method was used for multiple comparisons with the emmeans package. Finally, for both the expert and novice groups, we looked at whether perceived ambiguity explained the aesthetic evaluations as mediated by interest using the lavaan package (Rosseel, 2012; H3).

[3] The haikus that were selected for the haiku contest (not the Grand Prize or the Special Prize) are less famous than those that appear in a compendium of seasonal words for haiku poets (Saijiki). Additionally, they were selected from contests that happened long ago, specifically between 9 and 15 years ago; such haikus are, therefore, less memorable.

Table 1 presents the calculated means, standard deviations (Supplementary Table 1 for the results of the ANOVA).

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for each condition

	Expert				Novice
	Low ambiguity		High ambiguity			Low ambiguity		High ambiguity
Beauty	4.30	1.39	4.34	1.20		3.97	1.53	3.85	1.45
Perceived ambiguity	2.84	1.30	3.86	1.41		2.23	1.36	4.55	1.67
Interest	4.28	1.41	4.49	1.21		4.30	1.52	4.15	1.51
Valence	4.58	1.47	4.09	1.21		4.71	1.65	3.60	1.31
Arousal	4.65	1.27	4.38	1.17		4.33	1.53	3.92	1.32
Liking	4.34	1.44	4.25	1.24		4.24	1.60	3.52	1.36

Second, based on H1, we used a linear mixed model to examine whether haiku’s ambiguity and expertise explain beauty and liking. We computed the aesthetic evaluations of low- and high-ambiguity haikus using the linear mixed model for each expert and novice. In the model explaining beauty, the main effect of expertise (b = .32, SE = .15, t = 2.07, p = .04) was significant, but the haiku’s ambiguity (b = -.12, SE = .21, t = -.58, p = .56) and interaction between expertise and haiku’s ambiguity (b = .17, SE = .12, t = 1.40, p = .16; Figure 1A) were not significant. The experts rated the haikus as more beautiful than the novices. In the model explaining liking, the main effects of a haiku’s ambiguity (b = -.71, SE = .16, t = -4.35, p < .001) and the interaction (b = .63, SE = .13, t = 4.91, p < .001) were significant, while the main effect of expertise (b = .10, SE = .17, t = 0.60, p = .55) was not significant (Figure 1B). Experts did not differ in their liking for high- and low-ambiguity haikus (p = .96), while novices did (p < .01).

Third, we examined how experts and novices perceived the ambiguity of low- and high-ambiguity haikus. Using a linear mixed model with perceived ambiguity as the dependent variable revealed that the main effects of a haiku’s ambiguity (b = 2.32, SE = .15, t = 15.93, p < .001), expertise (b = .60, SE = .22, t = 2.79, p = .008), and their interaction (b = -1.30, SE = .13, t = -10.29, p < .001) were all significant (Figure 2). Additionally, we plotted a scatterplot of the perceived ambiguity and liking[4] of the 40 haikus according to expertise (Figure 3). Experts had fewer clear boundaries of perceived ambiguity for low- and high-ambiguity haikus (smaller variance), whereas novices had clearer boundaries.

Fourth, we investigated the effect of perceived ambiguity on aesthetic evaluation using a linear mixed model. The difference in comparison to the second analysis is that the independent variable in the second analysis, haiku’s ambiguity, was an experimental condition that was divided a priori by novices, whereas the analysis here captured the relationships between the data from the main study. For beauty, the main effect of expertise (b = .41, SE = .14, t = 2.83, p = .01) was significant, while the main effect of perceived ambiguity (b = -.00, SE = .03, t = -.01, p = .99) and interaction (b = -.06, SE = .04, t = -1.40, p = .16) was not statistically significant (Figure 4A). For liking, the main effects of expertise (b = .42, SE = .15, t = 2.70, p = .01) and perceived ambiguity (b = -.10, SE = .03, t = -3.29, p = .001) were significant; the interaction (b = .07, SE = .04, t = 1.53, p = .12) was not statistically significant (Figure 4B).

Finally, although the results of the fourth analysis above showed no interaction between perceived ambiguity and expertise in terms of aesthetic evaluation, we examined the influence of interest as a mediating variable between perceived ambiguity and liking[5] at each level of expertise (expert vs. novice) in accordance with H3. As for experts (Figure 5A), perceived ambiguity had a significantly negative effect on liking (b = -.17, SE = .02, z = -5.16, p < .001) and a significantly positive effect on interest (b = .09, SE = .03, z = 2.77, p = .01). Interest also had a positive effect on liking (b = .75, SE = .03, z = 30.31, p < .001). Thus, the indirect effect of perceived ambiguity via interest was also statistically significant (b_{indirect effect} = .07, SE = .02, z = 2.76, p = .01), and the overall effect of perceived ambiguity on liking was negative in this direction but non-significant (b_{overall effect} = -.05, SE = .03, z = -1.51, p = .13). For novices (Figure 5B), perceived ambiguity had a significantly negative effect on liking (b = -.12, SE = .02, z = -6.25, p < .001) but no significant effect on interest (b = -.01, SE = .03, z = -.22, p = .83). The effect of interest on liking was positive (b = .70, SE = .03, z = 28.31, p < .001). The indirect effect of perceived ambiguity via interest was not significant (b_{indirect effect} = -.004, SE = .02, z = -.22, p = .83), while the overall negative effect of perceived ambiguity on liking remained significant (b_{overall effect} = -.13, SE = .03, z = -4.57, p < .001).

[4] In the analysis related to H1 (Figure 1), the only interaction that was confirmed was liking, so only liking is presented here.

[5] This analysis was conducted for liking only, as the interaction in the first analysis and the main effects of perceived ambiguity and expertise in the fourth analysis were significant for liking.

We compared evaluations of haikus by experts and novices. First, in hypothesis 1, we examined whether experts make higher aesthetic evaluations of high-ambiguity haikus than novices. In support of H1, experts, unlike novices, did not lower their aesthetic evaluation (liking) of a haiku for high-ambiguity haikus. Second, in hypothesis 2, we examined the mechanisms behind hypothesis 1. Two opposing hypotheses were postulated: one, experts will perceive low ambiguity in the high-ambiguity haiku, resulting in a higher aesthetic evaluation (H2-A); the other, even if they perceive high ambiguity, they will still have a higher aesthetic evaluation (H2-B). Regarding H2, experts rated perceived ambiguity lower than novices for high-ambiguity haikus, which supported H2-A, not H2-B. In other words, experts maintained a liking for high-ambiguity haikus because they were less likely to perceive ambiguity owing to their knowledge of and experience with haikus. Third, in hypothesis 3, we examined whether among experts, ambiguity influences aesthetic evaluations through the level of interest in haikus. In support of H3, interest mediated the relationship between ambiguity and liking only for experts.

In line with previous studies, experts appreciated and evaluated haikus differently from novices (Millis, 2001; Nenadić et al., 2019; Pazzaglia et al., 2021; Silvia, 2013). Specifically, novices rated high-ambiguity haikus lower, similar to prior findings on the interpretation of haikus (Hitsuwari & Nomura, 2022), whereas experts did not. The experts did not lower their evaluation of high-ambiguity haikus because, based on our results, they did not perceive a haiku as highly ambiguous owing to their knowledge and experience, even if the novices had judged it to be ambiguous a priori. This is related to a phenomenon known as fluency theory or resolving ambiguity in which disambiguation and fluency in information processing are linked to aesthetic evaluation (Hitsuwari & Nomura, 2023; Muth & Carbon, 2013; Reber et al., 2004). Indeed, the results obtained in the analysis of Hypothesis 2-B showed that the lower the perceived ambiguity, the higher the liking. The perceived ambiguity of each expert in the second analysis (Figs. 2 and 3) can also produce another interpretation, that is, experts rated their perceived ambiguity slightly higher than novices for low-ambiguity haiku. Experts may be able to realize ambiguity in a wide range of haiku, including low-ambiguity haiku, which novices do not realize. This will be the subject of future studies. Among the experts, a sense of ambiguity led to interest, which in turn led to a greater aesthetic evaluation; this finding is consistent with the results of Silvia (2013), who revealed that those with expert knowledge found images to be more interesting and less confusing. While knowledge and interest are positively related (Tobias, 1994), there is evidence of a negative relationship, with a lack of knowledge producing situational interest (Rotgans & Schmidt, 2014). By integrating these factors, it seems likely that there is an optimal level of knowledge that elicits interest. In other words, it is possible that when it comes to haikus, no knowledge at all will fail to elicit interest, while too much knowledge and a familiar (≈ unambiguous) haiku will similarly fail to elicit interest. In the present study, we considered those with more than 10 years of experience to be experts, but the direct measurement of knowledge of haikus may also clarify the relationship between knowledge and interest in haikus more precisely. Knowledgeable experts such as literary critics and professors who do not create so much should also be considered (Graves, 1996).

Our study has some limitations. First, novices distinguished between low- and high-ambiguity haikus; this distinction was not clear to the experts. It would be interesting to determine the results that could be obtained using stimuli selected by experts in the future. Second, we employed two dependent variables for aesthetic evaluation—beauty and liking—which belong to the same factor on the Aesthetic Emotions Scale (Schindler et al., 2017), a global standard scale for gauging emotions related to aesthetics. However, we obtained different outcomes (see Figs. 1 and 4). Moreover, liking-based evaluations increase predictability more than beauty-based evaluations among non-experts (Sidhu et al., 2018); although we mainly reported on liking-based evaluations, which of these two evaluations are more appropriate for aesthetic evaluations of poetry or haikus more specifically needs to be examined.

In sum, we compared appreciation of haikus among experts and novices in terms of ambiguity. The experts did not lower their evaluation of high-ambiguity haikus, and the phenomenon entailed resolving issues of ambiguity. Although the relationship between ambiguity and aesthetic evaluation has been the topic of inconsistent findings in past studies, our findings suggest the possibility of organizing the results by examining the interaction between ambiguity and expertise. This is significant not only for studies of poetry and literature but also for psychological and cognitive science studies of art and aesthetics, where ambiguity is one of the most important factors of aesthetic evaluation. It is argued that research on this topic should consider the interaction between expertise and ambiguity, and distinguish between ambiguity of stimuli and perceived ambiguity, as in the present experiment. Furthermore, research on expertise, interest, and knowledge in relation to haikus has educational and psychological implications for students in school curricula and for adults who engage with haikus as part of their life’s work. Teachers can encourage various ways of enjoying haiku by recognizing that different levels of expertise have different ways of appreciating and enjoying haiku, and by promoting interest in even the ambiguous haiku.

Blohm, S., Wagner, V., Schlesewsky, M., & Menninghaus, W. (2018). Sentence judgments and the grammar of poetry: Linking linguistic structure and poetic effect. Poetics, 69, 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2018.04.005
Boselie, F. (1983). Ambiguity, beauty, and interestingness of line drawings. Canadian Journal of Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie, 37(2), 287–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0080716
Chaudhuri, S., Dooley, M., Johnson, D., Beaty, R., & Bhattacharya, J. (2024). Evaluation of poetic creativity: Predictors and the role of expertise—A multilevel approach. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000649
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Gilbert, R. (2023). The disjunctive dragonfly: A study of disjunctive method and definitions in contemporary English-language haiku. In J. Shea & G. Caldwell (Eds.), The Routledge global haiku reader (pp. 196–223). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003293309-4
Graves, B. (1996). The study of literary expertise as a research strategy. Poetics, 23(6), 385-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-422X(95)00008-8
Hitsuwari, J., & Nomura, M. (2021). Developing and validating a Japanese version of the Multidimensional Attitude toward Ambiguity Scale (MAAS). Psychology, 12, 477–497. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2021.124030
Hitsuwari, J., & Nomura, M. (2022). Beauty and ambiguity: Japan–Germany cross cultural comparison on aesthetic evaluation of haiku poetry. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000497
Hitsuwari, J., & Nomura, M. (2023). Effects of emotional and cognitive changes on aesthetic evaluation of poetry based on subjective and physiological continuous responses with pupil diameter measurement. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2713826/v1
Hitsuwari, J., & Nomura, M. (2024). Interaction between creation and appreciation: How linguistic art creation impacts on aesthetic evaluation of haiku poetry and ink paintings. International Journal of Psychology, 59(1), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12959
Hoerger, M. (2010). Participant dropout as a function of survey length in Internet-mediated university studies: Implications for study design and voluntary participation in psychological research. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(6), 697–700. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0445
Iseki, R. (2021). Anovakun (version 4.8.6.). http://riseki.php.xdomain.jp/
Jakesch, M., & Leder, H. (2015). The qualitative side of complexity: Testing effects of ambiguity on complexity judgments. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(3), 200–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039350
Jakesch, M., Leder, H., & Forster, M. (2013). Image ambiguity and fluency. PLoS ONE, 8(9), e74084. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074084　
Kato, J., & Hitsuwari, J. (2024). Association between the creative experience of haiku poetry and a tendency toward self-transcendent emotions. The Journal of Creative Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.657
Kishimoto, N. (2008). Haiku no Rikigaku. WEP. (in Japanese)
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
Lauriola, M., Foschi, R., Mosca, O., & Weller, J. (2016). Attitude toward ambiguity: Empirically robust factors in self-report personality scales. Assessment, 23, 353–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115577188
Lenth, R. (2023). emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.8.9. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans
Lomas, T., Etcoff, N., Van Gordon, W., & Shonin, E. (2017). Zen and the art of living mindfully: The health-enhancing potential of Zen aesthetics. Journal of Religion and Health, 56, 1720–1739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-017-0446-5　
Millis, K. (2001). Making meaning brings pleasure: The influence of titles on aesthetic experiences. Emotion, 1(3), 320–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.320
Maruyama, S., & Ishizu, T. (2024). The Effects of Titles on the Aesthetic Evaluation of Japanese Poetry. Empirical Studies of the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241270472
Minagawa, N. (2008). Haiku heno Kyomi / Kanshin ga Haiku no Jouchotekiimi no Hyotei nioyobosu Eikyo: Sousaku Keiken no Sukunai Kansyosya wo Taisyotosuru SD hou niyoru Kentou [The influence of interest in haiku on the rating of the emotional meaning of haiku: an investigation using the SD method with viewers who have little experience in creative writing]. Journal of Information Education, Naruto University of Education, 5, 67–70. https://doi.org/10.24727/00025668 (in Japanese)
Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). The aesthetic aha: On the pleasure of having insights into gestalt. Acta Psychologica, 144, 25–30. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.05.001
Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2024). Predicting instabilities: An embodied perspective on unstable experiences with art and design. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 379(1895), 20220416. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2022.0416
Muth, C., Hesslinger, V. M., & Carbon, C.-C. (2015). The appeal of challenge in the perception of art: How ambiguity, solvability of ambiguity, and the opportunity for insight affect appreciation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038814
Nenadić, F., Vejnović, D., & Marković, S. (2019). Subjective experience of poetry: Latent structure and differences between experts and non-experts. Poetics, 73, 100–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2018.11.005
Nicki, R. M., Lee, P. L., & Moss, V. (1981). Ambiguity, cubist works of art, and preference. Acta Psychologica, 49(1), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(81)90031-7
Nitta, Y. (2013). Silence of beautiful sentences—The mechanism of omission in HAIKU. The Thought and Language Study Group, Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, 112, 73–78. (in Japanese with English abstract) https://ken.ieice.org/ken/paper/20130223KBCa/
Noordewier, M. K., & Gocłowska, M. A. (2023). Shared and unique features of epistemic emotions: Awe, surprise, curiosity, interest, confusion, and boredom. Emotion. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001314
Pazzaglia, M., Galli, G., Leemhuis, E., Giannini, A. M., Pascucci, T., & Billi, E. (2021). Loss and beauty: How experts and novices judge paintings with lacunae. Psychological Research, 85, 1838–1847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01370-9
R Core Team (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/ Accessed January 28, 2024
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364–382. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2014). Situational interest and learning: Thirst for knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 32, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.002
Sato, T. (2007). The experienced readers’ liking for haiku and their personality. The Bulletin of Hachinohe Institute of Technology, 26, 139–147. http://id.nii.ac.jp/1078/00001477/ (in Japanese with English Abstract)
Schindler, I., Hosoya, G., Menninghaus, W., Beermann, U., Wagner, V., Eid, M., & Scherer, K. R. (2017). Measuring aesthetic emotions: A review of the literature and a new assessment tool. PloS ONE, 12(6), e0178899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178899
Shirane, H. (2023). Beyond the haiku moment: Bashō, Buson, and modern haiku myths. In J. Shea & G. Caldwell (Eds.), The Routledge global haiku reader (pp. 15–28). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003293309-4
Sidhu, D. M., McDougall, K. H., Jalava, S. T., & Bodner, G. E. (2018). Prediction of beauty and liking ratings for abstract and representational paintings using subjective and objective measures. PloS ONE, 13(7), e0200431. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200431
Silvia, P. J. (2008). Interest—The curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 57–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00548.x
Silvia, P. J. (2013). Interested experts, confused novices: Art expertise and the knowledge emotions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 31(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.31.1.f
Silvia, P. J., & Berg, C. (2011). Finding movies interesting: How appraisals and expertise influence the aesthetic experience of film. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29(1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.29.1.e
Suzuki, D. (1964). Zen to Nihon Bunka [Zen and Japanese Culture]. Iwanami Shoten Publishers. (in Japanese)
Szubielska, M., Ganczarek, J., Pietras, K., & Stolińska, A. (2021). The impact of ambiguity in the image and title on the liking and understanding of contemporary paintings. Poetics, 87, 101537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2021.101537
Takano, R., & Nomura, M. (2023). A closer look at the time course of bodily responses to awe experiences. Scientific Reports, 13, 22506. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49681-2
Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge, and learning. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543064001037
Wallot, S., & Menninghaus, W. (2018). Ambiguity effects of rhyme and meter. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(12), 1947. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/xlm0000557
Wang, X., Bylinskii, Z., Hertzmann, A., & Pepperell, R. (2023). A computational approach to studying aesthetic judgments of ambiguous artworks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000579

The authors declare no competing interests.

supplementaryfile.docx

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Comparison of the interpretation of ambiguity and aesthetic impression toward haiku poetry between experts and novices

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Method

3. Results

4. Discussion

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1