Abstract :

The growing prominence of China in the global art market contrasts with the relatively limited engagement of art students with abstract art, highlighting an important gap in understanding the determinants of abstract art perception. Existing studies have primarily focused on cognitive or stylistic interpretations, with insufficient attention to the combined influence of socio-personal and psychological factors. This conceptual paper develops an integrated framework to explain how individual characteristics shape the appreciation and interpretation of abstract art among university art students. Specifically, the model incorporates personal art-making experience, self-assessed artistic knowledge, socioeconomic status, and peer pressure as key antecedents, with openness to artistic experimentation positioned as a central psychological mechanism. Drawing on the Theory of Aesthetic Ability, Social Cognitive Theory, and the Big Five personality framework, the paper proposes that openness to artistic experimentation mediates the relationship between socio-personal factors and abstract art perception. By synthesizing insights from art education, psychology, and social influence literature, the study advances a socio-psychological perspective on art appreciation that moves beyond traditional approaches. The proposed framework offers theoretical contributions by integrating multiple domains into a unified model of aesthetic perception, and provides practical implications for art educators and policymakers seeking to foster inclusive and exploratory learning environments that enhance student engagement with abstract art.

---

Keywords :

abstract art perception, socio-personal factors, openness to artistic experimentation, art education, aesthetic experience

---

References :

1. Art Basel. (2024). The art market report 2024. Art Basel & UBS.
2. (2024). The art market in 2023. Artprice Report.
3. Asare, S., Walden, P., Aniagyei, E., & Emmanuel, M. (2023). A Comparative Study of Traditional Art Techniques versus Digital Art Techniques in the Context of College Visual Art Education. American Journal of Arts, Social and Humanity Studies, 3(1), 21-34.
4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
5. Chalmers, F. G. (1996). Celebrating pluralism: Art, education, and cultural diversity. Getty Education Institute.
6. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Robinson, R. E. (1990). The art of seeing: An interpretation of the aesthetic encounter. Getty Publications.
7. Duh, M. (2015). The function of museum pedagogy in the development of artistic appreciation. Journal of elementary education, 8(4), 87-102.
8. Eimert, D. (2016). Abstract art. Taschen.
9. Fancourt, D., & Steptoe, A. (2019). Cultural engagement and mental health: Does socioeconomic status matter? Social Science & Medicine, 235, 112376.
10. Gude, O. (2013). New school art styles: The project of art education. Art Education, 66(1), 6–15.
11. Kraehe, A. M., & Acuff, J. B. (2013). Equity and access in art education. Art Education, 66(3), 6–13.
12. Lamont, M., & Fournier, M. (1992). Cultivating differences: Symbolic boundaries and the making of inequality. University of Chicago Press.
13. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52(5), 509–516.
14. Sadler, D. R. (2014). The influence of peer feedback in learning environments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(3), 353–370.
15. Van Alphen, E. (2005). Art in mind: How contemporary images shape thought. University of Chicago Press.