skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Mendelson, Tamra C."

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Fleming, Roland W (Ed.)
    Generations of scientists have pursued the goal of defining beauty. While early scientists initially focused on objective criteria of beauty (‘feature-based aesthetics’), philosophers and artists alike have since proposed that beauty arises from the interaction between the object and the individual who perceives it. The aesthetic theory of fluency formalizes this idea of interaction by proposing that beauty is determined by the efficiency of information processing in the perceiver’s brain (‘processing-based aesthetics’), and that efficient processing induces a positive aesthetic experience. The theory is supported by numerous psychological results, however, to date there is no quantitative predictive model to test it on a large scale. In this work, we propose to leverage the capacity of deep convolutional neural networks (DCNN) to model the processing of information in the brain by studying the link between beauty and neuronal sparsity, a measure of information processing efficiency. Whether analyzing pictures of faces, figurative or abstract art paintings, neuronal sparsity explains up to 28% of variance in beauty scores, and up to 47% when combined with a feature-based metric. However, we also found that sparsity is either positively or negatively correlated with beauty across the multiple layers of the DCNN. Our quantitative model stresses the importance of considering how information is processed, in addition to the content of that information, when predicting beauty, but also suggests an unexpectedly complex relationship between fluency and beauty. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Coloration and body size are among the many morphological traits that vary among fish lineages. Elaborate coloration and body size covary in other animal groups, but relationships between these two morphological characteristics have not been rigorously examined in fishes. We formally test for correlations between coloration and body size in darters (Percidae: Etheostomatinae), a group of North American freshwater fishes that vary in the presence of male coloration and maximum body size. Although uncorrected analyses indicate a significant correlation between colour traits and body size in darters, phylogenetically corrected logistic regression models and ANOVAs revealed no significant correlations, suggesting body size does not act as a constraint on elaborate coloration or vice versa. These results are discussed in an ecological and behavioural context. 
    more » « less
  3. Taking an evolutionary approach to the question of beauty, we discuss the expression and perception of sexual beauty across the animal kingdom. Animals experience beauty in their brains, and animal brains are tuned to features of the environment most relevant to their survival. Over evolutionary time, sexually reproducing animals have exploited that tuning to maximize their attractiveness to the opposite sex, often leading to extreme courtship traits and behaviors. These are the traits of sexual beauty. Combining modern principles of neuroscience and neuroaesthetics with established principles of evolutionary biology, we aim to understand the biological basis and evolution of beauty in all animals, including ourselves. 
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)