Out of the lab and into the gallery

The rigorous study of neuroscience and human psychology has always been hindered by a fundamental difficulty; experimental procedures are, traditionally, only ever reliable and statistically accurate in a heavily controlled laboratory setting. The behaviour of human subjects is therefore significantly altered by the knowledge that they are in a lab and participating in an experiment.

A recent team at the University of Houston tried to overcome this difficulty and show that reliable data can be collected outside of such a lab setting. Thanks to on-going research in portable technology – they were able to use wireless EEG headsets (which measure brain activity) to begin to sketch the processes that occur in the brain when looking at artwork.

What happens when we look at artwork may not seem like the obvious first choice for scientists researching humans in their natural habitats –why not see what happens when we have sex or eat a burrito or something? However, it turns out that this research may also be helpful to those who want to try to restore function in sensory organs lost due to neurological disease or trauma.

Over 400 people participated in the experiment by walking around an art exhibition while wearing one of these headsets. The data recorded is akin to a flickering slideshow, its pattern of tiny electrical signals constantly changing as a result of the rapid firing of different combinations and permutations of neurons.

The findings suggest that the EEG data can be used to predict whether a subject was looking at a work of art or simply at a blank wall

The exhibit itself was called “The Boundary of Life is Quietly Crossed”, showcased at the Menil Collection in Houston. The artist, Dario Robleto, is interested in the human heartbeat, and his art explores how the heartbeat has been depicted and measured by technology in the past. The neuroscientists, however, were interested in another organ, and wanted to find out, first, whether or not the EEG headsets could collect accurate data and, second, what happens to the brain while looking at a great work of art.

The findings, which suggest that the EEG data can be used to predict whether or not a subject was looking at a work of art or simply at a blank wall (something all subjects were asked to do before entering the exhibit, in order to generate baseline readings), were published as a paper in the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. It should be stressed, as the researchers do themselves, that these findings are extremely provisional.

Out of the 400 people involved, the paper only contains and collates the data of 20 of them; more data, of subjects who wore slightly different variations of the EEG headset, is due to be released soon. And the artworks were separated into just three different categories; complex, moderate and blank wall. The probability of a random predictive success is therefore 33%, whereas the researchers managed a success rate of 55% using the EEG data. This is an achievement in itself, but there is clearly a lot more to be done.

Hopefully this breakthrough in technology will convince other neuroscience departments around the world that useable data can be collected outside of a laboratory setting, which could have huge ramifications for the study of human behaviour in the future. For those who are interested, the paper is called “ Your Brain on Art: Emergent Cortical Dynamics During Aesthetic Experiences”