Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-15T06:56:03.261Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

30 - Expertise in Drawing

from Part V.II - Domains of Expertise: Arts, Sports, Games, and Other Skills

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2018

By
Aaron Kozbelt  and
Justin Ostrofsky
Edited by
K. Anders Ericsson ,
Robert R. Hoffman ,
Aaron Kozbelt  and
A. Mark Williams
K. Anders Ericsson
Affiliation:
Florida State University
Robert R. Hoffman
Affiliation:
Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition
Aaron Kozbelt
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
A. Mark Williams
Affiliation:
University of Utah
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance , pp. 576 - 596
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013.Google Scholar
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115–117.Google Scholar
Biederman, I., & Kim, J. G. (2008). 17,000 years of depicting the junction of two smooth shapes. Perception, 37, 161–164.Google Scholar
Brown, D. (1991). Human universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Bullot, N. J., & Reber, R. (2013). The artful mind meets art history: Toward a psycho-historical framework for the science of art appreciation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 123–137.Google Scholar
Carson, L., & Allard, F. (2013). Angle-drawing accuracy as an objective performance-based measure of drawing expertise. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7, 119–129.Google Scholar
Cennini, C. d’A. (1954). The craftsman’s handbook (Il libro dell’arte) (trans. Thompson, D. V. Jr.). New York: Dover. (Original work published early fifteenth century)Google Scholar
Chamberlain, R., McManus, I. C., Brunswick, N., Rankin, Q., & Riley, H. (2015). Scratching the surface: Practice, personality, approaches to learning, and the acquisition of high-level representational drawing ability. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 451–462.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, R., McManus, I. C., Riley, H., Rankin, Q., & Brunswick, N. (2013). Local processing enhancements associated with superior observational drawing are due to enhanced perceptual functioning, not weak central coherence. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 1448–1466.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, R., McManus, I. C., Riley, H., Rankin, Q., & Brunswick, N. (2014). Cain’s house task revisited and revived: Extending theory and methodology for quantifying drawing accuracy. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 152–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamberlain, R., & Wagemans, J. (2015). Visual arts training is linked to flexible attention to local and global levels of visual stimuli. Acta Psychologica, 161, 185–197.Google Scholar
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55–81.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. J., & Bennett, S. (1997). Why can’t most people draw what they see? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 609–621.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. J., & Earls, H. (2010). Inverting an image does not improve drawing accuracy. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4, 168–172.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. J., & Jones, H. E. (2008). How shape constancy relates to drawing accuracy. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 8–19.Google Scholar
Cupchik, G. C. (1992). From perception to production: A multilevel analysis of the aesthetic process. In Cupchik, G. C. & Laszlo, J. (eds.), Emerging visions of the aesthetic process (pp. 83–99). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dodson, B. (1985). Keys to drawing. Cincinnati, OH: North Light Books.Google Scholar
Drake, J. E., & Winner, E. (2011). Realistic drawing talent in typical adults is associated with the same kind of local processing bias found in individuals with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41, 1192–1201.Google Scholar
Drake, J., & Winner, E. (2012). Predicting artistic brilliance. Scientific American Mind, 23, 42–48.Google Scholar
Edwards, B. (2012). Drawing on the right side of the brain. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (2004). The evolved fluid specificity of human creative talent. In Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Singer, J. L. (eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 57–82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Firestone, C., & Scholl, B. J. (2015). Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for ‘top-down’ effects. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–77.Google Scholar
Fry, R. (1960). Vision and design. New York: Meridian Books. (Original work published 1919)Google Scholar
Gaines, R. (1975). Developmental perception and cognitive styles: From young children to master artists. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 40, 983–998.Google Scholar
Galenson, D. W. (2001). Painting outside the lines: Patterns of creativity in modern art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Glazek, K. (2012). Visual and motor processing in visual artists: Implications for cognitive and neural mechanisms. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 155–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gobet, F., & Simon, H. A. (1998). Expert chess memory: Revisiting the chunking hypothesis. Memory, 6, 225–255.Google Scholar
Goldwater, R., & Treves, M. (eds.) (1972). Artists on art from the 14th to the 20th century. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Gombrich, E. H. (1960). Art and illusion. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gowen, E., & Miall, R. C. (2006). Eye–hand interactions in tracing and drawing tasks. Human Movement Science, 25, 568–585.Google Scholar
Hamm, J. (1963). Drawing the head and figure. New York: Grosset & Dunlap.Google Scholar
Hammad, S., Kennedy, J. M., Juricevic, I., & Rajani, S. (2008). Ellipses on the surface of a picture. Perception, 37, 504–510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayes, S., & Milne, N. (2011). What’s wrong with this picture? An experiment in quantifying accuracy in 2D portrait drawing. Visual Communication, 10, 149–174.Google Scholar
Hoffman, H. S. (1989). Vision and the art of drawing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171–178.Google Scholar
Kelen, E. (ed.) (1990). Leonardo da Vinci’s advice to artists. Philadelphia: Running Press.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A. (2001). Artists as experts in visual cognition. Visual Cognition, 8, 705–723.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A. (2008). Hierarchical linear modeling of creative artists’ problem solving behaviors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42, 181–200.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A., & Ostrofsky, J. (2013). Extending the psycho-historical framework to understand artistic production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 148–149.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A., & Seeley, W. P. (2007). Integrating art historical, psychological, and neuroscientific explanations of artists’ advantages in drawing and perception. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 80–90.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A., Seidel, A., ElBassiouny, A., Mark, Y., & Owen, D. R. (2010). Visual selection contributes to artists’ advantages in realistic drawing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4, 93–102.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A., Snodgrass, E., & Ostrofsky, J. (2014). Pixel drawing: A novel signal detection-based approach to measuring drawing skill. In Kozbelt, A. (ed.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Biennial Congress of the International Association of Empirical Aesthetics (pp. 276–281). New York: IAEA.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Li, R., Polat, U., Makous, W., & Bevalier, D. (2009). Enhancing the contrast sensitivity function through action video game training. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 549–551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livingstone, M. S., & Conway, B. R. (2004). Was Rembrandt stereoblind? New England Journal of Medicine, 351, 1264–1265.Google Scholar
Livingstone, M. S., Lafer-Sousa, R., & Conway, B. R. (2011). Stereopsis and artistic talent: Poor stereopsis among art students and established artists. Psychological Science, 22, 336–338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martindale, C. (1990). The clockwork muse: The predictability of artistic change. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Matthews, W. J., & Adams, A. (2008). Another reason why adults find it hard to draw accurately. Perception, 37, 628–630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, I. C., Loo, P.-W., Chamberlain, R. C., Riley, H. & Brunswick, N. (2011). Does shape constancy relate to drawing ability? Two failures to replicate. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 29, 191–208.Google Scholar
Melcher, D., & Cavanagh, P. (2011). Pictorial cues in art and in visual perception. In Bacci, F. & Melcher, D. (eds.), Art and the senses (pp. 359–394). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, P., Ropar, D., Ackroyd, K., & Rajendran, G. (2005). How perception impacts on drawings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 996–1003.Google ScholarPubMed
Murray, C. (2003). Human accomplishment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Ostrofsky, J. (2015). Do graphic long-term memories influence the production of observational drawings? The relationship between memory- and observation-based face drawings. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 217–227.Google Scholar
Ostrofsky, J., Cohen, D. J., & Kozbelt, A. (2014). Objective versus subjective measures of face-drawing accuracy and their relations with perceptual constancies. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 486–497.Google Scholar
Ostrofsky, J., Kozbelt, A., & Cohen, D. J. (2015). Observational drawing biases are predicted by biases in perception: Empirical support of the misperception hypothesis of drawing accuracy with respect to two angle illusions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1007–1025.Google Scholar
Ostrofsky, J., Kozbelt, A., & Kurylo, D. (2013). Perceptual grouping in artists and non-artists: A psychophysical comparison. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 31, 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrofsky, J., Kozbelt, A., & Seidel, A. (2012). Perceptual constancies and visual selection as predictors of realistic drawing skill. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 124–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrofsky, J., Kozbelt, A., Tumminia, M., & Cipriano, M. (2016). Why do non-artists draw the eyes too far up the head? How vertical eye-drawing errors relate to schematic knowledge, pseudoneglect and context-based perceptual biases. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10, 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, S. E. (1999). Vision science: Photons to phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pariser, D. (1991). Normal and unusual aspects of juvenile artistic development in Klee, Lautrec, and Picasso. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perdreau, F., & Cavanagh, P. (2011). Do artists see their retinas? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5, 1–10.Google Scholar
Perdreau, F., & Cavanaugh, P. (2013). The artist’s advantage: Better integration of object information across eye movements. i-Perception, 4, 380–395.Google Scholar
Perdreau, F., & Cavanaugh, P. (2014). Drawing skill is related to the efficiency of encoding object structure. i-Perception, 5, 101–119.Google Scholar
Perdreau, F., & Cavanagh, P. (2015). Drawing experts have better visual memory while drawing. Journal of Vision, 15, 5. DOI: 10.1167/15.5.5.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, J. E. (1982). The creative explosion. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Purves, D., & Howe, C. Q. (2005). Perceiving geometry: Geometrical illusions explained by natural scene statistics. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, D. A., Augustyn, J. S., Cohen, R. G., & Jax, S. A. (2006). Perceptual-motor expertise. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Hoffman, R. R., & Feltovich, P. J. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 505–520). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., McCarthy, K. A., & Svenson, E. (1994). Judgments of the creativity of artwork from students and professional artists. Journal of Psychology, 128, 23–31.Google Scholar
Ruskin, J. (1971). The elements of drawing. New York: Dover. (Original work published 1857)Google Scholar
Schlewitt-Haynes, L. D., Earthman, M. S., & Burns, B. (2002). Seeing the world differently: An analysis of descriptions of visual experiences provided by visual artists and nonartists. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 361–372.Google Scholar
Seeley, W. P., & Kozbelt, A. (2008). Art, artists, and perception: A model for premotor contributions to perceptual analysis and form recognition. Philosophical Psychology, 21, 149–171.Google Scholar
Selfe, L. (1977). Nadia: A case of extraordinary drawing ability in an autistic child. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Serafin, J., Kozbelt, A., Seidel, A., & Dolese, M. (2011). Dynamic evaluation of high- and low-creativity drawings by artist and non-artist raters: Replication and methodological extension. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 350–359.Google Scholar
Solso, R. L. (2001). Brain activities in an expert versus a novice artist: An fMRI study. Leonardo, 34, 31–34.Google Scholar
Taylor, L. M., & Mitchell, P. (1997). Judgments of apparent shape contaminated by knowledge of reality: Viewing circles obliquely. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 653–670.Google Scholar
Tchalenko, J. (2009). Segmentation and accuracy in copying and drawing: Experts and beginners. Vision Research, 49, 791–800.Google Scholar
Tchalenko, J., Nam, S.-H., Ladanga, M., & Miall, R. C. (2014). The gaze-shift strategy in drawing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 330–339.Google Scholar
Thouless, R. H. (1931). Phenomenal regression to the real object. British Journal of Psychology, 21, 339–359.Google Scholar
Thouless, R. H. (1932). Individual differences in phenomenal regression. British Journal of Psychology, 22, 216–241.Google Scholar
Treffert, D. A. (2009). Savant syndrome: An extraordinary condition. A synopsis: Past, present, future. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 364, 1351–1357.Google Scholar
Turner, M. (ed.) (2006). The artful mind: Cognitive science and the riddle of human creativity. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ullman, S. (1984). Visual routines. Cognition, 18, 97–159.Google Scholar
Vasari, G. (1996). Lives of the painters, sculptors, and architects, 2 vols. (trans. de Vere, G.). New York: Knopf. (Original work published 1550)Google Scholar
Ward, L. M. (1982). Determinants of attention to local and global features of visual forms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 562–581.Google Scholar
Willats, J. (1997). Art and representation: New principles in the analysis of pictures. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Winner, E. (1996). The rage to master: The decisive case for talent in the visual arts. In Ericsson, K. A. (ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games (pp. 271–301). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×