The Michelangelo Effect: Art Improves the Performance in a Virtual Reality Task Developed for Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation.
aesthetics
art
cognition
neuroscience
psychophysics
rehabilitation
stroke
virtual reality
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
29
09
2020
accepted:
09
12
2020
entrez:
25
1
2021
pubmed:
26
1
2021
medline:
26
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The vision of an art masterpiece is associated with brain arousal by neural processes occurring quite spontaneously in the viewer. This aesthetic experience may even elicit a response in the motor areas of the observers. In the neurorehabilitation of patients with stroke, art observation has been used for reducing psychological disorders, and creative art therapy for enhancing physical functions and cognitive abilities. Here, we developed a virtual reality task which allows patients, by moving their hand on a virtual canvas, to have the illusion of painting some art masterpieces, such as The Creation of Adam of Michelangelo or The birth of Venus of Botticelli. Twenty healthy subjects (experiment 1) and four patients with stroke (experiment 2) performed this task and a control one in which they simply colored the virtual canvas. Results from User Satisfaction Evaluation Questionnaire and the NASA Task Load Index highlighted an appropriate level of usability. Moreover, despite the motor task was the same for art and control stimuli, the art condition was performed by healthy subjects with shorter trajectories (
Identifiants
pubmed: 33488478
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.611956
pmc: PMC7817887
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
611956Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Iosa, Aydin, Candelise, Coda, Morone, Antonucci, Marinozzi, Bini, Paolucci and Tieri.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2002 Jul;55(3):1027-46
pubmed: 12188508
Epilepsy Behav. 2001 Oct;2(5):396-417
pubmed: 12609277
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2016 Jul;13(7):641-59
pubmed: 27309490
Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Jan 12;9:705
pubmed: 26793087
J Neurol Sci. 2017 Jun 15;377:25-30
pubmed: 28477702
Neurol Sci. 2021 Jan;42(1):319-320
pubmed: 32601747
Front Hum Neurosci. 2012 Nov 16;6:311
pubmed: 23162456
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005 Apr;6(4):332-9
pubmed: 15803164
Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 25;5:17139
pubmed: 26602036
Front Psychol. 2015 Dec 22;6:1944
pubmed: 26733924
Neurol Sci. 2017 Jun;38(6):933-934
pubmed: 28584906
NeuroRehabilitation. 2020;47(2):201-208
pubmed: 32741789
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 May;11(5):197-203
pubmed: 17347026
J Neurosci. 2000 Apr 1;20(7):2683-90
pubmed: 10729349
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 Sep;48(3):455-66
pubmed: 22522435
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2018 Feb;15(2):107-117
pubmed: 29313388
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;113(1):258-65
pubmed: 24183070
Praxis (Bern 1994). 1999 May 20;88(21):951-2
pubmed: 10412282
Prog Brain Res. 2018;237:201-221
pubmed: 29779735
Cogn Process. 2015 Sep;16 Suppl 1:425-9
pubmed: 26224275
J Neurosci. 2016 Jan 13;36(2):268-79
pubmed: 26758821
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Mar;85(3):380-4
pubmed: 15031821
Eur J Neurosci. 2020 Feb;51(3):937-951
pubmed: 31630450
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 May 20;113(20):347-52
pubmed: 27294814
Neurol Sci. 2020 Mar;41(3):575-582
pubmed: 31713758