The Experts below are selected from a list of 2790 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Colognesi Stéphane - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
La dynamique de construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur lors de l’évaluation de stages en enseignement
Canadian Society for the Study of Education Société canadienne pour l'étude de l'éducation, 2020Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Van Nieuwenhoven Catherine, Colognesi StéphaneAbstract:In the context of initial teacher training courses, and more particularly in the Frenchspeaking part of Belgium, this contribution attempts to answer the question: how to characterize the construction of the supervisor’s Evaluative Judgment during the co-assessment interview? To answer this question, we conducted an exploratory study. This is a multicase study based on two co-evaluation interviews conducted by two supervisors from the same training institute. The results show that the process is dynamic and iterative, taking into account a series of partial and provisional Judgments in order to construct the final Evaluative Judgment that meets the characteristics of professional Judgment in evaluation. Keywords: traineeship, supervisor, co-assessment, professional Judgment in evaluationDans le contexte des stages en formation initiale des enseignants, et plus particulièrement en Belgique francophone, cette contribution tente de répondre à la question suivante : comment caractériser la construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur lors de l’entretien de coévaluation ? Pour y répondre, nous avons réalisé une étude exploratoire. Il s’agit d’une étude multicas autour de deux entretiens de coévaluation menés par deux superviseurs issus du même institut de formation. Les résultats mettent en évidence que le processus est dynamique et itératif, prenant en compte une série de jugements partiels et provisoires afin de construire le jugement évaluatif final rencontrant les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation. Mots-clés : stage, superviseur, coévaluation, jugement professionnel en évaluatio
-
Le processus de construction du jugement évaluatif par les superviseurs de stage en enseignement
'Consortium Erudit', 2019Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Colognesi Stéphane, Van Nieuwenhoven CatherineAbstract:Dans le contexte de la formation initiale des enseignants en Belgique francophone, cet article s’intéresse aux stages, plus précisément à la construction du jugement évaluatif des superviseurs durant la coévaluation. Il a pour objectif d’analyser les jugements évaluatifs produits par les superviseurs afin d’identifier si ceux-ci respectent les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation, plus particulièrement la singularité de la situation. Cette contribution vise alors à répondre aux deux questions suivantes : Le jugement évaluatif du superviseur respecte-t-il les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation ? Dans quelle mesure la singularité de la situation influence-t-elle ce jugement évaluatif ? Pour ce faire, nous avons réalisé des entretiens individuels de huit superviseurs issus d’un même institut de formation. L’analyse du contenu appliquée aux données récoltées a permis de mettre en évidence les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel mis en oeuvre, mais aussi la manière dont les aspects singuliers relatifs au contexte de stage sont pris en compte dans la construction du jugement évaluatif.In the context of initial teacher training in French-speaking Belgium, this article focuses on traineeships, and more specifically on the construction of the Evaluative Judgment of supervisors during co-assessment. It aims to analyze the Evaluative Judgments produced by supervisors to see if they meet the characteristics of professional Judgment in assessment, and more specifically the dimension of the situation that takes into account its singularity. This contribution aims to answer the following two questions: Does the Evaluative Judgment of the supervisor meet the characteristics of professional Judgment in assessment? To what extent does the singularity of the situation influence this Evaluative Judgment? To answer these questions, we conducted an individual interview with eight supervisors from the same training institute. On the one hand, the analysis of the content highlighted the characteristics of the professional Judgment implemented. On the other hand, it showed how the traineeship context has been taken into consideration during the construction of the Evaluative Judgment.No contexto da formação inicial de professores na Bélgica francófona, este artigo incide sobre os estágios, mais especificamente na construção de juízos avaliativos dos supervisores durante a coavaliação. O objetivo é analisar os juízos avaliativos produzidos pelos supervisores, a fim de identificar se estes respeitam as características do juízo profissional em avaliação, mais particularmente a singularidade da situação. Este contributo visa responder às duas perguntas seguintes: o juízo avaliativo do supervisor respeita as características do juízo profissional em avaliação? Em que medida a singularidade da situação influencia esse juízo avaliativo? Para o efeito, realizamos entrevistas individuais a oito supervisores de um mesmo instituto de formação. A análise de conteúdo aplicada aos dados recolhidos permitiu destacar as características do juízo profissional adotado, mas também a maneira pela qual os aspectos singulares relacionados ao contexto do estágio são levados em consideração na construção do juízo avaliativo
-
Uno studio su casi multipli per capire come si tiene conto della singolarità in situazioni di valutazione congiunta di stage nell’insegnamento
University of Bern, 2019Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Colognesi Stéphane, Van Nieuwenhoven CatherineAbstract:Im Rahmen der Erstausbildung von Lehrpersonen im französischsprachigen Belgien müssen Aufsichtspersonen die Auszubildenden insbesondere durch Ko-Evaluierungen bewerten. Mit diesem Beitrag soll die folgende Frage beantwortet werden: Wie wird die Einzigartigkeit bzw. Spezifität der jeweiligen Situation bei der Bewertung von Seiten des Supervisors berücksichtigt? Wir haben eine Multi-Case-Studie durchgeführt, die auf acht Ko-Evaluationsinterviews basiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Supervisoren den Kontext des Praktikums und / oder die persönlichen Aspekte der Schülerinnen und Schüler berücksichtigen, um ein bewertendes Urteil zu bilden.In the context of initial teacher training in the French speaking part of Belgium, supervisors are required to evaluate trainees, in particular through co-evaluations. In this context, this contribution aims to answer the following question: How is the singularity of the situation taken into account in the construction of the supervisor’s Evaluative Judgment? To answer this question, we conducted a multi-case study built around eight co-evaluation interviews. The results highlight that the supervisors of the study take into account the internship context and / or the personal aspects of the student to build their Evaluative Judgment.Dans le contexte de la formation initiale des enseignants en Belgique francophone, les superviseurs sont amenés à évaluer les étudiants en stage notamment par des coévaluations. Dans ce cadre, cette contribution vise à répondre à la question suivante: Comment la singularité de la situation est-elle prise en compte dans la construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur? Pour y répondre, nous avons réalisé une étude multi-cas construite autour de huit entretiens de coévaluation. Les résultats mettent notamment en évidence que les superviseurs de l’étude prennent en compte le contexte de stage et/ou des aspects personnels de l’étudiant pour construire leur jugement évaluatif.Nel contesto della formazione iniziale degli insegnanti nel Belgio francofono, i supervisori sono tenuti a valutare gli studenti in tirocinio, in particolare attraverso valutazioni congiunte. In questo contesto, il presente contributo intende rispondere alla seguente domanda: Come si tiene conto della singolarità della situazione nella costruzione del giudizio valutativo del supervisore? Per rispondere a questa domanda, abbiamo condotto uno studio su casi multipli basato su otto interviste di co-valutazione. I risultati evidenziano in particolare che i supervisori tengano conto del contesto dello stage e/o degli aspetti personali dello studente per costruire il loro giudizio valutativo
Van Nieuwenhoven Catherine - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
La dynamique de construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur lors de l’évaluation de stages en enseignement
Canadian Society for the Study of Education Société canadienne pour l'étude de l'éducation, 2020Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Van Nieuwenhoven Catherine, Colognesi StéphaneAbstract:In the context of initial teacher training courses, and more particularly in the Frenchspeaking part of Belgium, this contribution attempts to answer the question: how to characterize the construction of the supervisor’s Evaluative Judgment during the co-assessment interview? To answer this question, we conducted an exploratory study. This is a multicase study based on two co-evaluation interviews conducted by two supervisors from the same training institute. The results show that the process is dynamic and iterative, taking into account a series of partial and provisional Judgments in order to construct the final Evaluative Judgment that meets the characteristics of professional Judgment in evaluation. Keywords: traineeship, supervisor, co-assessment, professional Judgment in evaluationDans le contexte des stages en formation initiale des enseignants, et plus particulièrement en Belgique francophone, cette contribution tente de répondre à la question suivante : comment caractériser la construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur lors de l’entretien de coévaluation ? Pour y répondre, nous avons réalisé une étude exploratoire. Il s’agit d’une étude multicas autour de deux entretiens de coévaluation menés par deux superviseurs issus du même institut de formation. Les résultats mettent en évidence que le processus est dynamique et itératif, prenant en compte une série de jugements partiels et provisoires afin de construire le jugement évaluatif final rencontrant les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation. Mots-clés : stage, superviseur, coévaluation, jugement professionnel en évaluatio
-
Le processus de construction du jugement évaluatif par les superviseurs de stage en enseignement
'Consortium Erudit', 2019Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Colognesi Stéphane, Van Nieuwenhoven CatherineAbstract:Dans le contexte de la formation initiale des enseignants en Belgique francophone, cet article s’intéresse aux stages, plus précisément à la construction du jugement évaluatif des superviseurs durant la coévaluation. Il a pour objectif d’analyser les jugements évaluatifs produits par les superviseurs afin d’identifier si ceux-ci respectent les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation, plus particulièrement la singularité de la situation. Cette contribution vise alors à répondre aux deux questions suivantes : Le jugement évaluatif du superviseur respecte-t-il les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation ? Dans quelle mesure la singularité de la situation influence-t-elle ce jugement évaluatif ? Pour ce faire, nous avons réalisé des entretiens individuels de huit superviseurs issus d’un même institut de formation. L’analyse du contenu appliquée aux données récoltées a permis de mettre en évidence les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel mis en oeuvre, mais aussi la manière dont les aspects singuliers relatifs au contexte de stage sont pris en compte dans la construction du jugement évaluatif.In the context of initial teacher training in French-speaking Belgium, this article focuses on traineeships, and more specifically on the construction of the Evaluative Judgment of supervisors during co-assessment. It aims to analyze the Evaluative Judgments produced by supervisors to see if they meet the characteristics of professional Judgment in assessment, and more specifically the dimension of the situation that takes into account its singularity. This contribution aims to answer the following two questions: Does the Evaluative Judgment of the supervisor meet the characteristics of professional Judgment in assessment? To what extent does the singularity of the situation influence this Evaluative Judgment? To answer these questions, we conducted an individual interview with eight supervisors from the same training institute. On the one hand, the analysis of the content highlighted the characteristics of the professional Judgment implemented. On the other hand, it showed how the traineeship context has been taken into consideration during the construction of the Evaluative Judgment.No contexto da formação inicial de professores na Bélgica francófona, este artigo incide sobre os estágios, mais especificamente na construção de juízos avaliativos dos supervisores durante a coavaliação. O objetivo é analisar os juízos avaliativos produzidos pelos supervisores, a fim de identificar se estes respeitam as características do juízo profissional em avaliação, mais particularmente a singularidade da situação. Este contributo visa responder às duas perguntas seguintes: o juízo avaliativo do supervisor respeita as características do juízo profissional em avaliação? Em que medida a singularidade da situação influencia esse juízo avaliativo? Para o efeito, realizamos entrevistas individuais a oito supervisores de um mesmo instituto de formação. A análise de conteúdo aplicada aos dados recolhidos permitiu destacar as características do juízo profissional adotado, mas também a maneira pela qual os aspectos singulares relacionados ao contexto do estágio são levados em consideração na construção do juízo avaliativo
-
Uno studio su casi multipli per capire come si tiene conto della singolarità in situazioni di valutazione congiunta di stage nell’insegnamento
University of Bern, 2019Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Colognesi Stéphane, Van Nieuwenhoven CatherineAbstract:Im Rahmen der Erstausbildung von Lehrpersonen im französischsprachigen Belgien müssen Aufsichtspersonen die Auszubildenden insbesondere durch Ko-Evaluierungen bewerten. Mit diesem Beitrag soll die folgende Frage beantwortet werden: Wie wird die Einzigartigkeit bzw. Spezifität der jeweiligen Situation bei der Bewertung von Seiten des Supervisors berücksichtigt? Wir haben eine Multi-Case-Studie durchgeführt, die auf acht Ko-Evaluationsinterviews basiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Supervisoren den Kontext des Praktikums und / oder die persönlichen Aspekte der Schülerinnen und Schüler berücksichtigen, um ein bewertendes Urteil zu bilden.In the context of initial teacher training in the French speaking part of Belgium, supervisors are required to evaluate trainees, in particular through co-evaluations. In this context, this contribution aims to answer the following question: How is the singularity of the situation taken into account in the construction of the supervisor’s Evaluative Judgment? To answer this question, we conducted a multi-case study built around eight co-evaluation interviews. The results highlight that the supervisors of the study take into account the internship context and / or the personal aspects of the student to build their Evaluative Judgment.Dans le contexte de la formation initiale des enseignants en Belgique francophone, les superviseurs sont amenés à évaluer les étudiants en stage notamment par des coévaluations. Dans ce cadre, cette contribution vise à répondre à la question suivante: Comment la singularité de la situation est-elle prise en compte dans la construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur? Pour y répondre, nous avons réalisé une étude multi-cas construite autour de huit entretiens de coévaluation. Les résultats mettent notamment en évidence que les superviseurs de l’étude prennent en compte le contexte de stage et/ou des aspects personnels de l’étudiant pour construire leur jugement évaluatif.Nel contesto della formazione iniziale degli insegnanti nel Belgio francofono, i supervisori sono tenuti a valutare gli studenti in tirocinio, in particolare attraverso valutazioni congiunte. In questo contesto, il presente contributo intende rispondere alla seguente domanda: Come si tiene conto della singolarità della situazione nella costruzione del giudizio valutativo del supervisore? Per rispondere a questa domanda, abbiamo condotto uno studio su casi multipli basato su otto interviste di co-valutazione. I risultati evidenziano in particolare che i supervisori tengano conto del contesto dello stage e/o degli aspetti personali dello studente per costruire il loro giudizio valutativo
D. Yves Von Cramon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Decision-making and the frontal lobes.
Current opinion in neurology, 2006Co-Authors: Kirsten G. Volz, Ricarda Ines Schubotz, D. Yves Von CramonAbstract:Purpose of reviewThis article reviews the most significant advances concerning the neural correlates of decision-making with emphasis on those imaging studies investigating the neural implementation of Evaluative Judgment processes. This is done against the background of current concepts from the fi
-
Functional specialization within the anterior medial prefrontal cortex: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study with human subjects.
Neuroscience letters, 2003Co-Authors: Stefan Zysset, Oswald Huber, Evelyn C. Ferstl, Andrea Christiane Samson, D. Yves Von CramonAbstract:This study investigated the functional neuroanatomy of the anterior medial prefrontal cortex (aMPFC). Previous studies have shown that the aMPFC is involved in Evaluative Judgment and self-referential processes. Specifically, different sections of the aMPFC are differentially influenced by attention demanding processes. Whereas the dorsal section is supposed to be involved in self-referential processes, the ventral section is assumed to be attenuated during attention demanding processes. The present study investigates the involvement of the dorsal and ventral aMPFC in Evaluative Judgment by using functional magnetic resonance imaging with spin-echo echo-planar-imaging. Processes involved in Evaluative Judgment are attention-demanding, self-referential and activate regions in the dorsal and ventral section of the aMPFC. Attention demanding tasks do not necessarily lead to an attenuation of the ventral section of the aMPFC, a region mainly involved in emotional and affective processing.
-
The anterior frontomedian cortex and Evaluative Judgment: An fMRI study
NeuroImage, 2002Co-Authors: Stefan Zysset, Oswald Huber, Evelyn C. Ferstl, D. Yves Von CramonAbstract:This study investigated the neuronal basis of Evaluative Judgment. Judgments can be defined as the assessment of an external or internal stimulus on an internal scale and they are fundamental for decision-making and other cognitive processes. Evaluative Judgments (I like George W. Bush: yes/no) are a special type of Judgment, in which the internal scale is related to the person's value system (preferences, norms, aesthetic values, etc.). We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine brain activation during the performance of Evaluative Judgments as opposed to episodic and semantic memory retrieval. Evaluative Judgment produced significant activation in the anterior frontomedian cortex (BA 10/9), the inferior precuneus (BA 23/31), and the left inferior prefrontal cortex (BA 45/47). The results show a functional dissociation between the activations in the anterior frontomedian cortex and in the inferior precuneus. The latter was mainly activated by episodic retrieval processes, supporting its function as a multimodal association area that integrates the different aspects of retrieved and newly presented information. In contrast, the anterior frontomedian cortex was mainly involved in Evaluative Judgments, supporting its role in self-referential processes and in the self-initiation of cognitive processes.
Maes Olivier - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
La dynamique de construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur lors de l’évaluation de stages en enseignement
Canadian Society for the Study of Education Société canadienne pour l'étude de l'éducation, 2020Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Van Nieuwenhoven Catherine, Colognesi StéphaneAbstract:In the context of initial teacher training courses, and more particularly in the Frenchspeaking part of Belgium, this contribution attempts to answer the question: how to characterize the construction of the supervisor’s Evaluative Judgment during the co-assessment interview? To answer this question, we conducted an exploratory study. This is a multicase study based on two co-evaluation interviews conducted by two supervisors from the same training institute. The results show that the process is dynamic and iterative, taking into account a series of partial and provisional Judgments in order to construct the final Evaluative Judgment that meets the characteristics of professional Judgment in evaluation. Keywords: traineeship, supervisor, co-assessment, professional Judgment in evaluationDans le contexte des stages en formation initiale des enseignants, et plus particulièrement en Belgique francophone, cette contribution tente de répondre à la question suivante : comment caractériser la construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur lors de l’entretien de coévaluation ? Pour y répondre, nous avons réalisé une étude exploratoire. Il s’agit d’une étude multicas autour de deux entretiens de coévaluation menés par deux superviseurs issus du même institut de formation. Les résultats mettent en évidence que le processus est dynamique et itératif, prenant en compte une série de jugements partiels et provisoires afin de construire le jugement évaluatif final rencontrant les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation. Mots-clés : stage, superviseur, coévaluation, jugement professionnel en évaluatio
-
Le processus de construction du jugement évaluatif par les superviseurs de stage en enseignement
'Consortium Erudit', 2019Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Colognesi Stéphane, Van Nieuwenhoven CatherineAbstract:Dans le contexte de la formation initiale des enseignants en Belgique francophone, cet article s’intéresse aux stages, plus précisément à la construction du jugement évaluatif des superviseurs durant la coévaluation. Il a pour objectif d’analyser les jugements évaluatifs produits par les superviseurs afin d’identifier si ceux-ci respectent les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation, plus particulièrement la singularité de la situation. Cette contribution vise alors à répondre aux deux questions suivantes : Le jugement évaluatif du superviseur respecte-t-il les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel en évaluation ? Dans quelle mesure la singularité de la situation influence-t-elle ce jugement évaluatif ? Pour ce faire, nous avons réalisé des entretiens individuels de huit superviseurs issus d’un même institut de formation. L’analyse du contenu appliquée aux données récoltées a permis de mettre en évidence les caractéristiques du jugement professionnel mis en oeuvre, mais aussi la manière dont les aspects singuliers relatifs au contexte de stage sont pris en compte dans la construction du jugement évaluatif.In the context of initial teacher training in French-speaking Belgium, this article focuses on traineeships, and more specifically on the construction of the Evaluative Judgment of supervisors during co-assessment. It aims to analyze the Evaluative Judgments produced by supervisors to see if they meet the characteristics of professional Judgment in assessment, and more specifically the dimension of the situation that takes into account its singularity. This contribution aims to answer the following two questions: Does the Evaluative Judgment of the supervisor meet the characteristics of professional Judgment in assessment? To what extent does the singularity of the situation influence this Evaluative Judgment? To answer these questions, we conducted an individual interview with eight supervisors from the same training institute. On the one hand, the analysis of the content highlighted the characteristics of the professional Judgment implemented. On the other hand, it showed how the traineeship context has been taken into consideration during the construction of the Evaluative Judgment.No contexto da formação inicial de professores na Bélgica francófona, este artigo incide sobre os estágios, mais especificamente na construção de juízos avaliativos dos supervisores durante a coavaliação. O objetivo é analisar os juízos avaliativos produzidos pelos supervisores, a fim de identificar se estes respeitam as características do juízo profissional em avaliação, mais particularmente a singularidade da situação. Este contributo visa responder às duas perguntas seguintes: o juízo avaliativo do supervisor respeita as características do juízo profissional em avaliação? Em que medida a singularidade da situação influencia esse juízo avaliativo? Para o efeito, realizamos entrevistas individuais a oito supervisores de um mesmo instituto de formação. A análise de conteúdo aplicada aos dados recolhidos permitiu destacar as características do juízo profissional adotado, mas também a maneira pela qual os aspectos singulares relacionados ao contexto do estágio são levados em consideração na construção do juízo avaliativo
-
Uno studio su casi multipli per capire come si tiene conto della singolarità in situazioni di valutazione congiunta di stage nell’insegnamento
University of Bern, 2019Co-Authors: Maes Olivier, Colognesi Stéphane, Van Nieuwenhoven CatherineAbstract:Im Rahmen der Erstausbildung von Lehrpersonen im französischsprachigen Belgien müssen Aufsichtspersonen die Auszubildenden insbesondere durch Ko-Evaluierungen bewerten. Mit diesem Beitrag soll die folgende Frage beantwortet werden: Wie wird die Einzigartigkeit bzw. Spezifität der jeweiligen Situation bei der Bewertung von Seiten des Supervisors berücksichtigt? Wir haben eine Multi-Case-Studie durchgeführt, die auf acht Ko-Evaluationsinterviews basiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Supervisoren den Kontext des Praktikums und / oder die persönlichen Aspekte der Schülerinnen und Schüler berücksichtigen, um ein bewertendes Urteil zu bilden.In the context of initial teacher training in the French speaking part of Belgium, supervisors are required to evaluate trainees, in particular through co-evaluations. In this context, this contribution aims to answer the following question: How is the singularity of the situation taken into account in the construction of the supervisor’s Evaluative Judgment? To answer this question, we conducted a multi-case study built around eight co-evaluation interviews. The results highlight that the supervisors of the study take into account the internship context and / or the personal aspects of the student to build their Evaluative Judgment.Dans le contexte de la formation initiale des enseignants en Belgique francophone, les superviseurs sont amenés à évaluer les étudiants en stage notamment par des coévaluations. Dans ce cadre, cette contribution vise à répondre à la question suivante: Comment la singularité de la situation est-elle prise en compte dans la construction du jugement évaluatif du superviseur? Pour y répondre, nous avons réalisé une étude multi-cas construite autour de huit entretiens de coévaluation. Les résultats mettent notamment en évidence que les superviseurs de l’étude prennent en compte le contexte de stage et/ou des aspects personnels de l’étudiant pour construire leur jugement évaluatif.Nel contesto della formazione iniziale degli insegnanti nel Belgio francofono, i supervisori sono tenuti a valutare gli studenti in tirocinio, in particolare attraverso valutazioni congiunte. In questo contesto, il presente contributo intende rispondere alla seguente domanda: Come si tiene conto della singolarità della situazione nella costruzione del giudizio valutativo del supervisore? Per rispondere a questa domanda, abbiamo condotto uno studio su casi multipli basato su otto interviste di co-valutazione. I risultati evidenziano in particolare che i supervisori tengano conto del contesto dello stage e/o degli aspetti personali dello studente per costruire il loro giudizio valutativo
Thomas Jacobsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effect of Explicit Evaluation on Neural Connectivity Related to Listening to Unfamiliar Music
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2017Co-Authors: Elvira Brattico, Carlos S. Pereira, Basel Abu-jamous, Thomas Jacobsen, Asoke K. NandiAbstract:People can experience different emotions when listening to music. A growing number of studies have investigated the brain structures and neural connectivities associated with perceived emotions. However, very little is known about the effect of an explicit act of judgement on the neural processing of emotionally-valenced music. In this study, we adopted the novel consensus clustering paradigm, called binarisation of consensus partition matrices (Bi-CoPaM), to study whether and how the conscious aesthetic evaluation of the music would modulate brain connectivity networks related to emotion and reward processing. Participants listened to music under three conditions – one involving a non-Evaluative Judgment, one involving an explicit Evaluative aesthetic Judgment, and one involving no judgement at all (passive listening only). During non-Evaluative attentive listening we obtained auditory-limbic connectivity whereas when participants were asked to decide explicitly whether they liked or disliked the music excerpt, only two clusters of intercommunicating brain regions were found: one including areas related to auditory processing and action observation, and the other comprising higher-order structures involved with visual processing. Results indicate that explicit Evaluative Judgment has an impact on the neural auditory-limbic connectivity during affective processing of music.
-
Aesthetics of Faces
Journal of Psychophysiology, 2008Co-Authors: Anja Roye, Lea Höfel, Thomas JacobsenAbstract:Temporal and brain topographic characteristics of the aesthetic Judgment of male and female faces were investigated, using event-related potentials and reaction times. The Evaluative aesthetic Judgment of facial beauty (beautiful vs. not beautiful) was contrasted with a nonEvaluative descriptive Judgment of head shape (round vs. oval). Analysis showed longer reaction times in the descriptive than in the Evaluative task, suggesting that the descriptive Judgment demanded more cognitive effort and may entail greater uncertainty. Electrophysiologically, the Evaluative Judgment elicited a negativity (400 to 480 ms) for the Judgment not beautiful, maximal over midline leads. A comparable deflection has been previously reported for Evaluative Judgments of graphic patterns. It was interpreted as an impression formation independent of the type of stimulus material, occurring when an aesthetic entity is judged intentionally. Besides this effect, which was independent of the gender of the face, the temporal characte...
-
Descriptive and Evaluative Judgment processes: Behavioral and electrophysiological indices of processing symmetry and aesthetics
Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2003Co-Authors: Thomas Jacobsen, Lea HöfelAbstract:Descriptive symmetry and Evaluative aesthetic Judgment processes were compared using identical stimuli in both Judgment tasks. Electrophysiological activity was recorded while participants judged novel formal graphic patterns in a trial-by-trial cuing setting using binary responses (symmetric, not symmetric; beautiful, not beautiful). Judgment analyses of a Phase 1 test and main experiment performance resulted in individual models, as well as group models, of the participants’ Judgment systems. Symmetry showed a strong positive correlation with beautiful Judgments and was the most important cue. Descriptive Judgments were performed faster than Evaluative Judgments. The ERPs revealed a phasic, early frontal negativity for the not-beautiful Judgments. A sustained posterior negativity was observed in the symmetric condition. All conditions showed late positive potentials (LPPs). Evaluative Judgment LPPs revealed a more pronounced right lateralization. It is argued that the present aesthetic Judgments engage a two-stage process consisting of early, anterior frontomedian impression formation after 300 msec and right-hemisphere Evaluative categorization around 600 msec after onset of the graphic patterns.
-
Aesthetics Electrified: An Analysis of Descriptive Symmetry and Evaluative Aesthetic Judgment Processes Using Event-Related Brain Potentials:
Empirical Studies of the Arts, 2001Co-Authors: Thomas Jacobsen, Lea HöfelAbstract:An event-related brain potential (ERP) study comparing descriptive and Evaluative Judgment processes is reported. Using identical stimuli to isolate perceptual from Judgmental processes, the two Judgment types were operationalized by employing symmetry and aesthetic Judgments. Electrophysiological activity was recorded while participants viewed newly designed two-dimensional patterns in a pre-cued task setting. Judgment analyses of a Phase I test and performance in the main experiment revealed detailed paramorphic models of the individual judges' cognitive systems as well as group models. Symmetry showeda strong positive correlation with Judgments and was the most important cue in every case. Descriptive Judgments were performed faster than Evaluative Judgments. The ERPs revealed a phasic frontal negativity in the non-aesthetic condition as well as a sustained posterior negativity in the symmetrical condition. All conditions showed late positive potentials (LPP). Evaluative Judgment LPPs revealed a more p...
