Fig 1.
Example of a stimulus-set including labelling and study design.
Top: From left to right, the artwork’s artistic value rose, and from right to left, the monetary value increased (e.g., in the between-group art-making experts, the left artwork is considered a pro-artistic choice). Pictograms represented artistic and the monetary values (by the size of the brush/coin) and were counterbalanced. In addition, the pictograms under each image were also counterbalanced left/right between participants. The artist of the middle and right artworks is by El Lazar Markovich Lissitzky (known as El Lissitzky) and the left one by László Moholy-Nagy. Copyright information: Shown artworks are in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author’s life plus 70 years. Bottom: Modelled study design, see Methods for full description.
Fig 2.
Visualization of the hypotheses and assumptions for behavioral and implicit measures.
Development of choice behavior described along five evaluation processing stages. Stages I-II: Learned socio-cultural choice behavior and associations; private context choice behavior in stage II (hypotheses 2.c-2-d). Stages III-IV include social context and influence on choice types (hypotheses 1.a-1.c; 2.a-2.d); stage V feed back into the evaluation process and updates personal experience, socio-cultural values, individual experience, and preferences updating stage I. Stages include stimuli-sets, physiological measures (in dark blue), influence of socio-cultural learned behavior (in dark gray), choice types (in yellow), and social context is presented in stage III (light blue).
Fig 3.
Descriptive results of liking and willingness-to-pay (wtp) choices between-group conditions.
Error bars represent standard error of the mean (see S2 Fig in Supplementary Information for separation in all condition).
Table 1.
Descriptive analysis liking and willingness-to-pay (wtp) choices for all conditions.
Fig 4.
Change in choice behavior from between the two audience conditions and for each choice type liking and willingness-to-pay (wtp).
The y-axis describes the direction of value from high artistic to high monetary value. Values at the zero line mean no change in decision behavior; negative values mean participants chose higher artistically valuable artworks in the public condition; positive values mean participants choose more high monetary valuable artworks in the public condition. Error-bars represent standard error of the mean.
Fig 5.
Change in gaze behavior of the last fixation between the two audience conditions calculated as public minus private.
Table 2.
Change of fixations between public and private condition.
Table 3.
Simple linear regression model for predicting liking and willingness-to-pay (wtp) choices.
Table 4.
Mixed ANOVA using total amount of fixation (image participants mostly looked at) showing differences between audience type and choice type.
Fig 6.
Clustering of groups respecting both association of testosterone and cortisol interrelations.
Table 5.
Descriptive analysis means and standard deviations of liking and willingness-to-pay (wtp) choices for all conditions for both hormone clusters.
Fig 7.
Descriptive statistics of choice behavior along with both Clusters.
(A) Choices between the within-subject condition private vs. public. (B) Within and between-group choice behavior; for visibility, Cluster 2 is shifted slightly to the right along the x-axis for each condition.
Table 6.
Linear regression model for predicting liking and willingness-to-pay (wtp) choices.