There is this study I love. Surprising, I know. In an attempt to understand the evaluation of art, researchers asked participants to not just look at paintings but pick them up and handle them. The catch? While some frames were just “regular;” others were filled with lead and therefore heavier.
Participants perceived paintings in heavier frames as more valuable than those in “normal” frames, even when the art itself had not changed. They were also willing to pay more.
You might think this is irrational. A lighter frame would make the painting easier to transport and hang.
Sure, but it’s not about the frame. This boils down to our tendency to appraise art holistically. When we evaluate a painting, we factor in a set of irrelevant factors. We factor in the weight of the object, the temperature of the room, the ambiance of the gallery, and the quality of the lighting.
These elements, though unrelated to the value of art itself, shape our perception. A dimly lit, cold and cluttered gallery might make a masterpiece feel unimpressive, while a sleek, high-end showroom will elevate even a mediocre piece. Side factors like these signal importance, permanence, and even artistic merit—or the lack thereof–and trick our brains into equating physical heft and presentation with substance and value.
Irrationally yours,
Dan Ariely
