Introducing Cognitive Psychology in Film Studies: Redefining Affordance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/ijeh.v2i3.350Keywords:
Film studies, Film perception and cognition, Affordance, Audience research.Abstract
This paper investigates how interdisciplinary research impacts the film industry in research and practice by introducing psychological concepts. Psychology, especially neural and cognitive science, provides a distinct advantage when examining humans’ audio-visual processing mechanisms and esthetics questions regarding the film. By introducing psychology, film researchers and filmmakers could rethink and evaluate the current research paradigm from a broader point of view. This paper consists of three parts: (1) a discussion on the nature of film using an interdisciplinary approach; (2) a discussion on the characteristics and attributes of film; (3) an introduction of the psychological concept of “affordance” to film studies and practice. Although the film interdisciplinary research paradigm is still under development, we argue that introducing the other subjects is innovating the field of film research, providing us with a new angle to examine the intersections of ubiquitous but complex human esthetics activities.
Downloads
References
Arnheim, R. (1957). Film as art. University of California Press.
Astruc, A. （1948). Naissance d’une nouvelle avant-garde: la caméra stylo. Ecran français 144 (30 March): 5.
Anderson, J., (1996). The reality of illusion: An ecological approach to cognitive film theory. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Anderson, J., & Anderson, B. (1996). The Myth of Persistence of Vision Revisited. Journal of Film and Video, 45(1), 3–12.
Anderson, J.D., and Anderson, B.E. (eds). (2005). Moving Image Theory: Ecological Considerations, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press
Begin, P. (2006). Buñuel, Eisenstein, and the 'Montage of Attractions': An Approach to Film in Theory and Practice. Bulletin of Spanish Studies, 83(8), 1113–1132. doi:10.1080/14753820601073613
Bordwell, D. (1985). Principles of narration. Narration on the fiction film, 48–62.
Bordwell, D. (1989). A case for cognitivism. Iris, 11–40.
Borwell, D (1989). Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the Interpretation of Cinema, Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
Bordwell, D., Staiger, J., & Thompson, K. (1985). The classical Hollywood cinema (pp. 381–5). New York: Columbia University Press.
Bordwell, D. (1997). On the history of film style. Harvard University Press.
Bordwell, D., & Carroll, N. (Eds.). (2012). Post-theory: reconstructing film studies. University of Wisconsin Press.
Bazin, A., & Gray, H. (1960). The ontology of the photographic image. Film Quarterly, 13(4), 4–9.
Bazin, A., & Gray, H. (1967). What is cinema? Berkeley: University of California Press.
Benjamin, W., & Underwood, J. (2008). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. London: Penguin.
Balazs, B. (1945). Theory of the film: Character and Growth of a New Art. New York: Dover Publications.
Bergson, H. (1988). Matter and Memory. 1896. Trans. Nancy Margaret Paul and W. Scott Palmer. New York: Zone Books.
Chatman, S. B. (1980). Story and discourse: Narrative structure in fiction and film. Cornell University Press.
Currie, G. (1997). The Film Theory that Never Was: A Nervous Manifesto. Film Theory and Philosophy. New York: Clarendon Press.
Cutting, J. E. (2005). Perceiving scenes in film and in the world. In J. D. Anderson & B. F. Anderson (Eds.), Moving image theory: Ecological considerations (pp. 9–27). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Cutting, J. E., DeLong, J. E., & Nothelfer, C. E. (2010). Attention and the evolution of Hollywood film. Psychological Science.
Cutting, J. E., Brunick, K. L., & DeLong, J. E. (2011). How Act Structure Sculpts Shot Lengths and Shot Transitions in Hollywood Film. Projections, 5(1), 1–16.
Cutting, J. E., Brunick, K. L., DeLong, J. E., Iricinschi, C., & Candan, A. (2011). Quicker, faster, darker: Changes in Hollywood film over 75 years. i-Perception, 2(6), 569–576.
Cutting, J. E. (2014). How light and motion bathe the silver screen. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 340–353.
Cutting, J. E. (2014). Event segmentation and seven types of narrative discontinuity in popular movies. Acta psychologica, 149, 69–77.
Colebrook, C. (2002). Gilles Deleuze. London: Routledge.
Chatman, Seymour.(1978) Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca: Cornell UP.
Carroll, N. (1988). Mystifying movies: fads & fallacies in contemporary film theory. Columbia University Press.
Carroll, N. (2012). The power of movies.Hrvatski Filmski Ljetopis, 17(65–66), 99–99.
Delluc, L. (1920). Photogénie. M. de Brunoff.
Deleuze, G. (1986). Cinema 1: The movement-image. London: Athlone Epstein, in Richard Abel, French Film Theory and Criticism, 1907-1939: Volume 1, 1907–1929, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1988a, pp. 242–245
Gibson, J. J. (1977). The Theory of Affordances, In R. E. Shaw & J. Bransford (eds.), Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing - Toward an Ecological Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 67.
Gibson, J. J., 1904. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gombrich, E. H., Hochberg, J., & Black, M. (1973). Art, perception, and reality (Vol. 1970). JHU Press.
Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding. Culture, media, language, 128–138.
Herman, D., 1962. (2009). Basic elements of narrative. Chichester, U.K; Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Luan, L. (2016). Finding a Basic Interpretive Unit through the Human Visual Perception and Cognition-A Comparison between Filmmakers and Audiences [Master's thesis, Bowling Green State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1467295770
Luan, L. (2018). The Historical Development and Future of Film Perception Research. Journal of Beijing Film Academy, (03),98-104. doi:CNKI:SUN:BDYX.0.2018-03-013.
Luan, L. (2019). Extension and Reflection: Film Perception and Cognition Study as a New Approach for Chinese Film Research. Film Art (01),138-144. doi:CNKI:SUN:DYYS.0.2019-01-023.
Luan, L.,Hu S., & Zhu L.(2021). An Analysis of 10 Films in Summer Film Market 2021——An Interdisciplinary Study Based on Film Content Quantification and Audience Analysis [J]. Contemporary Cinema, 10:21-29.
Luan, L. (2021). How Readers Process Narrative Information Involving Characters' Decisions [Doctoral dissertation, Bowling Green State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1636587253464058
McKee, R. (1997). Story: style, structure, substance, and the principles of screenwriting. Harper Collins.
Münsterberg, H. (1916). The photoplay: A psychological study. D. Appleton.
Mitry, Jean. La sémiologie en question: Langage et cinéma. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1987.. The Aesthetics and Psychology of the Cinema. Translated by Christopher King. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997.
Mitry, J. (1997). The aesthetics and psychology of the cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Metz, C. (1974). Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema. (M. Taylor, Trans.) New York: Oxford UP.
Metz, C. (1982). The imaginary signifier: Psychoanalysis and the cinema. Indiana University Press.
Richard A. (Editor) (1993). French Film Theory and Criticism: A History/Anthology, 1907–1939, Princeton University Press.
Smith, M.（1995). Engaging Characters: Fiction, Emotion, and the Cinema, New York: Oxford University Press.
Tan, E. S. (1996). Emotion and the structure of narrative film: Film as an emotion machine. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates
Langer, S. (1953). Feeling and form: A theory of art. New York: Scribner.
Martin, M. (1985). Le langage cinématographique.Paris: Les Editions du CERF, 1955.
Mitry, J. (1997). The aesthetics and psychology of the cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
