Next Article in Journal
Legacies of Hani Susumu’s Documentary School
Next Article in Special Issue
The Cyber Turn of the Contemporary Art Market
Previous Article in Journal
Vasari, Schapiro, Schaafsma: Three Points of Departure for a Discussion of Style in Rock Art
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Painting Industries of Antwerp and Amsterdam, 1500−1700: A Data Perspective
Article

Reputation, Status Networks, and the Art Market

1
Department of Arts & Culture Studies, Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands
2
Department of Sociology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, 9700 AB Groningen, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 1 February 2019 / Revised: 25 June 2019 / Accepted: 29 June 2019 / Published: 3 July 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Art Markets and Digital Histories)
The effect of an artist’s prestige on the price of artwork is a well-known, central tenant in art market research. In considering how an artist’s prestige proliferates, much research examines networks, where certain artistic groupings and associations promote individual member’s artistic standing (i.e., “associative status networks”). When considering the role of associative status networks, there are two models by which status may increase. First, the confirmation model suggests that actors of similar status are associated with each other. Second, the increase model suggests that a halo effect occurs, whereby an individual’s status increases by association with higher-status artists. In this research, we examine the association of artists through museum exhibition to test confirmation versus increase models, ascertaining whether prestige acquisition is a selection or influence process. This research capitalizes on the retrospective digitization of exhibition catalogues, allowing for large-scale longitudinal analysis heretofore unviable for researchers. We use the exhibition history of 1148 artists from the digitized archives of three major Dutch museums (Stedelijk, Boijmans-Van Beuningen, Van Abbe) from 1930 to 1989, as well as data on artists’ market performance from artprice.com and bibliographic data from the WorldCat database. We then employ network analysis to examine the 60-year interplay of associative status networks and determine how different networks predict subsequent auction performance. We find that status connections may have a point of diminishing returns by which comparison to high prestige peers increases one’s own prestige to a point, after which a high-status comparison network becomes a liability. View Full-Text
Keywords: artistic reputation; auction price; museum exhibition; associative status networks; prestige; associative theory artistic reputation; auction price; museum exhibition; associative status networks; prestige; associative theory
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Braden, L.E.A.; Teekens, T. Reputation, Status Networks, and the Art Market. Arts 2019, 8, 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8030081

AMA Style

Braden LEA, Teekens T. Reputation, Status Networks, and the Art Market. Arts. 2019; 8(3):81. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8030081

Chicago/Turabian Style

Braden, L.E.A., and Thomas Teekens. 2019. "Reputation, Status Networks, and the Art Market" Arts 8, no. 3: 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8030081

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop