1. Introduction
With the rise of online artwork trading, understanding what kinds of artworks drive participation is crucial. However, little research has focused on the relationship between artworks and interactions on social media. What does the popularity of an artwork depends on? We’re at a crossroads where the traditional physical art experience is migrating toward a more web-based environment. The online art market has increased substantially from the past five years (by 72%) [
1], with more than 71 percent of art collectors has purchased some form of art online last year [
1]. Art goes into the age of social media [
2]. Instagram has the highest engagement rates of all the social media platforms, 48% of art buyers using Instagram [
3]. Museums’ communication has been redefined too [
4,
5,
6], the relationship between museums and the public is changing towards more interactive and collaborative forms [
4,
7,
8]. Social media is increasingly being used directly to create or plan art. Frye held an exhibition of the “most-liked” paintings, which were voted for by nearly 4,500 people on different social media platforms [
9].
Media ecology believes that media is the extension of human senses of every era, and the main reason for social change is communication technology [
10]. Digital participation deepens and democratizes artistic exchange with audiences [
11], it has changed the role of the audience, and blurred boundaries of concepts such as “professional” and “public” [
12]. Before the age of the Internet, art critics determine the value of art. Today, Instagram is an extraordinary way to discover, promote and critique art [
13]. “Instagramism” as the aesthetic of the new global digital youth classes that emerge in the early 2010s [
14]. The online art experiences make all kinds of artworks to be adjusted in a highly interactive process. Many museums use “citizen curators” and “user-generated content” to plan exhibitions [
15]. For example, the Brooklyn Museum, inspired by James Surowiecki’s book
The Wisdom of Crowds, staged an exhibition titled “Click!”, based on feedback from museum visitors and online voters ranked entire artworks [
16].
McLuhan argues that media is the extensions of human [
17], interactivity is the typical feature of the Internet [
18]. Tom Valcanis believes that if the technology is a medium of cultural development, the interaction and user orientation of these technologies had produced a participatory “mashup” cultures. The ways of generating and accessing content are deconstructed by online platforms, computers and smartphones, and online content is uploaded, mixed, fused and reconstructed [
19], forming a “participatory culture” [
19]. Participatory culture is a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing one’s creations, and some type of informal mentorship whereby the most experienced people pass along what they know to novices. A participatory culture is also one in which members believe their contributions matter, and feel some degree of social connection with one another [
20]. Likes and comments are the most pervasive, and fundamental levels of participation [
21]. The interactions on social media occur very rapidly, which can be understood as a novelty or moment effect. The audience interacts with an artwork in seconds or even less with intuition.
2. Theoretical Background
Interaction plays an important role in social media, Ritter pointed out that although form and content are extremely significant to the creation of art, consideration can also be given to the method of communication between the artwork and a person [
32]. The relationship between museums and mass is changing towards more interactive and collaborative forms [
4,
6,
33]. The changing functions of the museum and the role of the curator might indeed change the very role of art in society as well. Digital technologies have played a crucial role in expanding the boundaries of art, social media has changed the expectations of audiences, and even the notion of art is changing [
34]. Digital interaction with the audience can promote cognitive decoding and enhance kinesthetic and emotional responses to artistic activities [
11]. A variety of simple graphical filters are available to camera phone users to enhance their photos, filtered photos are 21% more likely to be viewed and 45% more likely to be commented on by consumers of photographs [
24]. Manovich’s book
Instagram and Contemporary Image, places Instagram image culture within a rich cultural and historical context, including histories of photography, cinema, graphic design, as well as contemporary social media, design trends, music video, and k-pop. Manovich uses Instagram as a window into the identities of a young global generation connected by common social media platforms, cultural sensibilities, and visual aesthetics [
14]. Social media is redefining the art world, influencing not only the marketing but also the creation and curation of art [
9].
Social media feeds people’s social, esteem and Self-actualization needs [
31]. Most sites help strangers connect based on common interests, political views, or activities that inspire people to participate [
35]. Instagram users have five primary social and psychological motives: social interaction, archive, self-expression, escapism, and peeking [
36]. Self-expression is achieving personal goals, present a consistent and positive view of ourselves to the world and conform to social norms [
37]. Erving Goffman believes that the motivation for self-presentation is to receive positive feedback and meet the expectations of others [
38]. Amy Jo Kim put forward Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in the online community, the ability to self-realize is to assume the role of the community, develop skills and open up new opportunities [
39]. Zhu and Chen analyzed in detail how different types of social media services fulfilled human needs [
40]. Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, and Kasser discussed the most basic psychological needs of human beings are: autonomy, competence, relatedness, and self-esteem [
41]. People seek self-expression, self-esteem, and self-actualization through social media engagement.
Social media is a demanding area that requires constant engagement and status updates from its users. Nancy K. Baym came up with the concept of “relational labor” of social media connection [
42]. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, 34 percent of social media users admitted to using social media to “take a mental break”, 27 percent used social media to keep in touch with their families and 24 percent established or supported professional contacts [
43]. The main reasons for Instagram use are surveillance, documentation, coolness, and creativity, interpersonal interaction and narcissism are positively related to most motives for Instagram use. Gender is the best predictor of the Instagram use [
44].
The study of the user-generated content of social media reflects many aspects of society. Hochman and Schwartz analyzed a dataset of over half a million photos taken in New York and Tokyo and used visualization techniques in an attempt to highlight cultural differences [
45]. Social media can be an effective mechanism for cultural diffusion [
46]. Styles and trends are easily conveyed online to attract trendsetters [
47]. Kavita Bala and Noah Snavely came up with a framework for visual discovery at scale, by analyzing clothing and fashion in images of millions of people around the world [
48]. Hu, Manikonda, and Kambhampati argue that a strong social media presence may be more important than being under contract with a top agency, or than the aesthetic standards sought after by the industry [
49]. Hamari, Sjoklint, and Ukkonen believes that the importance or usefulness of contents and services is exclusively defined not just by the organization producing it, but by the public using them. [
50]. Kang and Chen first studied the relation between artists and followers [
51]. Social media gives artists the ability to control the way their story is told, and find people who want to hear it, feeling as if you know the artist. To what extent does the content released by artists and the interaction with followers affects the likes of artworks? If the quality of artworks is not completely defined by artists or organizations, to what extent should we trust the wisdom of crowds? Do the likes and comments on the artwork have anything to do with the quality of the art? This study will provide new insights into the nature of artwork interactions driven by social media.
Author Contributions
Data curation, J.K.; Formal analysis, X.K.; Investigation, X.K.; Methodology, X.K.; Project administration, J.K.; Resources, X.K.; Software, X.K. and J.K.; Supervision, W.C. and J.K.; Writing—original draft, X.K.; Writing—review and editing, W.C. and J.K.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- McAndrew, C. The Art Market 2018 An Art Basel & UBS Report; UBS: Zurich, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Fei, J. Art in the Age of Instagram. Available online: https://www.speeches.io/art-in-the-age-of-instagram-jia-jia-fei-tedxmarthasvineyard-with-evaluation-form/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Hiscox. Hiscox Online Art Trade Report; Hiscox: Hamilton, Bermuda, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Capriotti, P. Museums’ communication in small-and medium-sized cities. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 2010, 15, 281–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crenn, G.; Vidal, G. Les Musées Français et Leurs Publics a L’âge du Web 2.0. Nouveaux Usages du Multimédia et Transformations des Rapports Entre Institutions et Usagers; Archives & Museum Informatics: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2007; pp. 24–26. [Google Scholar]
- Gaëlle, C. Les musées français et leurs publics à l’âge du web 2.0. Nouveaux usages du multimédia et transformations des rapports entre institutions et usagers? In Proceedings of the International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meetings, Toronto, ON, Canada, 24–26 October 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Sigala, M. A learning assessment of online interpretation practices: From Museum supply chains to experience ecologies. Inf. Commun. Technol. Tour. 2005, 2005, 67–78. [Google Scholar]
- Kent, M.L. Critical analysis of blogging in public relations. Public Relat. Rev. 2008, 34, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sokolowsky, J. Art in the Instagram Age: How Social Media Is Shaping Art and How You Experience It. 2017. Available online: https://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/visual-arts/art-in-the-instagram-age-how-social-media-is-shaping-art-and-how-you-experience-it/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Hakanen, E.A. Branding the Teleself: Media Effects Discourse and the Changing Self; Lexington Books: Lanham, MD, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Walmsley, B. From arts marketing to audience enrichment: How digital engagement can deepen and democratize artistic exchange with audiences. Poetics 2016, 58, 66–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fleming, D. Managing change in museums. In Proceedings of the Museum and Change International Conference, National Museum, Prague, Czech Republic, 8–10 November 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Fleming, O. Why the World’s Most Talked-About New Art Dealer Is Instagram. Available online: https://www.vogue.com/article/buying-and-selling-art-on-instagram (accessed on 13 May 2014).
- Manovich, L. Instagram and Contemporary Image; Manovich. NET: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Proctor, N. Digital: Museum as platform, curator as champion, in the age of social media. Curator Mus. J. 2010, 53, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hart, H. Walker Visitors Vote for Half the Works to View in New Show. 2010. Available online: http://www.artnews.com/2010/12/01/citizen-curators/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- McLuhan, M. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man; Marshall McLuhan; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Deighton, J.; Sorrell, M. The future of interactive marketing. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1996, 74, 151–160. [Google Scholar]
- Valcanis, T. An iPhone in every hand: Media ecology, communication structures, and the global village. Etc A Rev. Gen. Semant. 2011, 68, 33–45. [Google Scholar]
- Jenkins, H. Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century; Mit Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Manovich, L. Cultural Analytics: Visualising Cultural Patterns in the Era of “More Media”; Domus: March, Italy, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Ding, C.; Cheng, H.K.; Duan, Y.; Jin, Y. The power of the “like” button: The impact of social media on box office. Decis. Support Syst. 2017, 94, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salo, J.; Lankinen, M.; Mäntymäki, M. The use of social media for artist marketing: Music industry perspectives and consumer motivations. Int. J. Media Manag. 2013, 15, 23–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakhshi, S.; Shamma, D.A.; Kennedy, L.; Gilbert, E. Why we filter our photos and how it impacts engagement. In Proceedings of the Ninth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Oxford, UK, 26–29 May 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Simo-Serra, E.; Fidler, S.; Moreno-Noguer, F.; Urtasun, R. Neuroaesthetics in fashion: Modeling the perception of fashionability. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Segalin, C.; Cheng, D.S.; Cristani, M. Social profiling through image understanding: Personality inference using convolutional neural networks. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 2017, 156, 34–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sherren, K.; Parkins, J.R.; Smit, M.; Holmlund, M.; Chen, Y. Digital archives, big data and image-based culturomics for social impact assessment: Opportunities and challenges. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2017, 67, 23–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esaak, S. What Are the Visual Arts? 2019. Available online: https://www.thoughtco.com/what-are-the-visual-arts-182706 (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Wikipedia. New Media Art. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media_art#cite_ref-3 (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Modell, A.H. The Private Self; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Maslow, A.H. Motivation and Personality; Harper & Row: New York, NY, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- Ritter, D. The intersection of art and interactivity. Ars Electron. Festiv. 1996, 96, 274–285. [Google Scholar]
- Bowen, J.; Bradburne, J.; Burch, A.; Dierking, L.; Falk, J. Digital Technologies and the Museum Experience: Handheld Guides and Other Media; Rowman Altamira: Lanham, MD, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Kristin, T.; Kristen, P.; Lee, R. Arts Organizations and Digital Technologies. 2013. Available online: http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/04/arts-organizations-and-digital-technologies/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Boyd, D.M.; Ellison, N.B. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 2007, 13, 210–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, E.; Lee, J.A.; Moon, J.H.; Sung, Y. Pictures speak louder than words: Motivations for using Instagram. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2015, 18, 552–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self: Goffman Drmaturgical Model; Indiana Press: Bloomington, IN, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life; Harmondsworth: London, UK, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, A.J. Community Building on the Web: Secret Strategies for Successful Online Communities Community; Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Y.-Q.; Chen, H.-G. Social media and human need satisfaction: Implications for social media marketing. Bus. Horiz. 2015, 58, 335–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheldon, K.M.; Elliot, A.J.; Kim, Y.; Kasser, T. What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2001, 80, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baym, N.K. Connect with your audience! The relational labor of connection. Commun. Rev. 2015, 18, 14–22. [Google Scholar]
- Kenneth, O.; Cliff, L.; Nicole, B.E. Social Media and the Workplace. 2017. Available online: http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/06/22/social-media-and-the-workplace/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Nabi, I.R. Instagram: Motives for its Use and Relationship to Narcissism and Contextual Age; Bahria University Karachi Campus: Karachi, Pakistan, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Hochman, N.; Schwartz, R. Visualizing instagram: Tracing cultural visual rhythms. In Proceedings of the Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Dublin, Ireland, 4–7 June 2012. [Google Scholar]
- You, Q.; García-García, D.; Paluri, M.; Luo, J.; Joo, J. Cultural diffusion and trends in facebook photographs. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Montréal, QC, Canada, 15–18 May 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Parker, C.J.; Wang, H. Examining hedonic and utilitarian motivations for m-commerce fashion retail app engagement. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. Int. J. 2016, 20, 487–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matzen, K.; Bala, K.; Snavely, N. Streetstyle: Exploring world-wide clothing styles from millions of photos. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706,01869. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, Y.; Manikonda, L.; Kambhampati, S. What we instagram: A first analysis of instagram photo content and user types. In Proceedings of the Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1–4 June 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Hamari, J.; Sjöklint, M.; Ukkonen, A. The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2016, 67, 2047–2059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, X.; Chen, W. The Like Economy: The Impact of Interaction between Artists and Fans on Social Media in Art Market. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Business and Information Management, Beijing, China, 23–25 July 2017; ACM: Beijing, China, 2017; pp. 45–49. [Google Scholar]
- Wikiart. ARTWORKS BY GENRE. Available online: https://www.wikiart.org/en/paintings-by-genre (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Bourdieu, P.; Darbel, A. The Love of Art; European Art Museums and their Public, Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- McCornack, S.; Ortiz, J. Choices & Connections: An Introduction to Communication; Macmillan Higher Education: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Bakhshi, S.; Shamma, D.A.; Gilbert, E. Faces engage us: Photos with faces attract more likes and comments on instagram. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1–26 April 2014; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Redies, C. Combining universal beauty and cultural context in a unifying model of visual aesthetic experience. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2015, 9, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Takeuchi, A.; Nagao, K. Communicative facial displays as a new conversational modality. In Proceedings of the INTERACT’93 and CHI’93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 24–29 April 1993; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Goldman, A.I.; Sripada, C.S. Simulationist models of face-based emotion recognition. Cognition 2005, 94, 193–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kahneman, D. Thinking, Fast and Slow; Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Merriam Webster. Intuition. Available online: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intuition (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Wilson, T.D.; Schooler, J.W.; Schooler, J.W. Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1991, 60, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tran, T. What to Post on Instagram: 15 Creative and Engaging Ideas. 2019. Available online: https://blog.hootsuite.com/instagram-post-ideas/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Jenkins, H. Interactive Audiences; The New Media Book: London, UK, 2002; pp. 157–170. [Google Scholar]
- Zuss, M. The Practice of Theoretical Curiosity; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; Volume 20. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, J.A.; Mehrabian, A. Distinguishing anger and anxiety in terms of emotional response factors. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1974, 42, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kidd, C.; Piantadosi, S.T.; Aslin, R.N. The Goldilocks effect: Human infants allocate attention to visual sequences that are neither too simple nor too complex. PLoS One 2012, 7, e36399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cupchik, G.C.; Gebotys, R.J. Interest and pleasure as dimensions of aesthetic response. Empir. Stud. Arts 1990, 8, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, E.S. Emotion, art, and the humanities. Handb. Emot. 2000, 3, 116–134. [Google Scholar]
- Hagtvedt, H.; Patrick, V.M.; Hagtvedt, R. The perception and evaluation of visual art. Empir. Stud. Arts 2008, 26, 197–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roth-Hanania, R.; Davidov, M.; Zahn-Waxler, C. Empathy development from 8 to 16 months: Early signs of concern for others. Infant Behav. Dev. 2011, 34, 447–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- James, P. 8 Reasons Why Social Media is Decimating Art and Literature. 2014. Available online: https://qwiklit.com/2014/03/08/8-reasons-why-social-media-is-decimating-art-and-literature/ (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Sharlow, S. Death of An Artist: How Social Media Is Ruining Creativity. 2015. Available online: https://www.elitedaily.com/life/culture/death-artist-social-media-ruining-creativity/907113 (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Whitehead, K. Is Social Media Killing Art or Bringing it to the People? Available online: https://www.scmp.com/culture/arts-entertainment/article/2074306/social-media-killing-art-or-bringing-it-people (accessed on 28 Feburary 2017).
- Maharani, N.; Sevriana, L. Analysis of Attitude, Motivation, Knowledge and Lifestyle of the Consumers in Bandung Who Shop through Instagram. Winners 2017, 18, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Polaine, A. Lowbrow, high art: Why Big Fine Art doesn’t Understand Interactivity. Available online: http://pl02.donau-uni.ac.at/xmlui/handle/10002/563. (accessed on 29 October 2019).
- Shoemaker, P.J.; Vos, T. Gatekeeping Theory; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Lewin, K. Forces behind food habits and methods of change. Bull. Natl. Res. Counc. 1943, 108, 35–65. [Google Scholar]
- Conner, L. Taking Back the Arts: 21st Century Audiences, Participatory Culture and the End of Passive Spectatorship. L’ordinaire Des Amériques 2016, 220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baltissen, R.; Ostermann, B.-M. Are the dimensions underlying aesthetic and affective judgment the same? Empir. Stud. Arts 1998, 16, 97–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silvia, P.J. Emotional responses to art: From collation and arousal to cognition and emotion. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2005, 9, 342–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russell, J.A. Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychol. Rev. 2003, 110, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Manovich, L. Notes on Instagrammism and Mechanisms of Contemporary Cultural Identity (and Also Photography, Design, Kinfolk, k-pop, Hashtags, Mise-en-Scène, and Cостояние). 2016. Available online: http://manovich. net/index. php/projects/instagram-and-contemporary-image (accessed on 29 October 2019).
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).