This seemed to indicate that aesthetic effects are not universally shared, but strongly determined by private evaluation. In addition, there are big differences between the different types of images, which makes the agreement depend essentially on the type of image. Interestingly, people generally agreed more on the aesthetic effects of the artwork (3 out of 14 effects, mostly rated in common) than on the aesthetic effect of the elements of these artworks (with the exception of the color combination). In addition, the two variables that interest researchers in empirical aesthetics, favor and interest, are strongly determined by private evaluation. This is consistent with previous results [20,21,30]. In summary, this seems to indicate that we have not found support for the acceptance of the universality of aesthetic effects. Theories of aesthetic experience can be divided into two types, depending on the type of characteristic raised to explain what makes the experience aesthetic. Internalist theories appeal to characteristics that are within experience, typically phenomenological characteristics, while externalist theories refer to characteristics outside of experience, typically to the characteristics of the lived object. (The distinction between internalist theories and external theories of aesthetic experience is similar, but not identical, to that between phenomenal and epistemic conceptions of aesthetic experience, made by Gary Iseminger (Iseminger 2003, 100 and Iseminger 2004, 27, 36). Although internalist theories – particularly those of John Dewey (1934) and Monroe Beardsley (1958) – have been made in the early and middle parts of the 20th since then, externalist theories – including Beardsleys (1982) and George Dickies (1988) – have been booming ever since. Beardsley`s views on aesthetic experience draw us strongly to our attention, as it could be said that Beardsley wrote both the culminating internalist theory and the theory of founding sineidism. Dickie`s critique of Beardsley`s internalism is equally strong, as it pushed Beardsley – and with him most others – from internalism to externalism.
As a first step, we calculated the aesthetic effects indices from our total sample, separately for each image type, as shown in Table 1 and shown in Figure 2 (Panel 1). This showed that there was always a higher level of private evaluation for the majority of notions, beyond the types of images. Interestingly, the type of image appears to play an important role in determining the concordance between the evaluators. For the entire artwork, the aesthetic effects of warmth, difficult and happy were determined mainly by a common evaluation.