
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Author Stoyan Sgourev discusses his article for the April 2014 issue of American Sociological Review, “‘Notable’ or ‘Not Able’: When Are Acts of Inconsistency Rewarded?”
Abstract: Atypical practices of crossing categories or genres are generally discouraged in the market, but the ideal of the Renaissance mind persists. Building on recent work elaborating the need to reward the greater risk associated with atypicality for it to survive, this article provides the first systematic, direct evidence for such a reward. We focus on stylistic inconsistency—mixing distinct artistic styles. In a between-subject experimental design, 183 subjects estimated the aesthetic and market value of consistent and inconsistent sets of artworks by Pablo Picasso in three status conditions. Controlling for cognitive difficulties posed by inconsistency, we show that inconsistency is rewarded (i.e., evaluated higher than consistency on aesthetic value) only at high status. Status cues guide perception so that inconsistent works by a prominent artist are given the benefit of the doubt and interpreted as a sign of creativity. The association with creativity leads to a reward for atypicality in the absence of tangible proof that it performs better than typicality.
Article available here.
Posted April 2014
By Sage Publications4.2
2020 ratings
Author Stoyan Sgourev discusses his article for the April 2014 issue of American Sociological Review, “‘Notable’ or ‘Not Able’: When Are Acts of Inconsistency Rewarded?”
Abstract: Atypical practices of crossing categories or genres are generally discouraged in the market, but the ideal of the Renaissance mind persists. Building on recent work elaborating the need to reward the greater risk associated with atypicality for it to survive, this article provides the first systematic, direct evidence for such a reward. We focus on stylistic inconsistency—mixing distinct artistic styles. In a between-subject experimental design, 183 subjects estimated the aesthetic and market value of consistent and inconsistent sets of artworks by Pablo Picasso in three status conditions. Controlling for cognitive difficulties posed by inconsistency, we show that inconsistency is rewarded (i.e., evaluated higher than consistency on aesthetic value) only at high status. Status cues guide perception so that inconsistent works by a prominent artist are given the benefit of the doubt and interpreted as a sign of creativity. The association with creativity leads to a reward for atypicality in the absence of tangible proof that it performs better than typicality.
Article available here.
Posted April 2014

38,430 Listeners

43,687 Listeners

201 Listeners

5,576 Listeners

1,808 Listeners

56 Listeners

21 Listeners

7 Listeners

4 Listeners

12 Listeners

8 Listeners

2 Listeners

20 Listeners

2 Listeners

4 Listeners

759 Listeners

841 Listeners

113,121 Listeners

3,624 Listeners

15,506 Listeners

16,525 Listeners

9,438 Listeners

234 Listeners

28 Listeners