
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

22,014 Listeners

32,090 Listeners

43,567 Listeners

7,689 Listeners

289 Listeners

289 Listeners

1,820 Listeners

46 Listeners

21 Listeners

7 Listeners

161 Listeners

3 Listeners

12 Listeners

8 Listeners

17 Listeners

3 Listeners

2 Listeners

4 Listeners

428 Listeners

54 Listeners

6,355 Listeners

6,389 Listeners

2,107 Listeners

410 Listeners