interesting literature

I have been immersed in my literature review for my dissertation. Here is a summary of a fantastic article exploring the role of mirror neurons and embodied simulation in the empathic and bodily responses to visual art. In addition, the idea of mirror neurons have interesting implications for new media. What do we learn via our face to face interactions with others? If viewing another activates our brain as does viewing violent images, what does the excessive amount of visual stimuli in our convergence culture do to our brain?

Freedberg, D & Gallese, (2007). Motion, emotion, and empathy in esthetic
experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5), 197-203.

Freedberg and Gallese emphasized the role of empathy as an essential component of esthetic response to works of art. According to the authors, viewing a work of art can trigger both physical and feeling responses related to the content of the image, as well as the “movement or implied movement within the representation” (p. 197). “The viewing of images of punctured or damaged body parts activates part of the same network of brain centers that are normally activated by our own sensations of pain, accounting for the feeling of physical sensation and corresponding shock” (p. 198). The authors note how even images that are non-emotionally laden and/or non-objective can evoke “bodily resonances…in which beholders might find themselves automatically simulating the emotional expression, the movement or even the implied movement within the representation” (p. 197).
Freedberg and Gallese explain these phenomena via research on mirror neurons and the concept of embodied simulation, which postulates mechanisms in the brain fire when observing an action as if one is actually performing the action. Freedberg and Gallese note how research has shown that viewing a stationary image (as would be entailed in piece of art) activates the mirror neuron system in much the same way as actually observing this action being performed in real time (thus viewing the static image of a hand grasping an object evokes the same response as actually watching a hang grasp an object). Moreover, the authors note how “The observation of a graspable object leads to the simulation of the motor act that object affords “(p. 200). The brain responds not only to the movement or task, but the objects associated with the task. Thus viewing a pair of scissors is likely to activate the areas of the brain that are activated and involved in the act of “scissoring”. In this view objects evoke various intentions that are reflected in the activation of the brain. In addition to the embodied simulation associated with direct depiction of content and imagery of people, places, and things as well as non-objective shapes, colors, and lines.

Such research is profoundly relevant for art therapy in that we see the potential for empathic emotional bodily-based responses afforded by the activation of circuitry and systems within the brain associated with viewing an image. Freedberg and Gallese (2007) noted that while the art theory in the 19th century noted the role of the physical responses in experiencing a work of art, art history in the 20th century has largely neglected the role of the “embodied empathic feeling in the observer” (p. 199), bracketing esthetic experience and art as “a matter of pure cognition” (p. 199).
It would not be a significant stretch to apply the “pure cognition” view to the field of Psychology treatment, which may have overly relied on thought and language as the cornerstones of treatment (Although the embodied simulation does much to support the power of counter transference and transference issues as well as object relations theory. If we have brain-based responses in relation to our history with objects, it seems likely that people would conjure parallel activation).
The ability of visual imagery such as art to evoke empathic responses may lead to the powerful interposal connections that art making affords in both individual and group therapy treatment. Witnessing a piece of art results in a shared embodied experience that would be occurring at a neurological and bodily based level that would not require language to either evoke or explain its power. A client that shares the image of a traumatic memory for example, would likely induce a shared emotional experience in the other group members, resulting in a communal emotional resonance. Thus we see the importance of witnessing the visual depiction of a person’s image, the often non-verbal reverence offered by the group leader and the group members for the image.
The powerful and uncomfortable somatic and bodily responses imagery can evoke may be uncomfortable. It is worth noting how therapist s may feel prone to solve the image, explain or fix it verbally. Perhaps such instincts are a response to the powerful phenomenological and bodily responses occurring in the therapist. In other words he or she may be inadvertently using language to explain away, control, or counter his or her own emotional responses as opposed to addressing the imagery. Thus, it is essential that the therapist travels alongside and stays with the client and their work. Such views are the cornerstone of art therapy treatment, but until recently have struggled for empirical foundations and evidence.
In addition, an empathic based view of image making, the embodied simulation of art making addresses the possibility for vicarious traumatization as well as therapeutic burn out. Witnessing such imagery and experiencing states of attunement afforded by these mechanisms may overwhelm therapists as the repetitive exposure to imagery may trigger multiple responses in the energy consuming empathic mirror neuron systems in the brain.