Originals and Reproductions: The Influence of Presentation Format in Adolescents' Responses to a Renaissance Painting

References

• Barnhart, C. L., (Ed.). (1962). The American college dictionary. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, W. (1968). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction (H. Zahn, Trans.). In H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations (pp. 217–251). New York: Schocken.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, J. (1977). Ways of seeing. London: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Burnham, R. (1994). If you don't stop, you don't see anything. Teachers College Record, 95(4), 520–525.
   Google Scholar
• Danto, A. C. (1986). The philosophical disenfranchisement of art. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Danto, A. C. (1992). Beyond the Brillo box: The visual arts in post-historical perspective. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Desai, D. (2000). Imaging difference: The politics of representation in multicultural art education. Studies in Art Education, 42(2), 114–120.
   Google Scholar
• Draper, S. W. (n.d.). The Hawthorne effect and other expectancy effects: A note. Retrieved May 11, 2006, from http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/∼steve/hawth.html#1Hawthrone%20overall
   Google Scholar
• Dreher, R. E. (1968). Esthetic responses to paintings: As originals, kodachrome prints and black-and-white photographs. Paper presented at the 76th Annual Convention, American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Duro, P. (1991). Quotational art: Retaining the original: Multiple originals, copies, and reproductions, studies in the history of art (Volume 20) from the National Gallery of Art. Art History, 14(2), 294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisner, E. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
   Google Scholar
• Farley, F. H., & Weinstock, C. A. (1980). Experimental esthetics: Children's complexity preference in original art and photoreproductions. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15(3), 194–196.
   Google Scholar
• Fineberg, J. D. (1999). Art since 1940: Strategies of being. New York: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Gaskell, I. (1991). Book reviews: Retaining the original: Multiple originals, copies, and reproductions (Center for Advanced Studies in the Visual Arts Symposium Papers VII. Studies in the History of Art, Volume 20) edited by Kathleen Preciado. British Journal of Aesthetics, 31(2), 179.
   Google Scholar
• Gonzalez, A. (2001, September). Los museos en la sociedadde la informacion: Elimpacto de las nuevas tecnologias. Paper presented at the Congreso Internacional de Tecnologia, Dducacion y Desarrollo Sostenible, Murcia, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, M. L. B. (1999). Museos virtualesy digitales: Nuevas estrategias de difusion artistica. Paper presented at the VII Encuentro de Bibliotecas de Arte de España y Portugal, Santander, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Hardiman, G. W., & Zernich, T. (1984). Subjective responses to paintings as originals, colored slides, and colored prints. Studies in Art Education, 25(2), 104–108.
   Google Scholar
• Hauser, A. (1973). Kunst und Gesellschaft. Munchen: Beck.
   Google Scholar
• Hazan, S. (2001). The virtual aura: Is there space for enchantment in a technological world? Museums and the Web 2001: Selected papers from an international conference. Retrieved August 1, 2005, 2005, from www.archimuse.com/mw2001
   Google Scholar
• Hein, G. (1998). Learning in the museum. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Heise, D., & Grandgenett, N. F. (1996). Perspectives on the use of Internet in art classroom. Art Education, 49(6), 12–18.
   Google Scholar
• Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1994). The educational role of the museum. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kiechel, V. (1984). The influence of mode, size and type as it affects painting preferences of fifth grade children. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska.
   Google Scholar
• Konrad, U., Sowada, A., & Konrad, G. (2002). Asmat: Perception of life in art: The collection of the Asmat Museum of Culture and Progress. Monchengladbach, Germany: B. Kuhlen Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Kulka, T. (2005). Forgeries and art evaluation: An argument for dualism in aesthetics. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 39(3), 58–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malraux, A. (1953). The voices of silence (S. Gilbert, Trans.). Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• McKay, S. W., & Monteverde, S. R. (2003). Dialogic looking: Beyond the mediated experience. Art Education, 56(1), 40.
   Google Scholar
• Merriam, S. B. (2002). Qualitative research in practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Montebello, P. D. (1997, March-April). Musings on museums. CAA News.
   Google Scholar
• Mullins, C. (2005, April 9). Double trouble forgeries are often so fine and beautifully wrought that they can fool the experts for centuries. So why is an original artwork intrinsically better? Financial Times, p. 34.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. (2000). The slide lecture, or the work of art history in the age of mechanical reproduction. Critical Inquiry, 26(3), 414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oddie, G., & Ward, D. (1989). The aesthetic adequacy of copies. British Journal of Aesthetics, 29(3), 258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Nebury Park, London, and New Delhi: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rockefeller, M. C., & Gerbrands, A. A. (1967). The Asmat of New Guinea: The journal of Michael Clark Rockefeller. New York: Museum of Primitive Art.
   Google Scholar
• Savedoff, B. E. (1999). Frames. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 57(3), 354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scanlan, L. W. (2000). Kids as curators: Virtual art at the Seattle Museum. Humanities, 21(5), 8–11.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarcz, J. H. (1982). The reproduction in art education. Art Education, 35(4), 10–14.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, J. (1987). The renaissance in the north. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
   Google Scholar
• Stankiewicz, M. A. (1984). A picture age: Reproductions in picture study. Studies in Art Education, 26(2), 86–92.
   Google Scholar
• Varnedoe, K. (1999). Jackson Pollock. New York: The Museum of Modern Art.
   Google Scholar
• Zeller, T. (1983). Let's teach art with originals. Art Education, 36(2), 43–46.
   Google Scholar