Eye-Tracking Study: How Children See Art Differently

Adults and children view art in completely different ways.

Carrying out research at Amsterdam’s Van Gogh Museum in 2017, my colleagues and I found that when adults look at an artwork, they are guided by their existing knowledge and expectations. For example, when observing Van Gogh’s View of Auvers, adults’ attention may be captured by the distinctive brushstrokes they associate with the artist’s other iconic works.

But we found that children take a different view. Free from the social and cultural frameworks that shape adult perception, they are driven by stimuli such as bright colours or bold shapes. For instance, when viewing Van Gogh’s Daubigny’s Garden, they are naturally drawn to the red roses that stand out against the green background.

It makes sense that these differences must affect children’s experiences of visiting an art gallery or museum. But while many museums have launched interactive learning activities tailored to children – such as creative workshops and scavenger hunts – there are still many exhibits where children’s only access to information is through labels written for adult visitors, tailored to adult ways of viewing art.

In a recent research study with colleagues, I used eye-tracking technology to investigate how the information given to children about artworks affected how they viewed them.

We carried out the study at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, and focused on three 17th-century paintings: Bartholomeus van der Helst’s Banquet of the Amsterdam Civic Guard in Celebration of the Peace of Münster; Banquet Still Life by Adriaen van Utrecht; and Winter Landscape with Skaters by Hendrick Avercamp.

We compared how children aged between ten and 12 responded to three types of descriptions. These were the adult-oriented labels already in place at the museum, playful storytelling labels tailored for children, and no information at all. We produced heatmaps to show where the children focused their attention.

Looking – and seeing

The results were striking. The children provided with child-focused, narrative-driven labels engaged with the artworks in ways we did not see at all with those who read adult-focused descriptions. They directed their gaze towards key elements of the paintings highlighted by the playful descriptions, and spent more time examining them.

In contrast, the children who received adult-oriented explanations behaved in the same way as children who received no information at all. Their attention was scattered and unfocused.

For Avercamp’s c.1608 painting, the description for adults read:

The high vantage point of this painting turns it into a sampler of human – and animal – activity during a harsh winter. Hundreds of people are out on the ice, most of them for pleasure, others working out of dire necessity. Avercamp did not shy away from grim details: in the left foreground crows and a dog feast on the carcass of a horse that has frozen to death.

Our heatmap shows that the children’s gaze skates across the painting, with no particular focus:

This is similar to the heatmap produced when the children had no information given to guide them:

But the results were different when the children were given information aimed particularly at them. For this painting, it read:

He could have painted me anywhere, but where am I? Right in the middle of the picture, with my snout on the ice! The spot where everyone can see me. A man in blue pants almost trips over me. Two girls next to me giggle at my clumsiness. But I won’t give up. I’ll get back on my feet and keep going. Before winter is over, I’ll be skating like a pro!

The description changed how the children interacted with the painting. They engaged more closely, concentrating on identifying the figure described in the information they were given.

Telling stories

Pauline Kintz, head of the public sub-team at the Rijksmuseum, commented on the significance of our findings: “We want to be a museum for everyone, and thus tell stories that are accessible to all.”

For museums, these results suggest a need to rethink how labels are designed, especially for younger audiences. Tailored descriptions could transform the way children experience art in these settings.

The implications for schools are equally profound. Our research offers a compelling argument for reimagining art education. By exploring and adopting new approaches, schools can make art lessons more engaging and meaningful.

Art classes could adopt methods similar to those used by the Rijksmuseum to actively engage students and enhance their connection with art.

We know that when teachers take traditional approaches, such as reading from textbooks or delivering lectures, students of art history find it hard to connect with the art.

But lessons could incorporate storytelling to frame historical artists and movements in ways that resonate with children’s everyday experiences and interests. Guided exploration could encourage students to identify and discuss specific elements of an artwork, much like the tailored descriptions in our study.

As our findings demonstrate, understanding and respecting how children view the world – including how they view art – can open new doors for teaching and learning.