Environment and Social Psychology

Cross-Cultural aesthetic cognition: Chinese interpretations of Malaysian Batik through social psychology

Ziyi Zhang

UCSI UNIVERSITY, Negeri Selangor, 56000, Malaysia

Hwee Ling Siek

UCSI UNIVERSITY, Negeri Selangor, 56000, Malaysia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v10i10.4118

Keywords: Chinese aesthetics; Batik painting; transcultural framework; Malaysian art; visual interpretation; aesthetic translation

---

Abstract

This study addresses the limitation of Western-centric frameworks in Malaysian Batik scholarship by applying Chinese aesthetic principles to examine cross-cultural aesthetic cognition. Despite Batik's economic significance (contributing RM1.2 billion annually to Malaysia) and artistic evolution, existing research remains predominantly descriptive, lacking systematic exploration of aesthetic cognition across diverse social groups. This qualitative investigation employed visual analysis and semi-structured interviews with 45 participants 20 Malaysian Batik artists, 10 Chinese art scholars, and 15 art students to examine how three core Chinese aesthetic concepts illuminate Batik interpretation: Yijing (artistic conception), qiyun shengdong (vitality of spirit), and tianren heyi (harmony between nature and humanity). The study analyzed canonical works by Chuah Thean Teng and contemporary Batik paintings through the proposed Chinese Aesthetic Transcultural Framework (CATF). Findings revealed Yijing as the most frequently recognized principle (93 coded references), followed by qiyun shengdong (66) and tianren heyi (55). Results demonstrate that aesthetic cognition is socially embedded, varying significantly across stakeholder groups based on cultural positioning and professional experience. The present study contributes theoretically in that Chinese aesthetic principles are operationalized as analytical tools for the study of non-Chinese visual cultures, challenging the methodological monocentrism that dominates the field of art criticism. From a practical perspective, the CATF offers museum curators, politicians, and educators complex interpretative frameworks that promote a more thorough transcultural understanding in contemporary global art studies by replacing craft-based judgments with philosophical insights.

---

References

[1]. 1.Geng, W., Wan Samiati Andriana, W. M. D., & Tahir, A. (2023). The spirit and elements of Malaysian multiculturalism in Chuah Thean Teng’s batik paintings. Idealogy Journal, 8(2), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.24191/idealogy.v8i2.475

[2]. 2.Geng, W., Wan Samiati Andriana, W. M. D., Tahir, A., & Li, J. (2024). Differences in painting styles of Malaysian Chinese artists in different periods. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 9(27), 77–82. https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v9i28.5747

[3]. 3.Shaharuddin, S. I. S., Shamsuddin, M. S., Drahman, M. H., Hasan, M., Asri, N. A. M., Nordin, A. A., & Shaffiar, N. M. (2021). A review on the Malaysian and Indonesian batik production, challenges, and innovations in the 21st century. SAGE Open, 11(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211040128

[4]. 4.Wahed, W. J. E., Amin, H., Bohari, A. A. M., Pindah, C., & Azmi, S. (2022). Malaysian batik, our pride: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(10), 942–955. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i10/14950

[5]. 5.Wang, Y. (2023). Fashion: An essential factor influencing the development of 19th to 20th centuries Peranakan decorative motifs. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1), 2198321. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2023.2198321

[6]. 6.Yusoff, N., Samsuri, N., Ayob, S., & Teo, Y. C. (2019). Emotional expression of the Malaysian Chinese towards the Malay cultural heritage visualization. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 6(3), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/259

[7]. 7.Geng, W. Y., Wan Samiati Andriana, W. M. D., & Tahir, A. (2023). Exploring the painting styles of Malaysian Chinese artists after the National Cultural Congress. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 13(2), 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARAFMS/v13-i2/18192

[8]. 8.Lyu, Z., & Yahaya, S. R. (2021). An aesthetic study on traditional batik design of Miao ethnicity in China. KUPAS SENI: Jurnal Seni dan Pendidikan Seni, 9(2), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.37134/kupasseni.vol9.2.2.2021

[9]. 9.Huang, W., Abdul Rahman, A. R., Singh, D. S., Lee, C., Low, K. W., & Raja Ahmad Effendi, R. A. A. (2024). A thematic review on Baba Nyonya relating to cultural features (2014–2024). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(7), 1785–1797. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i7/18108

[10]. 10.Lu, J., Li, J., & Chen, H. (2019). Aesthetic appraisal of Chinese calligraphy by Chinese and Western viewers: A cross-cultural study. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 37(1), 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237417731449.

[11]. 11.N. M. Fauzi and K. Ghazali, “Style of Malaysian paintings from 1950 to 2010,” Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 28, Special Issue 2, pp. 197–208, 2016.

[12]. 12.W. Geng, W. S. A. Mohammed Daud, and A. Tahir, “The spirit and elements of Malaysian multiculturalism in Chuah Thean Teng’s Batik paintings,” 2023.

[13]. 13.W. Y. Geng, W. S. Andriana, and A. Tahir, “Exploring the painting styles of Malaysian Chinese artists after the National Cultural Congress,” Int. J. of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1101–1117, 2023.

[14]. 14.J. He, “Exploring the similarities, differences and integration of Eastern and Western aesthetics,” Journal of Education and Educational Research, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 12–19, 2021.

[15]. 15.T. Lee, “Defining the aesthetics of the Nyonyas’ batik sarongs in the Straits Settlements, late nineteenth to early twentieth century,” Asian Studies Review, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 173–192, 2016.

[16]. 16.M. S. Meskardi and A. M. Safri, Visual Culture of Malaysian Batik. Melaka, Malaysia: IRoNIS Press (UTeM), 2020.

[17]. 17.A. Mortu, J. Stejskal, and M. Windsor, “Remote art and aesthetics: An introduction,” British Journal of Aesthetics, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 267–277, 2024.

[18]. 18.X. Pan, R. Legino, X. You, and Y. Cai, “A comparative study of traditional Chinese and Malaysian auspicious motifs,” Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, vol. 8, no. 24, pp. 331–337, 2023.

[19]. 19.J. Paramitha and F. Wei, “Exploring cultural transformation through design: Implications of Indonesia-China relations on national identity,” Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health, vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 1936–1946, 2024.

[20]. 20.M. Pizzolante, M. Pelowski, T. R. Demmer, S. Bartolotta, E. D. Sarcinella, A. Gaggioli, and A. Chirico, “Aesthetic experiences and their transformative power: A systematic review,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 15, Art. 1328449, 2024, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1328449.

[21]. 21.L. Qi and J. Ryan, “Nature, engagement, empathy: Yijing as a Chinese ecological aesthetics,” Environmental Values, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 343–364, 2017.

[22]. 22.Z. Qi, “The Taoist spirit of traditional Chinese aesthetics,” in The Spirit of Traditional Chinese Aesthetics, Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2024, pp. 153–230.

[23]. 23.Yang, T., Silveira, S., Formuli, A., Paolini, M., Pöppel, E., Sander, T., & Bao, Y. (2019). Aesthetic experiences across cultures: Neural correlates when viewing traditional Eastern versus Western landscape paintings. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 798. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00798

[24]. 24.van Geert, E., Ding, R., & Wagemans, J. (2025). A cross-cultural comparison of aesthetic preferences for neatly organized compositions: Native Chinese versus native Dutch speakers. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 43(1), 250–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241245917

[25]. 25.Mikuni, J., Spee, B. T. M., Forlani, G., Leder, H., Scharnowski, F., Nakamura, K., … & Pelowski, M. (2024). Cross-cultural comparison of beauty judgments in visual art using machine learning. Scientific Reports, 14, 15948. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-65088-z

[26]. 26.Miller, C. A., Zhang, K., & Hübner, R. (2025). On the universality of aesthetic preference and inference: A cross-cultural (Chinese–German) study. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, 685. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04806-y

[27]. 27.Sulemana, A., Mensah, E. F., Sampah, S. N. A., Gbadegbe, R., & Tieli, J. (2025). Form and symbolism: A cross-cultural analysis of ancient Chinese and West African figurative sculptures. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 12(1), 2474848. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2025.2474848

[28]. 28.Markova, L. (2025). Transcoding migration: On the transcultural aesthetics of socially engaged creativity across Europe. In New Approaches to Transcodification (pp. 327–336). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111636122-030

[29]. 29.Zou, Y., Zhao, C., Childs, P., & Luh, D. B. (2024). Cross-cultural design in costume: Case study on totemic symbols of China and Thailand. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 1263. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03707-w

[30]. 30.Szubielska, M., Ho, R., & Kopiś-Posiej, N. (2025). The cultural-match effect on art appreciation in adolescents. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 43(2), 899–920. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241308812

[31]. 31.Siek, H. L., Liew, Y. M., Keoy, K. H., & Cherukuri, A. K. (2023). A Study of the Corporate Design Packaging of Malaysia’s Processed Food. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 22(05), 2350026.

[32]. 32.Ishiguro, Y., & Masuda, T. (2021). East–West differences in attention to context: Historical changes in the backgrounds of portrait paintings. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 618061. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.618061

[33]. 33.Chakrabarti, A. (2020). Cultural diversity: A challenge and an opportunity for aesthetics beyond the West. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 78(4), 485–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12732

[34]. 34.Ding, X., & Lin, N. (2018). Beauty in multicultural contexts: A comparison of aesthetic preferences across cultures. International Journal of Psychology, 53(S2), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12540

[35]. 35.Chattaraman, V., Rudd, N. A., & Lennon, S. J. (2017). The allure of cross-cultural aesthetic products: An exploration of cultural fusion in global design. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 29(5), 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2017.1363002

[36]. 36.Lenneberg, S., & Müller, B. (2019). Transcultural aesthetics in global contemporary art: A comparative analysis of non-Western frameworks. Arts, 8(4), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8040150

[37]. 37.Cheung, J. O., & Kwan, L. Y. (2022). Portraits east and west: Cultural differences in artistic depictions of faces over time. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 911234. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.911234

[38]. 38.Pelowski, M., Leder, H., Tinio, P. P. L., Scholl, M., & Akiba, F. (2017). “Move me, astonish me… delight my eyes and brain”: The Vienna Integrated Model of art perception. Physics of Life Reviews, 21, 80–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2017.02.003

[39]. 39.Brielmann, A. A., & Pelli, D. G. (2017). Beauty requires thought. Current Biology, 27(24), 1506–1513.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.018

[40]. 40.Darda, K. M., & Cross, E. S. (2022). The role of expertise and culture in visual art appreciation. Scientific Reports, 12, 10666. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14128-7

[41]. 41.Marin, M. M., & Leder, H. (2018). Examining complexity across domains: Influences of expertise and abstractness. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000126

[42]. 42.Muth, C., & Leder, H. (2018). Aesthetic aha: Pleasure, insight, and facial feedback in art perception. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(1), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000136

[43]. 43.Menninghaus, W., Wagner, V., Hanich, J., et al. (2017). The Distancing-Embracing model of the enjoyment of negative emotions in art reception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X17000309

[44]. 44.Myszkowski, N., & Storme, M. (2018). Measuring aesthetic judgment ability: The revised Visual Aesthetic Sensitivity Test (VAST-R). Personality and Individual Differences, 130, 107–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.001

[45]. 45.Jacobsen, T., & Beudt, S. (2017). Domain generality and domain specificity in aesthetic appreciation. New Ideas in Psychology, 47, 97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2017.03.004

[46]. 46.Vessel, E. A., Starr, G. G., & Rubin, N. (2018). The brain’s default network mediates aesthetic appeal across visual domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(37), 9122–9127. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803595115

[47]. 47.Vartanian, O., Navarrete, G., Chatterjee, A., et al. (2019). Preference for curvilinear contour in interior architectural spaces: Evidence from experts and non-experts. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(1), 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000140

[48]. 48.Chatterjee, A., & Vartanian, O. (2016). Neuroscience of aesthetics. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369(1), 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13035

[49]. 49.Nadal, M., & Skov, M. (2018). The neural architecture of aesthetic experiences: A meta-analysis of fMRI studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 95, 190–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.09.007

[50]. 50.Augustin, M. D., & Carbon, C. C. (2017). The cycle of art reception: The importance of emotion and memory in aesthetic experience. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(4), 514–523. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3353

[51]. 51.Fingerhut, J., & Prinz, J. (2022). Beyond pleasure: A review of aesthetic chills, awe, and transformative art experiences. Review of General Psychology, 26(3), 324–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680221075968

[52]. 52.Koelsch, S., Jacobs, A. M., Menninghaus, W., et al. (2019). The quartet theory of human emotions: An integrative and neurofunctional model of aesthetic experience. Physics of Life Reviews, 33, 50–7