A new psychological study reveals that pointing gestures in early modern paintings act as hidden guides for human vision. Viewers barely look at the painted fingers, yet these small details completely reshape how people observe and interpret the artwork. The research was published in a scientific journal.
In art history, the way viewers interact with painted pointing hands has been discussed for centuries. During the Renaissance, artists began incorporating specific characters into their compositions to direct the audience. One such character is the admonitor. This figure typically gazes directly out at the viewer while pointing a finger toward an important element in the main scene.
The concept of the admonitor originated from fifteenth-century theatrical plays. A mediating character on stage would catch the eyes of the audience and point to the main action. Painters adopted this technique to organize their images and guide the eye along a desired path. Over time, these pointing gestures multiplied and evolved, serving as visual tools to indicate spatial relationships, sequential events, and symbolic connections.
Despite the prominence of pointing hands in classical art theory, modern researchers had never tested these assumptions with empirical experiments. Temenuzhka Dimova, a researcher at the University of Vienna, led a team to investigate whether these painted fingers actually influence modern viewers. Nicolas Lapique of the Broad Institute and Raphael Rosenberg of the University of Vienna also collaborated on the project. The team wanted to determine if people focus on pointing hands, if they follow the gestures to their targets, and if this small detail transforms the overall understanding of a scene.
The researchers recruited eighty-four adults between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four. None of the participants had an educational background in art history. The team selected fifteen European paintings from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, featuring works by renowned artists like Caravaggio, Raphael, and Rembrandt.
To isolate the effect of the pointing hands, the researchers created a subtle digital trick. They used photo editing software to seamlessly erase the pointing forefingers from the digital reproductions of the paintings. The participants were divided into two groups, and each participant viewed a mix of original and edited paintings, always seeing only one version of any given artwork. None of the participants reported noticing any digital modifications.
The experiment took place in two consecutive stages. In the first stage, participants sat in front of a high-resolution monitor and observed each painting in silence for forty seconds. An eye-tracking camera recorded the exact movements of their dominant eye. The equipment measured exactly where their gazes landed and how long they lingered on specific spots.
The eye-tracking data revealed a surprising pattern regarding the painted hands. Viewers spent an average of just half a second looking directly at the pointing fingers. This amounted to about one and a half percent of their total viewing time. The painted fingers themselves attracted very little direct visual attention.
Even though the fingers barely registered in direct vision, their presence heavily directed the rest of the viewing experience. In the original paintings, the presence of a pointing finger caused viewers to look repeatedly at the intended target of the gesture. Participants also spent substantial time looking at the face of the character who was pointing.
The tracking software recorded frequent, rapid eye movements bouncing between the pointing character’s face and the target object. Viewers seemed to search for meaning by linking the person making the gesture with the object being indicated. The researchers found that viewers often established strong visual relationships between these specific areas.
The altered paintings produced a completely different viewing pattern. Without the pointing gestures to guide them, participants tended to fixate on whatever character was in the center of the canvas. They also spent more time inspecting minor decorative elements, such as embroidered clothing, cuffs, or background drapery. The absence of a pointing finger essentially trapped the viewer’s gaze on the main character’s face or scattered it among purely aesthetic details.
Seventeenth-century art theorists proposed the idea that every painted element is coordinated with all others. They believed each detail fulfilled a specific function within the whole composition. The eye-tracking data supports this historical theory. Removing a single painted finger disturbed the visual equilibrium of the entire image, forcing viewers to build completely different relationships between the remaining characters.
After the silent observation phase, the researchers conducted a second round of testing. They showed the paintings to the participants again and asked open-ended questions about what they saw. The verbal responses demonstrated that the hidden fingers did more than move eyes around the canvas. They altered how people understood the stories within the paintings.
When viewing the original version of Caravaggio’s artwork featuring the sacrifice of Isaac, many participants specifically mentioned the ram that an angel points toward. Those looking at the modified version rarely mentioned the animal. The pointing gesture successfully highlighted a key narrative element in the original piece.
In a painting by Raphael that features two distinct visual levels, viewers of the original piece felt the upper and lower scenes were deeply connected. They identified two pointing characters as the main link between the levels. Viewers of the altered piece thought the two scenes were entirely separate.
The way a viewer follows a pointing gesture is not always perfect, however. The researchers noticed that viewers sometimes focused on unintended objects that happened to sit along the invisible line drawn by the pointing finger. In Caravaggio’s famous painting of Saint Matthew, two painted figures point their fingers toward the left side of the canvas. Instead of looking all the way across the scene to the actual saint, viewers often stopped their gaze on a young man sitting much closer to the pointing hands.
This ambiguity shows that while painted gestures command attention, they do not guarantee a person will find the exact intended target right away. If an unintended element sits closer to the pointing hand, the viewer’s gaze might land there first. The gesture simply creates a general region of scrutiny where the viewer searches for meaning.
Future studies might explore how these viewing patterns change when individuals receive brief contextual clues before looking at the art. Testing individuals with formal art history education could also reveal whether trained eyes follow the same hidden paths as those of the general public.
The study, “Brief Glance, Lasting Effect: Depicted Pointing Gestures Transform the Perception of Paintings,” was authored by Temenuzhka Dimova, Nicolas Lapique, and Raphael Rosenberg.