New Study Shows Children’s Pour-Paintings Share Surprising Similarities With Jackson Pollock’s Work
A new study published in Frontiers in Physics has taken a close, scientific look at the famous pour-painting style of Jackson Pollock, and the findings are far more unexpected than most people might guess. The researchers wanted to understand whether the complex splatter patterns we associate with Pollock’s art could be reliably distinguished from those created by children. What they discovered is that children’s paintings often share striking structural similarities with Pollock’s work—sometimes even more than paintings created by adults.
This study isn’t about questioning Pollock’s skill or legacy. Instead, it sheds light on how human movement, balance, and natural pattern-making influence the art people create. And when you apply advanced mathematical tools like fractal analysis and lacunarity analysis, the signatures of these movements become surprisingly measurable.
The Experiment That Started Back in 2002
The research team, led by Prof. Richard Taylor at the University of Oregon, began the project back in 2002. After a long pause, they resumed the work in 2018 and have now completed and published it. They recruited 18 children between four and six years old and 34 adults between 18 and 25 years old to create pour-paintings inspired by Pollock.
Participants were asked to drip and splatter diluted paint onto sheets of paper lying flat on the floor. The selected age groups were intentionally different, because biomechanical balance, body control, and fluidity of motion vary widely between young children and adults. These factors were expected to influence the way paint spreads and moves.
How the Paintings Were Analyzed
To compare the artworks objectively, the researchers used two key mathematical tools: fractal analysis and lacunarity analysis.
Fractal analysis measures the complexity of paint patterns across different scales—essentially how “full” or detailed the painting becomes as you zoom in and out. Lacunarity, on the other hand, looks at the distribution and size of gaps between paint clusters, describing how uniform or varied those empty spaces are.
These tools are ideal for poured art because drip-based paintings naturally form fractal-like structures. In nature, we see fractals in trees, mountains, rivers, and clouds. Pollock himself was known for producing fractal patterns long before scientists had precise tools to measure them.
Clear Differences Between Kids and Adults
Once the data was analyzed, the differences between children’s and adults’ paintings were extremely clear.
Adult paintings tended to have:
- Higher paint density
- More varied and complex trajectories
- More frequent direction changes
- Wide, sweeping paint paths
Children’s paintings displayed:
- Simpler, one-dimensional trajectories
- Fewer directional shifts
- Smaller-scale paint patterns
- More gaps and open spaces between clusters
Adults produced what the researchers described as the “bones” of a painting—dense, layered structures with richer motion patterns. Kids, meanwhile, created artworks marked by simplicity, openness, and larger voids between paint trails.
These distinctions suggest a direct connection to biomechanical balance. Children lack the stable body control adults have, producing more linear, less varied motions. But interestingly, this sometimes made their paintings look closer to Pollock’s works in certain metrics.
Why Children’s Paintings Sometimes Resemble Pollock’s More Than Adults’
One of the most fascinating findings is that children’s fractal patterns aligned more closely with the patterns found in some of Pollock’s famous works than those created by the adult participants.
This doesn’t imply Pollock painted like a child. Instead, it points toward the idea that Pollock’s unique balance limitations—an aspect discussed in art history—may have shaped the style of his pours. His movements had a particular rhythm and constraint, giving his splatters specific structural qualities.
The study analyzed two expressionist works for comparison:
- Jackson Pollock’s “Number 14”
- Max Ernst’s “Young Man Intrigued by the Flight of a Non-Euclidean Fly”
Max Ernst’s painting fell squarely within the children’s fractal range, likely because he used a pendulum tool, which restricts natural human motion. Pollock’s work landed within the adult distribution but very close to the children’s zone, supporting the idea that his distinctive balance and body mechanics influenced the final result.
What Makes a Painting Look Pleasant?
Another part of the study explored how people perceive poured paintings. A selection of adult-created works was rated for:
- Visual complexity
- Interest
- Pleasantness
The clear trend: paintings with less complexity and more open space were rated as more pleasant.
This is consistent with what scientists know about human visual processing. Our eyes and brains have evolved to naturally prefer fractal patterns that resemble landscapes, foliage, or other natural scenes. Simple, clustered, and open fractal patterns are often perceived as more soothing.
Because children’s paintings typically share these features—lower density and more gaps—they may naturally have a pleasant aesthetic quality that viewers respond to.
Why This Matters for Art and Science
This research contributes to a deeper understanding of how art is shaped by the human body. Pour-painting is not about fine brushwork or precise technique—it’s about movement, gravity, and physical expression. When you break down the patterns mathematically, the results make it clear that age, balance, and body coordination leave identifiable marks in the paint.
Additionally, this opens up new possibilities in fields like:
- Art authentication, by measuring fractal signatures
- Neuroscience and psychology, exploring how humans respond to natural patterns
- Therapeutic art, since fractal-rich images have been shown to help reduce stress
The COVID-19 pandemic reminded many researchers that fractal visuals can have calming effects. With that in mind, understanding why certain patterns feel relaxing or familiar is more relevant than ever.
A Quick Look at Fractals for Curious Readers
Since fractals play such an important role in this study, here are a few extra details worth knowing:
What Are Fractals?
Fractals are self-similar patterns—structures that repeat at different scales. Whether you zoom in or zoom out, the pattern retains a recognizable shape. Nature uses fractals everywhere because they’re efficient ways to grow, distribute energy, and build complex structures.
Why Do Humans Like Fractals?
Research shows that certain fractal ranges—especially fractal dimension values between 1.3 and 1.5—tend to feel most visually pleasing and soothing. These ranges mirror natural environments like forests and coastlines. When art contains similar patterns, our brains process them with ease, which can create feelings of comfort or aesthetic enjoyment.
How Does Pollock Fit Into This?
Pollock’s drip paintings unintentionally fall right into these fractal ranges. That may be part of the reason why his chaotic splatters feel strangely harmonious. His works weren’t random—they were the result of controlled motion, rhythm, and a distinct physical style.
Final Thoughts
This new research provides a refreshing perspective on the relationship between human movement, natural patterns, and artistic expression. Instead of lowering Pollock’s genius to “something a kid could do,” the study actually elevates our understanding of why his patterns resonate so deeply—and how even the spontaneous movements of young children can echo aspects of great art.
For artists, scientists, educators, and anyone curious about how creativity intersects with physics, this study opens a fascinating window into what makes pour-paintings so visually engaging.
Research Paper:
A Question of Jackson Pollock’s Balance: Using Lacunarity and Fractal Analysis to Distinguish Poured Paintings by Adults and Children
