PECULIARITIES OF VALUES TRANSFER AMONG COUNTRIES VIA ARTS DIGITALIZATION

. The aesthetic experience digitalisation influences the capacity of artistry and creativity of the artwork and the quality of participation in arts. Due to cultural differences between post-communist and non-communist countries’ citizens in perception qualities, this research aims to evaluate the influence of the participation form (in-real or digital) in the aesthetic situation by the receivers from post-communist and non-communist societies on artistry and creativity potential in the context of cultural and social sustainability. The quality of participation in five arts types (musical, performing, literary, audio-visual, visual) was evaluated using the same ten criteria. Qualitative data analysis based on an international sample from 38 countries (n = 221) concludes that the participation form in arts determines participation quality level in the aesthetic situation by post-communist and non-communist countries’ receivers differently. There are significant cultural determinants among post-communist and non-communist countries’ citizens between participation in particular arts and between particular forms of participation in particular types of arts. The reasons for these differences cannot be drawn from this research; however, future comparative qualitative research directions are set. The research results, in the context of the political system transformation theory as one of the sustainable development features, should gain the interest of: 1) Art creators looking for the optimal and sustainable way of distributing artworks among receivers from post-communist and non-communist countries; 2) Art managers and marketers for deeper understanding of post-communist and non-communist art receivers’ perspectives and their preferences about participation in arts in-real or digitally towards sustainable development; 3) Art receivers to compare their opinion about the ways of sustainable participation in arts with the preferences of art receivers from post-communist and non-communist countries


Introduction
As a broad global public discourse policy concept, sustainability concentrates on environmental, economic, and social dimensions.Undoubtedly, arts belong to the social pillar; however, due to the attraction of the majority of global citizens, it generates an essential input to the economy and, on this basis, influence the environment as well.Moreover, differences between communist (or freshly post-communist) economies and free-of-communism economies confirm the arts' impact on social capital and, consequently, on the environment.Based on the above, digitalisation of the aesthetic situation plays a role in sustainable developments -its importance needs to be still investigated (Jovanovic et al., 2019;Modliński & Pinto, 2020;Mondejar et al., 2021;Sacco et al., 2021).
For centuries, the content of human activities has been relatively fixed, although their forms change endlesslyin-real activities are transferred to digital forms or changed by them.Because the form of participation affects participation content and accordingly switches contributions and outcomes (Karayilanoğlu & Arabacioğlu, 2020), we cannot forget that culture diversifies them even more (Hofstede, 2011;Vollero et al., 2020).Furthermore, digitalisation progressively changes the culture in its wholeness: along with technological advancement comes a transformation of social contacts, aesthetic experiences and forms of expression (Kröner et al., 2021).In constantly-evolved circumstances, also management requires new approaches and new tools.
The COVID-19 pandemic touched all processes and sped up digital participation in numerous areas, including the arts (Lei & Tan, 2021).Considering the participation in arts from the aesthetic situation perspective, the exploration should be undertaken from two sides: the creators' and the receivers' (Gołaszewska, 1984;Szostak, 2020Szostak, , 2021a;;Szostak & Sułkowski, 2020a).Therefore, the spine of this investigation is a function of the combination of "aesthetic situation" and "digital technologies" to get information about the change of creativity and artistry potential.The primary research problem is analysing the impact of "digital technologies" on particular "aesthetic situation" components in optics of creativity and artistry loss or gain, adding the lens of cultural dimensions.Therefore, the central investigation on this issue must be separated into two levels: 1) creator-artwork (creative process) and 2) artwork-receiver (receiving process).This article emphasises the artwork-receiver stage, and its goals are: 1) assessment of the influence of digital technologies on the perception of each type of art by the communist and non-communist countries' citizens; 2) assessment of the scale of the influence of digital technologies on the perception of each type of arts by the communist and non-communist countries' citizens; 3) assessment of the scale of creativity and artistry loss or gain because of the use of digital technologies in each type of art seen by the communist and non-communist countries' citizens.Therefore, based on cultural differences, the following research hypothesis was created to achieve these goals: The form of participation (inreal or digital) in arts shapes participation quality in the aesthetic situation by the communist and non-communist countries' arts receivers differently.Therefore, the following research questions were set to verify this hypothesis: RQ1) How do the communist and non-communist countries' arts receivers perceive the quality of participation in particular types of arts regarding the form of participation (in-real or digitally)?RQ2) What are the differences among the communist and non-communist countries' arts receivers between particular forms of participation in particular types of arts?RQ3) What are the differences among the communist and non-communist countries' arts receivers between participation in particular types of arts regarding the form of participation?This research does not intend to explain differences in assessing the quality of the aesthetic situation, which can be described only after comparative qualitative research.However, this investigation's results can be a central basis of indicators for forming the model for this kind of roots research.

Literature review
Being a framework for cross-cultural communication, Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory indicates the impact of a society's culture on its members' values and how these values relate to members' behaviour (Hofstede, 2011).Following this theory, communist and post-communist societies equipped with different values structures should assess participation in arts differently compared to societies without communist history; this statement is based on the research about cultural differences in perception of creative identities like artists, creators, managers, leaders and entrepreneurs (Szostak, 2021b(Szostak, , 2021c)).We cannot forget that the communism burden had (or still has) been having diverse shapes and powers; also, the length of the influence plays a vital role: the Chinese society will be differently influenced by its version of communism compared to Polish or Czech ones after 30+ years of freedom (Bartlová, 2019;Kozieł, 2019;Tan, 2012).The annals of art history are full of theories created by communist or fascist dictators who used culture as an essential factor in their domination over society (Gupta, 2010;Rasmussen, 2021).However, when the Iron Curtain fell in Europe in the 1990s, post-communist countries started a new era of changes in the world of art.After the Cold War ended, profound political, social, economic, and cultural transformations in the former Eastern Blocforces started back to the balance (Kaljula, 2015).These political and economic changes may be performed spontaneously, focused on current trends and needs of receivers or considering long-term sustainability of systems, environment and culture.In this context, digitalisation is perceived as a process in line with sustainable goals and standards (Jovanovic et al., 2019;Mondejar et al., 2021;Sacco et al., 2021); however, it is evident to art receivers and creators that not all arts are equally capable of being created, performed, and received in a digitalised way (Schiuma, 2017;Zorita-Aguirre, 2020).For some groups of the society, digitalisation creates new positive dimensions but also, at the same time, barriers or exclusion (Fancourt et al., 2020;Kuc-Czarnecka, 2020;Rivas-Carmona, 2020).
Art in human existence has been present since the earliest times, and through the centuries, the roles of arts and creativity have changed, mixed, and evolved.Although aesthetics as a separate discipline has split off relatively late, it was present from the beginning of abstract thought within philosophical discourses (Gołaszewska, 1984;Szostak & Sułkowski, 2020a;Tatarkiewicz, 2015).Art is a way of transferring the artist's will into the artwork to affect the receivers, and the artist's role is to communicate inner states; artists express their states of mind allowing recipients to achieve particular states (Szostak & Sułkowski, 2020a).From the aesthetic situation point of view, the creator generates his artwork reflecting the natural world and the world of universal values, and the creator departs this ready-made result (artwork) for the receiver.The receiver selects the way of participation in the receiving process fitting to particular conditions.On the other side, the unadjusted-to-the-circumstances choice of the perception form determines the content of the receiving process.More-experienced receivers may be supplementary fluent in using a less efficient form of participation without the quality of the content.Opposing, even the most efficient participation form may not be sufficient to distribute the entire content to the lessexperienced receiver (Gołaszewska, 1984;Szostak, 2020).
From the aesthetic point of view, the most noticeable sign of creativity is the artwork itself; in the creator's personality, the fundamental processes making up the phenomenon of creativity happen.The work of art is a carrier of creativity and artistry (Szostak, 2020); simultaneously, the level of creativity and artistry (including universal values) located in the artwork varies on the art receiver's attitude and the form of participation in arts (Szostak, 2021a).The activity of artistic creation is shaped by specified factors like personality conditions, social conditions, and a wealth of experience.However, a straightforward creative attitude is insufficient to start the creative process.Creativity itself is also necessary.The motifs of creative activity may be divided into assignedstraightforwardly affecting the shaping of the work realised with the participation of creative work and unassigned marked in work indirectly, possible to implement using additional actions and to trigger creative forces: economic thoughts, social coercion, accordance with stereotypes (Szostak, 2020(Szostak, , 2021a)).
Participation in arts requires senses (Ekmekçi et al., 2014;Sosnowska, 2015); that is why non-communist and communist countries' citizens use their senses differently (Doğan et al., 2019).However, despite arts' digitalisation being regulated by the technical possibilities to transmit the analogue senses' experience into virtual dimensions (Mao & Jiang, 2021), it is justified that digital participation in arts plays the role of 'digital mediation'.This concept locates the role of digital technology in a proper position, i.e., in 'between' the artwork and the receiver (Jarrier & Bourgeon-Renault, 2019).Furthermore, senses allow for physical, emotional (Buravenkova et al., 2018), intellectual, andspiritual (Rivas-Carmona, 2020;J. C. Wu, 2020) participation in art.Examination of the receiving process on all levels in the context of cultural differences exposes the investigated problem's complexity level.
Advanced IT tools, digitalisation, social media, and constantly-developing business skills forced arts to take a sharp turn (Handa, 2020).In the digital age, performative arts have especially undergone a radical shift since ephemeral performance may be stopped, replayed and repeated (Dunne-Howrie, 2020).Even though the escalation of digitalisation use in arts has been faster, more comprehensive, and more intense year by year, the COVID-19 pandemic added additional stimuli to this process like lockdowns and social distancing (Lei & Tan, 2021;Raimo et al., 2021;Szostak & Sułkowski, 2021a).Parallelly, aside from the digital transformation of the participation in arts, there are complementary trends among artists like their shift in the direction of entrepreneurship (Szostak & Sułkowski, 2021a) or new problems with artists' auto-identification (Szostak & Sułkowski, 2021b, 2021c).That is why digitalisation may be seen as a revolution or evolution.Digital technologies allow redesigning the environment and historical attempts to numerous issues.Therefore, it can be said that today's culture is ordered by digitalisation (Roberge & Chantepie, 2017).Because the digital transformation affects and is shaped by specific cultures differently, it also amplifies spirituality from its real context in the socio-cultural interpretation of the natural world to current digitally-mediated settings (Sosnowska, 2015).Mediatisation of cultural practices has been changing the processes of cultural memory construction, and online interaction skills have become the basis of education to equalise tradition and modernisation (Arkhangelsky & Novikova, 2021).The goal of using the Internet as a participating platform engaging the public in creating artwork is to showcase the relationship between the shared imagination and the specific artistic sensibilities of its participants (Literat, 2012).
Digitalisation, broadening horizons for art receivers, unlocks other concerns simultaneously.First, the mass receivers' attitude decreases the artwork's artistic quality.Second, the digitalisation of arts develops the serving role of arts to make them more understandable and customer-friendly (Pöppel et al., 2018;Szostak, 2021a).Third, digital exclusionsignificant in communist countrieslimits participation in the receiving process (Hracs, 2015;Rikou & Chaviara, 2016).Still, a vital question is the relationship between value and quality, which is used to measure and compare various objects encountered (Fortuna & Modliński, 2021).E.g., considering musical arts, during the reception of a concert in in-real form, the receiver meets the artwork in its desired-by-artist appearance: no volume adjustments, no pauses.On the contrary, the digital form of participation in musical arts allows for these adjustments andif made arbitrarilythe artwork affects the receiver differently from the creator's desire.In performing arts perceived in-real, a receiver is also a form of a hostage of the artwork; he must keep the regimes of the artwork (its length, volume, visibility).Among all arts, performing arts are probably the most shaped by digitalisation (Dube & İnce, 2019).Finally, the concept of self-historicisation, merging with the contemporary artistic language of performance, supports the artists' recognition in the international art context; a long period of communism shaping the culture of participation in art plays a vital role here (Proksch-Weilguni, 2019).
Audio-visual arts are tightly fixed to the digital form of participation.However, receivers of audio-visual artwork, in-real or digitally, can imagine meaningful dissimilarities between these forms.E.g., the receiver cannot pause or modify the volume of a movie at the cinema; at home, it is entirely possible.Furthermore, at the cinema, the receiver is influenced by the audience's feedback; at home, he is isolated.Additionally, the use of visual image technology in art also permits the growth of digital media art (Mao & Jiang, 2021) and, accordingly, a neverending cycle of mutual inspiration.The form of the receiving process of visual arts profoundly affects the shape of the receiving process: a painting is determined by its content and form (e.g.size), environment, emotions shaped by these issues and linked to the receiver's approach towards the artwork.Based on that, digital collaboration in art, digital marketing and digital performance can differentiate and include audiences as authentic arts co-producers (Fortuna & Modliński, 2021).It seems interesting to examine how art receivers of different cultures (post-communist and non-communist) perceive artworks created in this process because the effectiveness and sustainability of the aesthetic situation digitisation are not apparent (Nawa & Sirayi, 2014;Rusinko, 2020).
From the management point of view, organisations can gain from aesthetics on many levels: 1) utilising artistic interventions for individual and group creativity development or problem-solving (Schnuugg, 2019;Skoldberg Johansson et al., 2015); 2) interpreting arts into executive action using the effectiveness of art forms (Pöppel et al., 2018); 3) utilising abstract concepts of aesthetics into management theory and practice (Szostak, 2021a;Szostak & Sułkowski, 2020a, 2020b).Based on this, managementperceived as achieving goals efficientlyis about selecting and regulating the optimal type of participation in each type of art, considering the acceptable grade of creativity and artistry loss or gain for art creators and receivers.Furthermore, art creators work differently in the digital environment needing assistance from co-workers, contractors, and managers, playing a significant role in connecting, harmonising and curating projects and processes (Hracs, 2015).Also, marketers attempting to adjust to constant changes in the market may gain from this research.Cultural differences determine all these optics, and the communism factor plays an important role here.
It is worth asking what may be the reasons for differences between communist and post-communist citizens compared to non-communist citizens in the assessment of the receiving process of arts.The first trace may lead to political system transformation theory focusing on time perspective for changes in culture and identity of society; more extended period and power of communist burden, more significant changes and a more extended period of forgetting about the past and achieving free perspective of non-communist societies (Pavlica & Thorpe, 1998;Szostak, 2021bSzostak, , 2021c)).These results were observed by researchers of many European post-communistic countries like the Czech Republic (Hornat, 2019), Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania (Kreuzer & Pettai, 2003), Slovakia (Mikloš, 2021), and currently communist countries like China (Xue et al., 2021).There are three transformation strategies of countries from communism: 1) gradualist, 2) radical, and 3) spontaneous (Mikloš, 2021), and each of them determines the cultural results differently.In addition, education system quality and governments' priorities are crucial (Birch, 2003;Golob & Makarovič, 2017;Hornat, 2019).In this context, the sustainability issue in this transformation is crucial for all three pillars of sustainable development; each of the mentioned strategies has different consequences on economics, the environment and societies (Mikloš, 2021).
In the second step, a quantitative investigation was made to estimate culturally-differentiated receivers' participation quality in each type of art analysed based on the ten criteria described above.Furthermore, this step aimed to conclude the results about possibly different artistic activities being comprehensible simultaneously.IBM SPSS and MS Excel software executed data analysis; however, complex statistics were not conducted due to the small sample size (n = 221).Therefore, this article exhibits a limited number of conclusions from the entire investigation.The quantitative investigation was held between May and December 2021, applying digital tools by SURVIO company.The survey, arranged in English, was disseminated by social media, direct requests and official announcements.It contained 71 questions and was divided into six parts.The first five parts regarded each type of art.All questions were closed-type; respondents could select prepared answers only.While assessing the level of quality of a factor, the respondents used a 5-step Lickert scale: very low (1), rather low (2), neutral (3), rather high (4), and very high (5).The sixth part of the survey permitted categorising the respondents regarding age, gender, nationality (the respondents were divided into communist and post-communist countries and no communist burden countries based on nationality) and education level.28.4% out of 777 visits concluded in 221 responses.The oldest participant was born in 1931 (90 y.o.) and the youngest in 2005 (16 y.o.).The majority of respondents (60.1%) graduated bachelor's, master's, or engineer studies; 28.2% had a doctorate, habilitation, or professorship; 9.4% graduated from a technical college or high school, and 2.3% from primary school or junior high school.Respondents (55.2% men and 44.8% women) came from 38 countries: 37.2% from Poland, 11.2% from the USA, 7.4% from Ukraine, 7.4% from Finland, 3.7% from Germany, 3.7% from India, 2.7% from Turkey, 2.7% from the UK.This paper describes only a fraction of the research results.86.2% of all respondents, i.e. 82.5% of communist countries' citizens and 90.6% of non-communist countries' citizens, participate in cultural life (music, theatre, literature, painting, sculpture, video game, architecture, fashion) in opposition to 13.8% of all respondents (17.5% of communist countries' citizens and 9.4% of noncommunist countries' citizens) who do not do it at all.This information allows the prediction of higher demand for arts participation by communist and post-communist citizens in the context of the transfer of the political system towards non-communist solutions; this transfer should be performed in a possibly sustainable way.See: Figure 1.Communist countries' citizens participate in cultural life by selecting musical arts in 68.2%, performing arts in 70.6%, literary arts in 45.9%, audio-visual arts in 52.9% and visual arts in 41.2%.Communist countries' citizens participate in cultural life by choosing musical arts in 74.0%, performing arts in 68.8%, literary arts in 50.6%, audio-visual arts in 63.6% and visual arts in 51.9%.See: Figure 2. It can be said that more non-communist countries' citizens participate in arts than communist and post-communist countries' citizens (in descending order): 26.2% more in visual arts, 20.2% more in literary arts, 10.4% in audio-visual arts, 8.5% more in musical arts.Only performing arts are 2.5% more often participated by communist and post-communist countries' citizens than non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 3.These results indicate the detailed arts where a sustainable transfer of values and solutions should be focused and performed.Source: own elaboration.

Regarding the type of arts
The vast majority of all types of arts receivers are involved both in classical and popular forms of arts: 77.6% of communist countries' citizens and 50.9% of non-communist countries' citizens in musical arts, 78.0% of communist countries' citizens and 58.3% of non-communist countries' citizens in performing arts, 71.1% of communist countries' citizens and 66.7% of non-communist countries' citizens in literary arts, 71.1% of communist countries' citizens and 78.3% of non-communist countries' citizens in audio-visual arts, and 79.4% of communist countries' citizens and 62.9% of non-communist countries' citizens in visual arts.However, only the classical form is attended by: 12.1% of communist countries' citizens and 41.5% of non-communist countries' citizens in case of musical arts, 15.3% of communist countries' citizens and 27.1% of non-communist countries' citizens in case of performing arts, 18.4% of communist countries' citizens and 25.0% of non-communist countries' citizens in case of literary arts, 6.7% of communist countries' citizens and 4.3% of non-communist countries' citizens in case audio-visual arts, and 8.8% of communist countries' citizens and 22.9% of noncommunist countries' citizens in case of visual arts.On the other hand, only the popular form of arts is attended by: 10.3% of communist countries' citizens and 7.5% of non-communist countries' citizens in case of musical arts, 6.8% of communist countries' citizens and 14.6% of non-communist countries' citizens in case of performing arts, 10.5% of communist and 8.3% of non-communist in case of literary arts, 22.2% of communist countries' citizens and 17.4% of non-communist countries' citizens in case audio-visual arts, and 11.8% of communist countries' citizens and 14.3% of non-communist countries' citizens in case of visual arts.See: Figure 4 and Figure 5. Source: own elaboration.
The research exposes the following variances between citizens of communist and non-communist countries in the form of participation in each type of art.Musical arts receivers assess the quality of the whole aesthetic situation concerning the form of participation in the following distribution: in-real -4.04 by communist countries' citizens and 4.17 by non-communist countries' citizens (difference 3.1%), digitally -3.33 by communist and 3.23 by noncommunist countries' citizens (difference 2.8%).Performing arts receivers assess the quality of the whole aesthetic situation as follows: in-real -3.96 by communist countries' citizens and 4.02 by non-communist (difference 1.4%), digitally -3.02 by communist countries' citizens and 3.12 by non-communist (difference 3.1%).Literary arts receivers assess the quality of the whole aesthetic situation as follows: in-real -3.96 by communist countries' citizens and 4.00 by non-communist (difference 1.2%), digitally -3.31 by communist countries' citizens and 3.69 by non-communist (difference 11.5%).Audio-visual arts receivers assess the quality of the whole aesthetic situation: in-real -3.62 by communist and 3.60 by non-communist countries' citizens (difference 0.7%), digitally -3.96 by communist countries' citizens and 3.89 by non-communist (difference 1.8%).Finally, visual arts receivers assess the quality of the whole aesthetic situation: in-real -4.09 by communist and 3.99 by non-communist countries' citizens (difference 2.4%), digitally -3.28 by communist countries' citizens and 3.43 by non-communist (difference 4.4%).See: Figure 6 and Figure 7.These results can be used as a map of differences that will be diminished by countries with the communist burden on their way toward the free market.The concern of sustainable transformation in these areas can benefit from using this information.Source: own elaboration.
According to communist countries' citizens, musical arts comparing digital to in-real participation lose 17.7% of the receiving process quality and 22.4% according to non-communist countries' citizens.Performing arts lose accordingly 23.8% to the communist and 22.5% to non-communist countries' citizens.Literary arts lose 16.5% to the communist and 8.0% to non-communist countries' citizens.Audio-visual arts, comparing digital to in-real participation, gain 9.3% to the communist countries' citizens and 8.1% to the non-communist.Visual arts lose 19.7% to the communist countries' citizens and 14.1% to the non-communist.See: Figure 8. Source: own elaboration.

Regarding qualities of the aesthetic situation
After analysing general variances between the forms of participation in each type of art by the communist and non-communist countries' citizens, it is worth verifying how particular components of the aesthetic situation behave regarding the type of participation in each type of art concerning the cultural roots of arts receiver.Understanding these differences can be essential in planning and performing sustainable development on many levelsprimarily cultural and artistic.

Satisfaction
Musical arts receivers from the communist and non-communist countries assess their satisfaction concerning the form of participation in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real   Regarding the variances between the communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their satisfaction regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art, the results are the following.First, non-communist countries' citizens assessed their satisfaction flowing from in-real participation in musical arts as 2.6% higher than communist; however, digital participation in musical arts is 1.3% more satisfactory by non-communist to communist countries' citizens.Second, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in performing arts as 4.2% less satisfactory to communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in performing arts is seen as 6.8% more satisfactory by non-communist than communist countries' citizens.Third, non-communist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as 1.2% less satisfactory than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in literary arts is seen as 16.6% more satisfactory by non-communist than communist countries' citizens.Fourth, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in audio-visual arts as 5.7% less satisfactory than communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in audio-visual arts is seen as 2.9% less satisfactory by non-communist than communist countries' citizens.Finally, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in visual arts as 3.7% less satisfactory than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in visual arts is seen as 7.1% more satisfactory by non-communist to communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 10.
We can see the following variances between the form of participation in the receiving process by the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens regarding their satisfaction flowing from a particular type of art.First, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in musical arts as 26.1% less satisfactory than inreal; for non-communist countries' citizens, this difference is slightly higher, i.e. 27.0%.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in performing arts as 32.0% less satisfactory than in-real; this difference is 24.2% for non-communist countries' citizens.Third, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in literary arts as 24.3% less satisfactory than in-real; this difference is 10.7% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as 4.8% more satisfactory than in-real; this difference is 7.9% for non-communist countries' citizens.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in visual arts as 22.5% less satisfactory than in-real; this difference is 13.9% for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 11.Source: own elaboration.
Speaking about the variances between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their pleasure regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art, the results are the following.First, non-communist countries' citizens assessed their pleasure flowing from in-real participation in musical arts as 1.4% higher than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in musical arts is seen as 2.3% less pleasing for non-communist countries' citizens than communist.Second, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in performing arts as 0.7% less pleasing to communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in performing arts is seen as 4.2% less pleasing for non-communist countries' citizens than communist.Third, non-communist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as 0.4% less pleasing than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in literary arts is seen as 6.0% more pleasing for non-communist countries' citizens than communist.Fourth, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in audio-visual arts as 1.0% more pleasing than communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in audio-visual arts is seen as 0.5% less pleasing for non-communist countries' citizens than communist.Finally, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in visual arts as 3.0% less pleasing than the communist; however, digital participation in visual arts is seen as 6.1% more pleasing for non-communist countries' citizens than communist.See: Figure 13.Source: own elaboration.
We can see the following variances between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding their pleasure flowing from a particular type of art.First, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in musical arts as 26.1% less pleasing than in-real; for noncommunist countries' citizens, this difference is 27.0%.Second, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in performing arts as 32.0% less pleasing than in-real; this difference is 24.2% for non-communist countries' citizens.Third, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in literary arts as 24.3% less pleasing than in-real; this difference is 10.7% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as 4.8% more pleasing than in-real; this difference is 7.9% higher for non-communist countries' citizens.Finally, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in visual arts as 22.5% less pleasing than in-real; this difference is 13.9% for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 14.Source: own elaboration.
The variances between the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their engagement regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in musical arts as 5.6% more engaging than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in musical arts is seen as 0.5% more engaging by noncommunist than communist countries' citizens.Second, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in performing arts as 0.1% more engaging than the communist; however, digital participation in performing arts is seen as 3.9% more engaging by non-communist countries' citizens than communist.Third, the non-communist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as 3.4% more engaging than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in literary arts is seen as 12.6% more engaging by noncommunist countries' citizens than communist.Fourth, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in audio-visual arts as 4.2% less engaging than the communist; however, digital participation in audio-visual arts is 1.2% more engaging by non-communist countries' citizens than communist.Finally, the noncommunist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in visual arts as 3.5% less engaging than communist countries' citizens; digital participation in visual arts is seen as 7.9% more engaging by the non-communist countries' citizens to the communist.See: Figure 16.
We can see the following variances between the form of participation in the receiving process by the communist and the non-communist regarding their engagement flowing from a particular type of art.First, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in musical arts as 24.8% less engaging than in-real; for noncommunist countries' citizens, this difference is 28.4%.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in performing arts as 30.0%less engaging than in-real; this difference is 27.3% for non-communist countries' citizens.Third, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in literary arts as 16.3% less engaging than in-real; this difference is 8.9% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as 2.9% less engaging than in-real; noncommunist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as 8.7% more engaging.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in visual arts as 25.2% less engaging than in-real; this difference is 16.3% for the non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 17.Source: own elaboration.Source: own elaboration.

The possibility of experiencing catharsis
Musical arts receivers from the communist and the non-communist countries assess their possibility of experiencing catharsis concerning the form of participation in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real -4.19 by the communist countries' citizens and 4.05 by the non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.15 by the communist countries' citizens and 3.07 by the non-communist.Performing arts receivers assess their possibility of experiencing catharsis as follows: in-real -4.00 by communist countries' citizens and 3.88 by noncommunist, digitally -2.95 by the communist countries' citizens and 3.18 by non-communist.Literary arts receivers assess their possibility of experiencing catharsis as follows: in-real -4.00 by the communist countries' citizens and 3.94 by non-communist, digitally -3.13 by the communist countries' citizens and 3.61 by the noncommunist.Audio-visual arts receivers assess their possibility of experiencing catharsis: in-real -3.66 by the communist countries' citizens and 3.58 by non-communist, digitally -3.86 by the communist countries' citizens and 3.79 by non-communist.Finally, visual arts receivers assess their possibility of experiencing catharsis: in-real -3.97 by communist countries' citizens and 3.85 by non-communist, digitally -2.82 by communist and 3.32 by non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 18.Source: own elaboration.
The variances between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing the possibility of experiencing catharsis regarding the form of participation in the receiving process are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in musical arts as 3.3% less catharsis-generating than the communist countries' citizens; digital participation in musical arts is seen as 2.5% more catharsisgenerating for the non-communist countries' citizens than the communist.Second, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in performing arts as 2.9% less catharsis-generating; digital participation in performing arts is seen as 7.9% more catharsis-generating for non-communist countries' citizens than the communist.Third, the non-communist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as 1.4% less catharsis-generating than communist; digital participation in literary arts is seen as 15.2% more catharsisgenerating by the non-communist countries' citizens than the communist.Fourth, non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in audio-visual arts as 2.1% less catharsis-generating than communist; however, digital participation in audio-visual arts is 1.9% less catharsis-generating by non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Finally, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in visual arts as 3.1% less catharsis-generating than the communist; digital participation in visual arts is seen as 17.7% more catharsis-generating by the non-communist countries' citizens than the communist.See: Figure 19.Source: own elaboration.
We can see the following variances between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding the possibility of experiencing catharsis from a particular type of art.First, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in musical arts as 24.8% less enabling experiencing catharsis than in-real; this difference is 24.2% for non-communist countries' citizens.Second, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in performing arts as 26.3% less enabling experiencing catharsis than in-real; this difference is 18.1% for non-communist countries' citizens.Third, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in literary arts as 21.7% less enabling experiencing catharsis than in-real; this difference is 8.6% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as 5.4% more enabling experiencing catharsis than in-real; non-communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as 5.6% more enabling experiencing catharsis.Finally, communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in visual arts as 29.0% less enabling experiencing catharsis than in-real; this difference is 13.8% for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 20.

Contact with the artwork itself
Musical arts receivers from communist and non-communist countries assess their contact with the artwork itself concerning the form of participation in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real -4.33 by communist countries' citizens and 4.18 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.25 by communist and 3.09 by non-communist countries' citizens.Performing arts receivers assess their contact with the artwork itself as follows: in-real -4.10 by communist countries' citizens and 4.14 by non-communist, digitally -2.88 by communist countries' citizens and 2.98 by non-communist.Literary arts receivers assess their contact with the artwork itself as follows: in-real -4.11 by communist countries' citizens and 4.06 by non-communist, digitally -3.34 by communist countries' citizens and 3.55 by non-communist countries' citizens.Audio-visual arts receivers assess their contact with the artwork itself: in-real -3.66 by communist countries' citizens and 3.55 by noncommunist countries' citizens, digitally -3.86 by communist countries' citizens and 3.88 by non-communist.Finally, visual arts receivers assess their contact with the artwork itself: in-real 4.20 by communist countries' citizens and 4.10 by non-communist, digitally -3.15 by communist and 3.29 by non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 21.Source: own elaboration.
The variances between the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their contact with the artwork itself regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in musical arts as 3.4% lower than the communist countries' citizens regarding the contact with the artwork itself; digital participation in musical arts gives 5.1% less contact with the artwork itself to the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Second, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in performing arts as allowing 0.9% more contact with the artwork itself than the communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in performing arts allows 3.6% more contact with the artwork itself for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Third, the non-communist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as allowing 1.2% less contact with the artwork itself than the communist countries' citizens; digital participation in literary arts allows 6.1% more contact with the artwork itself for the non-communist countries' citizens than the communist.Fourth, the non-communist countries' citizens see in-real participation in audiovisual arts as allowing 2.9% less contact with the artwork itself than the communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in audio-visual arts allows 0.7% more contact with the artwork itself for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Finally, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in visual arts as allowing 2.3% less contact with the artwork itself than the communist countries' citizens; digital participation in visual arts allows 4.4% more contact with the artwork itself for the noncommunist than the communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 22.Source: own elaboration.
We can see the following about the variances between the form of participation in the receiving process by the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens regarding contact with the artwork itself in a particular type of art.First, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in musical arts as allowing 24.8% less contact with the artwork itself than in-real; this difference is 26.1% for non-communist countries' citizens.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in performing arts as allowing 29.9% less contact with the artwork itself than in-real; this difference is 28.0% for the non-communist countries' citizens.
Third, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in literary arts as allowing 18.6% less contact with the artwork itself than in-real; this difference is 12.6% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as allowing 5.4% more contact with the artwork itself than in-real; the non-communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as allowing 9.3% more contact with the artwork itself than in-real.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in visual arts as allowing 25.0% less contact with the artwork itself than in-real; this difference is 19.8% for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 23.Source: own elaboration.

Contact with the performer itself
Musical arts receivers from communist and non-communist countries assess their contact with the performer itself concerning the form of participation in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real -4.21 by communist countries' citizens and 4.19 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -2.75 by communist and 2.95 by non-communist countries' citizens.Performing arts receivers assess their contact with the performer itself as follows: in-real -4.07 by communist countries' citizens and 4.04 by non-communist, digitally -2.65 by communist countries' citizens and 2.93 by non-communist.Literary arts receivers assess their contact with the performer itself as follows: in-real -4.00 by communist countries' citizens and 4.19 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.26 by communist countries' citizens and 3.84 by non-communist.Audio-visual arts receivers assess their contact with the performer itself: in-real -3.48 by communist and 3.58 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.48 by communist countries' citizens and 3.74 by non-communist.Finally, visual arts receivers assess their contact with the performer itself: in-real -4.00 by communist countries' citizens and 4.08 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.03 by communist and 3.29 by non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 24.
The variances between the communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their contact with the performer itself regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in musical arts as allowing 0.3% less contact with the performer itself than the communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in musical arts allows 7.3% more contact with the performer itself for the non-communist than communist countries' citizens.Second, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in performing arts as allowing 0.7% less contact with the performer itself than the communist countries' citizens; digital participation in performing arts allows 10.5% more contact with the performer itself for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Third, the non-communist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as allowing 4.9% more contact with the performer itself than the communist; digital participation in literary arts allows 17.8% more contact with the performer itself for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in audio-visual arts as allowing 3.1% more contact with the performer itself than the communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in audio-visual arts allows 7.7% more contact with the performer itself for the noncommunist than the communist countries' citizens.Finally, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in visual arts as allowing 1.9% more contact with the performer itself than the communist countries' citizens; digital participation in visual arts allows 8.6% more contact with the performer itself by non-communist to the communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 25.Source: own elaboration.
We can see the following variances between the form of participation in the receiving process by the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens regarding their contact with the performer itself flowing from a particular type of art.First, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in musical arts as allowing 34.7% less contact with the performer itself than in-real; for non-communist countries' citizens, this difference is 29.8%.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in performing arts as allowing 34.7% less contact with the performer itself than in-real; this difference is 27.4% for non-communist countries' citizens.Third, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in literary arts as allowing 18.4% less contact with the performer itself than in-real; this difference is 8.4% for the non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess digital and in-real participation in audio-visual arts equally regarding contact with the performer itself than; the non-communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in audio-visual arts as allowing 4.5% more contact with the performer itself than in-real.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess digital participation in visual arts as allowing 24.2% less contact with the performer itself than in-real; this difference is 19.3% for the non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 26.The variances between the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their comfort of participation regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed comfort of in-real participation in musical arts as 7.5% higher than communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in musical arts regarding the comfort of participation is 6.9% lower for non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Second, n the on-communist countries' citizens assessed comfort of in-real participation in performing arts as 5.4% higher than the communist; the comfort of digital participation in performing arts is 6.3% higher for non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Third, the non-communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of in-real participation in literary arts as 0.1% higher than the communist; digital participation in literary arts is 15.2% more comfortable for non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed the comfort of in-real participation in audio-visual arts as 0.8% lower than the communist; the comfort of digital participation in audio-visual arts is seen as 7.3% lower for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Finally, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed comfort of in-real participation in visual arts as 2.1% lower than the communist countries' citizens; the comfort of digital participation in visual arts is 5.1% higher for non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 28.Source: own elaboration.
We can see the following differences between the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art by the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens regarding their comfort level.First, the communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of digital participation in musical arts as 9.8% lower than inreal; this difference is 21.8% lower for non-communist.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of digital participation in performing arts as 16.6% lower than in-real; this difference is 15.9% lower for non-communist countries' citizens.Third, the communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of digital participation in literary arts as 18.7% lower than in-real; this difference is 6.5% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of digital participation in audio-visual arts as 15.3% higher than in-real; the non-communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of digital participation in audio-visual arts as 7.7% higher than in-real.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess the comfort of digital participation in visual arts as 15.4% lower than in-real; this difference is 9.2% lower for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 29.Source: own elaboration.
The variances between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed their possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience in in-real participation in musical arts as 3.7% higher than the communist countries' citizens; however, digital participation in musical arts allows 1.5% fewer possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience by the non-communist to the communist countries' citizens.Second, in-real participation in performing arts allows 5.6% fewer possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens; digital participation in performing arts allows 1.8% more possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Third, the noncommunist countries' citizens assess in-real participation in literary arts as allowing 0.2% more possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience than the communist; digital participation in literary arts allows 3.9% more possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed in-real participation in audio-visual arts as allowing 2.7% more possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience than communist; however, digital participation in audiovisual arts gives 5.2% fewer possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience by non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Finally, the non-communist countries' citizens see 3.9% fewer possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience in in-real participation in visual arts than the communist; digital participation in experience in digital participation in musical arts as 1.7% lower than in-real; for non-communist countries' citizens, this difference is 6.7% lower.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess the possibility of shaping the aesthetical experience in digital participation in performing arts as 18.6% lower than in-real; this difference is 12.3% for non-communist.Third, the communist countries' citizens assess the possibility of shaping the aesthetical experience in digital participation in literary arts as 9.9% lower than in-real; this difference is 6.5% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess the possibility of shaping the aesthetical experience in digital participation in audio-visual arts as 18.8% better than in-real; this difference is 9.6% for non-communist countries' citizens.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess the possibility of shaping the aesthetical experience in digital participation in visual arts as 10.5% lower than in-real; this difference is 10.6% for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 32.Source: own elaboration.

Own motivation to participate
The variances between the communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their motivation to participate regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed their motivation to participate in-real in musical arts as 5.6% higher than the communist; however, motivation to participate digitally in musical arts is seen as 8.8% lower by non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Second, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed their motivation to participate in-real in performing arts as 7.5% higher than the communist; motivation to participate digitally in performing arts is seen as 5.3% lower for the non-communist than communist countries' citizens.Third, the non-communist countries' citizens assess their motivation to participate in-real in literary arts as 1.6% lower than the communist; motivation to participate digitally in literary arts is 8.1% higher for the noncommunist than the communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed their motivation to participate in-real in audio-visual arts as 2.6% lower than the communist; however, motivation to participate digitally in audio-visual arts is 4.7% lower for non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Finally, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed their motivation to participate in-real in visual arts as 2.1% lower than the communist; motivation to participate digitally in visual arts is seen as 1.8% lower for the non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 34.
We can see the following about the differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by the communist and the non-communist countries' citizens regarding their motivation to participate in particular types of art.First, the communist countries' citizens assess their motivation to participate digitally in musical arts as 12.9% lower than in-real; for non-communist countries' citizens, this difference is 24.8%.Second, the communist countries' citizens assess their motivation to participate digitally in performing arts as 21.3% lower than in-real; this difference is 30.6% for non-communist.Third, the communist countries' citizens assess their motivation to participate digitally in literary arts as 16.3% lower than in-real; this difference is 8.0% for non-communist countries' citizens.Fourth, the communist countries' citizens assess their motivation to participate digitally in audio-visual arts as 8.7% higher than in-real; this difference is 6.4% higher for non-communist.Finally, the communist countries' citizens assess their motivation to participate digitally in visual arts as 17.5% lower than inreal; this difference is 17.2% for non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 35.Regarding the variances between the communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing the easiness of participation regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art, the results are the following.First, the non-communist countries' citizens assessed the easiness of in-real participation in musical arts as 15.1% higher than the communist countries' citizens; the easiness of digital participation in musical arts is seen as 6.4% lower for non-communist than the communist countries' citizens.Second, the noncommunist countries' citizens assessed the easiness of in-real participation in performing arts as 18.0% higher

Conclusions
It can be concluded that the form of participation (in-real or digital) in arts culturally influences the level of participation quality in the aesthetic situation by the post-communist and non-communist countries receivers differently.The confirmation of the hypothesis followed the answers to the research questions showing cultural variances between participation in particular types of arts and cultural differences between particular forms of participation in particular types of arts by the post-communist and non-communist countries' receivers.Finally, extrapolating the conclusions, it can be said that these cultural differences are based on fundamental cultural dimensions, e.g.individualism-collectivism or uncertainty avoidance and arise strictly from history (Hofstede, 2011) and confirm the consequences of the political system transformation theory being one of the features of the sustainable development.In addition, different assessments of the qualities of the aesthetic situation in the digitalised way between post-communist and non-communist citizens show particular spaces for a sustainable approach.
As limitations of the research may be seen: 1) The vast majority of the sample (88.3%) was represented by persons with Bachelor's, Engineer's, Master's, Doctoral and Professorship diplomas, who are more conscious of their behaviour and better equipped to describe their perception of intangible assets and features in comparison to the rest of society; 2) The sample set was relatively small for general conclusions (n = 221).
The results of this investigation should be stimulating for: 1) Art creators looking for the optimal and sustainable way of distributing artworks among receivers from post-communist and non-communist countries; 2) Art managers and marketers for a deeper understanding of post-communist and non-communist art receivers' perspectives and their preferences about participation in arts in-real or digitally, especially in the sustainability context; 3) Art receivers to compare their opinion about the ways of sustainable participation in arts with the preferences of art receivers from post-communist and non-communist countries.
Potential research questions for additional research in the sustainable transfer of societies from (post-)communism to free-market ones may be the following: 1) How do the post-communist and non-communist countries' art creators perceive the artistry and creativity loss or gain regarding diverse forms of artwork distribution?2) What are the postcommunist and non-communist countries' variances in artistry and creativity loss or gain regarding diverse forms of receiving process between diverse cultures?3) What are the variances in artistry and creativity loss or gain regarding diverse forms of receiving process by the post-communist and non-communist countries' citizens?4) How long does it take to "forget" the post-communist burden influencing assessing the aesthetic situation's components?5) How to use the differences in participation in arts towards sustainable development of society, economy and environment?

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Participation in all types of arts by communist and non-communist countries' citizens.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Participation in each type of art by communist and non-communist countries' citizens.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in participation in each type of arts.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Participation in particular arts regarding arts types (classical only, both classical and popular, popular only) by communist and non-communist countries' citizens.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in participation in different arts regarding arts types (classical only, both classical and popular, popular only).

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Assessment of the whole aesthetic situation quality regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of arts between citizens of communist and non-communist countries.

Figure 7 .
Figure 7. Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing the whole aesthetic situation quality regarding the in-real and digital form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.

Figure 8 .
Figure 8. Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens' assessment of the receiving process regarding the whole aesthetic situation quality of a particular type of art considering the form of participation (in-real or digital).
-4.33 by communist countries' citizens and 4.44 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.20 by communist countries' citizens and 3.24 by non-communist.Performing arts receivers assess their satisfaction as follows: in-real -4.25 by communist countries' citizens and 4.08 by non-communist, digitally -2.89 by communist countries' citizens and 3.09 by non-communist.Literary arts receivers assess their satisfaction as follows: in-real -4.11 by communist countries' citizens and 4.06 by non-communist, digitally -3.11 by communist countries' citizens and 3.63 by non-communist.Audio-visual arts receivers assess their satisfaction: in-real -3.84 by communist countries' citizens and 3.62 by non-communist, digitally -4.02 by communist countries' citizens and 3.91 by noncommunist.Finally, visual arts receivers assess their satisfaction: in-real -4.24 by communist countries' citizens and 4.08 by non-communist, digitally -3.28 by communist and 3.51 by non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 9.

Figure 9 .
Figure 9. Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' satisfaction flowing from a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 10 .
Figure 10.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens' in assessing their satisfaction regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 11 .
Figure 11.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens' regarding their satisfaction flowing from a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 12 .
Figure 12.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' pleasure flowing from a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.

Figure 13 .
Figure 13.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their pleasure regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 14 .
Figure 14.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding their pleasure flowing from a particular type of art.
Musical arts receivers from communist and non-communist countries assess their engagement concerning participation form in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real -4.09 by communist countries' citizens and 4.32 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.07 by communist countries' citizens and 3.09 by non-communist.Performing arts receivers assess their engagement: in-real -4.15 by communist countries' citizens and 4.16 by non-communist, digitally -2.91 by communist and 3.02 by non-communist countries' citizens.Literary arts receivers assess their engagement: in-real -3.87 by communist countries' citizens and 4.00 by non-communist, digitally -3.24 by communist countries' citizens and 3.65 by non-communist.Audio-visual arts receivers assess their engagement: in-real -3.84 by communist countries' citizens and 3.68 by non-communist, digitally -3.95 by communist countries' citizens and 4.00 by non-communist.Finally, visual arts receivers assess their engagement: in-real -4.17 by communist countries' citizens and 4.03 by non-communist, digitally -3.12 by communist countries' citizens and 3.37 by non-communist.See: Figure15.

Figure 15 .
Figure 15.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' engagement flowing from a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 16 .
Figure 16.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their engagement regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.

Figure 17 .
Figure 17.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding their engagement flowing from a particular type of art.

Figure 18 .
Figure 18.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' possibility of experiencing catharsis in a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.

Figure 19 .
Figure 19.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing the possibility of experiencing catharsis regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.

Figure 20 .
Figure 20.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding the possibility of experiencing catharsis in a particular type of art.

Figure 21 .
Figure 21.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' contact with the artwork itself in a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.

Figure 22 .
Figure 22.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing contact with the artwork itself regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 23 .
Figure 23.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding contact with the artwork itself flowing from a particular type of art.

Figure 24 .
Figure 24.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' contact with the performer itself in a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.

Figure 25 .
Figure 25.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing contact with the performer itself regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.

Figure 26 .
Figure 26.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding contact with the performer itself in a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 27 .
Figure 27.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' comfort of participation flowing from a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.

Figure 28 .
Figure 28.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their comfort of participation regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 29 .
Figure 29.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding the comfort of participation flowing from a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.4.2.8.Possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experienceMusical arts receivers from communist and non-communist countries assess their possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience concerning the form of participation in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real -3.55 by communist countries' citizens and 3.68 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.49 by communist and 3.44 by non-communist countries' citizens.Performing arts receivers assess their possibilities of

Figure 30 .
Figure 30.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' possibilities of shaping the aesthetical experience in a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.

Figure 33 .
Figure 33.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' own motivation to participate in a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.Source: own elaboration.Musical arts receivers from communist and non-communist countries assess their motivation to participate concerning the form of participation in the receiving process in the following distribution: in-real -4.07 by communist countries' citizens and 4.30 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.55 by communist and 3.23 by non-communist countries' citizens.Performing arts male receivers assess their motivation to participate in-real as 3.81 and 4.10 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.00 by communist and 2.84 by noncommunist countries' citizens.Literary arts receivers assess their motivation to participate as follows: in-real -3.87 by communist and 3.81 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.24 by communist and 3.50 by non-communist countries' citizens.Audio-visual arts receivers assess their motivation to participate: in-real -3.66 by communist and 3.56 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.98 by communist and 3.79 by non-communist countries' citizens.Finally, visual arts receivers assess their motivation to participate: in-real -4.11 by communist and 4.03 by non-communist countries' citizens, digitally -3.39 by communist and 3.33 by non-communist countries' citizens.See: Figure 33.

Figure 34 .
Figure 34.Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing their motivation to participate regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.

Figure 35 .
Figure 35.Differences between the form of participation in the receiving process by communist and non-communist countries' citizens regarding their motivation to participate in a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 36 .
Figure 36.Assessment of communist and non-communist countries' citizens' easiness of participation in a particular type of art concerning the form of participation in the receiving process.Source: own elaboration.

Figure 37 .
Figure 37. Differences between communist and non-communist countries' citizens in assessing the easiness of participation regarding the form of participation in the receiving process of a particular type of art.Source: own elaboration.