Cargando…

Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking

Explanations of aesthetic pleasure based on processing fluency have shown that ease-of-processing fosters liking. What is less clear, however, is how processing fluency arises. Does it arise from a relative comparison among the stimuli presented in the experiment? Or does it arise from a comparison...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Forster, Michael, Gerger, Gernot, Leder, Helmut
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4545584/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26288314
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135944
_version_ 1782386764643565568
author Forster, Michael
Gerger, Gernot
Leder, Helmut
author_facet Forster, Michael
Gerger, Gernot
Leder, Helmut
author_sort Forster, Michael
collection PubMed
description Explanations of aesthetic pleasure based on processing fluency have shown that ease-of-processing fosters liking. What is less clear, however, is how processing fluency arises. Does it arise from a relative comparison among the stimuli presented in the experiment? Or does it arise from a comparison to an internal reference or standard? To address these questions, we conducted two experiments in which two ease-of-processing manipulations were applied: either (1) within-participants, where relative comparisons among stimuli varying in processing ease were possible, or (2) between-participants, where no relative comparisons were possible. In total, 97 participants viewed simple line drawings with high or low visual clarity, presented at four different presentation durations, and rated for felt fluency, liking, and certainty. Our results show that the manipulation of visual clarity led to differences in felt fluency and certainty regardless of being manipulated within- or between-participants. However, liking ratings were only affected when ease-of-processing was manipulated within-participants. Thus, feelings of fluency do not depend on the nature of the reference. On the other hand, participants liked fluent stimuli more only when there were other stimuli varying in ease-of-processing. Thus, relative differences in fluency seem to be crucial for liking judgments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4545584
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45455842015-09-01 Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking Forster, Michael Gerger, Gernot Leder, Helmut PLoS One Research Article Explanations of aesthetic pleasure based on processing fluency have shown that ease-of-processing fosters liking. What is less clear, however, is how processing fluency arises. Does it arise from a relative comparison among the stimuli presented in the experiment? Or does it arise from a comparison to an internal reference or standard? To address these questions, we conducted two experiments in which two ease-of-processing manipulations were applied: either (1) within-participants, where relative comparisons among stimuli varying in processing ease were possible, or (2) between-participants, where no relative comparisons were possible. In total, 97 participants viewed simple line drawings with high or low visual clarity, presented at four different presentation durations, and rated for felt fluency, liking, and certainty. Our results show that the manipulation of visual clarity led to differences in felt fluency and certainty regardless of being manipulated within- or between-participants. However, liking ratings were only affected when ease-of-processing was manipulated within-participants. Thus, feelings of fluency do not depend on the nature of the reference. On the other hand, participants liked fluent stimuli more only when there were other stimuli varying in ease-of-processing. Thus, relative differences in fluency seem to be crucial for liking judgments. Public Library of Science 2015-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4545584/ /pubmed/26288314 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135944 Text en © 2015 Forster et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Forster, Michael
Gerger, Gernot
Leder, Helmut
Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking
title Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking
title_full Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking
title_fullStr Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking
title_full_unstemmed Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking
title_short Everything’s Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking
title_sort everything’s relative? relative differences in processing fluency and the effects on liking
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4545584/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26288314
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135944
work_keys_str_mv AT forstermichael everythingsrelativerelativedifferencesinprocessingfluencyandtheeffectsonliking
AT gergergernot everythingsrelativerelativedifferencesinprocessingfluencyandtheeffectsonliking
AT lederhelmut everythingsrelativerelativedifferencesinprocessingfluencyandtheeffectsonliking