Affective responses to coherence in high and low risk scenarios

ABSTRACT Presenting information in a coherent fashion has been shown to increase processing fluency, which in turn influences affective responses. The pattern of responses have been explained by two apparently competing accounts: hedonic marking (response to fluency is positive) and fluency amplification (response to fluency can be positive or negative, depending on stimuli valence). This paper proposes that these accounts are not competing explanations, but separate mechanisms, serving different purposes. Therefore, their individual contributions to overall affective responses should be observable. In three experiments, participants were presented with businesses scenarios, with riskiness (valence) and coherence (fluency) manipulated, and affective responses recorded. Results suggested that increasing the fluency of stimuli increases positive affect. If the stimulus is negative, then increasing fluency simultaneously increases negative affect. These affective responses appeared to cancel each other out (Experiment 1) when measured using self-report bipolar scales. However, separate measurement of positive and negative affect, either using unipolar scales (Experiment 2) or using facial electromyography (Experiment 3), provided evidence for co-occurring positive and negative affective responses, and therefore the co-existence of hedonic marking and fluency amplification mechanisms.

[1]  H. Leder,et al.  It felt fluent but I did not like it: fluency effects in faces versus patterns , 2017, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  A. Chetverikov,et al.  On the joys of perceiving: Affect as feedback for perceptual predictions. , 2016, Acta psychologica.

[3]  H. Leder,et al.  Exploring the Subjective Feeling of Fluency. , 2016, Experimental psychology.

[4]  P. Winkielman,et al.  Easy moves: Perceptual fluency facilitates approach-related action. , 2016, Emotion.

[5]  Claus-Christian Carbon,et al.  The Appeal of Challenge in the Perception of Art: How Ambiguity, Solvability of Ambiguity, and the Opportunity for Insight Affect Appreciation , 2015 .

[6]  Heather M. Claypool,et al.  Fluency and Attitudes , 2015 .

[7]  Jan R. Landwehr,et al.  A Dual-Process Perspective on Fluency-Based Aesthetics , 2015, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[8]  Sascha Topolinski,et al.  Corrugator activity confirms immediate negative affect in surprise , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[9]  L. Jancke,et al.  Perceptual discrimination difficulty and familiarity in the Uncanny Valley: more like a “Happy Valley” , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[10]  C. Carbon,et al.  The Fluency Amplification Model: fluent stimuli show more intense but not evidently more positive evaluations. , 2014, Acta psychologica.

[11]  Š. Bahník,et al.  If It’s Difficult to Pronounce, It Might Not Be Risky: The Effect of Fluency on Judgment of Risk Does Not Generalize to New Stimuli , 2014, Psychological science.

[12]  Sascha Topolinski A process model of intuition , 2011 .

[13]  J. Crotts,et al.  The perceived usefulness of blog postings: An extension of the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm , 2011 .

[14]  Peter R. Darke,et al.  Great expectations and broken promises: misleading claims, product failure, expectancy disconfirmation and consumer distrust , 2010 .

[15]  F. Strack,et al.  The analysis of intuition: Processing fluency and affect in judgements of semantic coherence , 2009 .

[16]  Sascha Topolinski,et al.  Scanning the “Fringe” of consciousness: What is felt and what is not felt in intuitions about semantic coherence , 2009, Consciousness and Cognition.

[17]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Uniting the Tribes of Fluency to Form a Metacognitive Nation , 2009, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[18]  Sascha Topolinski,et al.  The face of fluency: Semantic coherence automatically elicits a specific pattern of facial muscle reactions , 2009 .

[19]  Sascha Topolinski,et al.  The architecture of intuition: Fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  If It's Difficult to Pronounce, It Must Be Risky , 2009, Psychological science.

[21]  Daniel M Wegner,et al.  Psychological effects of thought acceleration. , 2008, Emotion.

[22]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer The secret life of fluency , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[23]  Sascha Topolinski,et al.  Where there's a will-there's no intuition. The unintentional basis of semantic coherence judgments , 2008 .

[24]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Overcoming intuition: metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[25]  R. Dhar,et al.  Preference Fluency in Choice , 2007 .

[26]  R. Petty,et al.  Ease of retrieval effects in social judgment: the role of unrequested cognitions. , 2007, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[27]  T. Goschke,et al.  On the speed of intuition: Intuitive judgments of semantic coherence under different response deadlines , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[28]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Affective Forecasting , 2005 .

[29]  Angela Y. Lee,et al.  The Effect of Conceptual and Perceptual Fluency on Brand Evaluation , 2004 .

[30]  Melissa L. Finucane,et al.  Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[31]  Julius Kuhl,et al.  Emotion and Intuition , 2003, Psychological science.

[32]  J. Kuhl,et al.  Intuition, affect, and personality: unconscious coherence judgments and self-regulation of negative affect. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[33]  G. Haddock It's easy to like or dislike Tony Blair: accessibility experiences and the favourability of attitude judgments. , 2002, British journal of psychology.

[34]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[35]  John J. B. Allen,et al.  The Role of Affect in the Mere Exposure Effect: Evidence from Psychophysiological and Individual Differences Approaches , 2001 .

[36]  L D Williams,et al.  The source of feelings of familiarity: the discrepancy-attribution hypothesis. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Judgments of Truth , 1999, Consciousness and Cognition.

[38]  L D Williams,et al.  Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don't? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. , 1998, Acta psychologica.

[39]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Affective Judgments , 1998 .

[40]  S. Epstein Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. , 1994, The American psychologist.

[41]  R. Bornstein,et al.  The Attribution and Discounting of Perceptual Fluency: Preliminary Tests of a Perceptual Fluency/Attributional Model of the Mere Exposure Effect , 1994 .

[42]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. , 1994 .

[43]  M. Bradley,et al.  Measuring emotion: the Self-Assessment Manikin and the Semantic Differential. , 1994, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[44]  D. S. Lindsay,et al.  Remembering Mistaken for Knowing: Ease of Retrieval as a Basis for Confidence in Answers to General Knowledge Questions , 1993 .

[45]  R. Bornstein,et al.  Stimulus recognition and the mere exposure effect. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[46]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Illusions of immediate memory: evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality , 1990 .

[47]  G. Regehr,et al.  Intuition in the context of discovery , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[48]  J. E. Swan,et al.  Equity and Disconfirmation Perceptions as Influences on Merchant and Product Satisfaction , 1989 .

[49]  R. Bornstein Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. , 1989 .

[50]  A. J. Fridlund,et al.  Guidelines for human electromyographic research. , 1986, Psychophysiology.

[51]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Electromyographic activity over facial muscle regions can differentiate the valence and intensity of affective reactions. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[52]  R. Oliver A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions , 1980 .

[53]  J. E. Grush Attitude formation and mere exposure phenomena: A nonartifactual explanation of empirical findings. , 1976 .

[54]  S. Mednick The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[55]  Grzegorz Pochwatko,et al.  Intuitive (in)coherence judgments are guided by processing fluency, mood and affect , 2014, Psychological research.

[56]  R. Zajonc,et al.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monograph Supplement , 2022 .

[57]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment , 2003 .

[58]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Fast and frugal heuristics: The adaptive toolbox. , 1999 .

[59]  Albert A. Harrison,et al.  Drive and predisposition as factors in the attitudinal effects of mere exposure , 1972 .

[60]  R. Zajonc Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. , 1968 .