Personality and Social Psychology Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Reber, R.
Right arrow Articles by Winkielman, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Reber, R.
Right arrow Articles by Winkielman, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 8, No. 4, 364-382 (2004)
DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3

Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience?

Rolf Reber

Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Norway

Norbert Schwarz

Department of Psychology and Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan

Piotr Winkielman

Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego

We propose that aesthetic pleasure is a funnction of the perceiver's processing dynamics: The more fluently perceivers can process an object, the more positive their aesthetic response. We review variables known to influence aesthetic judgments, such as figural goodness, figure-ground contrast, stimulus repetition, symmetry, and prototypicality, and trace their effects to changes in processing fluency. Other variables that influence processing fluency, like visual or semantic priming, similarly increase judgments of aesthetic pleasure. Our proposal provides an integrative framework for the study of aesthetic pleasure and sheds light on the interplay between early preferences versus cultural influences on taste, preferences for both prototypical and abstracted forms, and the relation between beauty and truth. In contrast to theories that trace aesthetic pleasure to objective stimulus features per se, we propose that beauty is grounded in the processing experiences of the perceiver, which are in part a function of stimulus properties.

References

  • Aizenstein, H. J., MacDonald, A. W., Stenger, V. A., Nebes, R. D., Larson, J. K., Ursu, S., et al., (2000). Complementary category learning systems identified using event-related functional MRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 977-987.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Arkes, H. R., Hackett, C., & Boehm, L. (1989). The generality of the relation between familiarity and judged validity. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2, 81-94.
  • Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception: The new version. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Attneave, F. (1954). Some informational aspects of visual perception. Psychological Review, 61, 183-193.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Bar, M., & Biederman, I. (1998). Subliminal visual priming. Psychological Science, 9, 464-469.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Beardsley, M. C. (1981). Aesthetics: Problems in the philosophy and criticism (2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett
  • Bednar, J. A., & Miikkulainen, J. A. (2000). Self-organization of innate face preferences: Could genetics be expressed through learning? In Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 117-122). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Begg, I. M., Anas, A., & Farinacci, S. (1992). Dissociation of processes in belief: Source recollection, statement familiarity, and the illusion of truth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 446-458.[CrossRef]
  • Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  • Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics. Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
  • Biederman, I., Hilton, H. J., & Hummel, J. E. (1991). Pattern goodness and pattern recognition. In J. R. Pomerantz & G. R. Lockhead (Eds.), The perception of structure (pp. 73-95). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Birkhoff, G. (1933). Aesthetic measure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Bornstein, R. F., & D'Agostino, P. R. (1994). The attribution and discounting of perceptual fluency: Preliminary tests of a perceptual fluency/attributional model of the mere exposure effect. Social Cognition, 12, 103-128.
  • Bornstein, R. F., Kale, A. R., & Cornell, K. R. (1990). Boredom as a limiting condition on the mere exposure effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 791-800.[CrossRef]
  • Bourdieu, P. (1987). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1979)
  • Brickman, P., Redfield, J., Harrison, A. A., & Crandall, R. (1972). Drive and predisposition as factors in the attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 31-44.[CrossRef]
  • Brown, A. S., & Nix, L. A. (1996). Turning lies into truths: Referential validation of falsehoods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1088-1100.[CrossRef]
  • Buchner, A. (1994). Indirect effects of synthetic grammar learning in an identification task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 550-566.[CrossRef]
  • Burgess, T. D., & Sales, S. M. (1971). Attitudinal effects of "mere exposure": A reevaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 461-472.[CrossRef]
  • Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Losch, M. E., & Kim, H. S. (1986). Electromyographic activity over facial muscle regions can differentiate the valence and intensity of affective reactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 260-268.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, 19-35.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Chandrasekhar, S. (1987). Truth and beauty. Aesthetics and motivations in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Checkosky, S. F., & Whitlock, D. (1973). The effects of pattern goodness on recognition time in a memory search task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100, 341-348.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Clore, G. L. (1992). Cognitive phenomenology: Feelings and the construction of judgment. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 133-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Curran, T. (2000). Brain potentials of recollection and familiarity. Memory and Cognition, 28, 923-938.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Derryberry, D., & Tucker, D. M. (1994). Motivating the focus of attention. In P. M. Niedenthal & S. Kitayama (Eds.). The heart's eye (pp. 167-196). San Diego, CA: Academic.
  • Desimone, R., Miller, E. K., Chelazzi, L., & Lueschow, A. (1995). Multiple memory systems in the visual cortex. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 475-490). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Dickie, G. (1997). Introduction to aesthetics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  • Eco, U. (1988). Art and beauty in the middle ages. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  • Enquist, M., & Arak, A. (1994). Symmetry, beauty and evolution. Nature, 372, 169-172.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Etcoff, N. (1999). Survival of the prettiest: The science of beauty. New York: Anchor Books/Doubleday.
  • Eysenck, H. J. (1941). The empirical determination of an empirical formula. Psychological Review, 48, 83-92.[CrossRef]
  • Eysenck, H. J. (1942). The experimental study of the "good gestalt" —A new approach. Psychological Review, 49, 344-364.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Fazendeiro, T., & Winkielman, P. (2003). Effects of conceptual fluency on affective judgments and psychophysiological responses. Manuscript in preparation.
  • Fazendeiro, T. A., Winkielman, P., Luo, C., & Lorah, C. (in press). False recognition across meaning, language and stimulus format: Conceptual relatedness and feelings of familiarity. Memory and Cognition.
  • Feagin, S. F. (1995). Beauty. In R. Audi (Ed.), The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy (p. 66-66). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der Ästhetik [Elements of aesthetics]. Leipzig, Germany: Breitkopf & Härtel.
  • Fernandez-Duque, D., Baird, J. A., & Posner, M. I. (2000). Executive attention and metacognitive regulation. Consciousness and Cognition, 9, 288-307.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Francès, R. (1987). The perception of music (W. J. Dowling, Trans.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Yeo, R. A. (1994). Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 73-85.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Garner, W. R. (1974). The processing of information structure. Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Gentner, T. Q., & Hulse, S. H. (1998). Perceptual mechanisms for individual vocal recognition in European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Animal Behavior, 56, 579-594.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Gombrich, E. H. (1984). A sense of order (2nd ed.). London: Phaidon.
  • Gombrich, E. H. (1995). The story of art (16th ed.). London: Phaidon.
  • Gordon, P. C., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Implicit learning and generalization of the "mere exposure" effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 492-500.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Green, C. D. (1995). All that glitters: A review of psychological research on the aesthetics of the golden section. Perception, 24, 937-968.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Grush, J. E. (1976). Attitude formation and mere exposure phenomena: A nonartifactual explanation of empirical findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 281-290.[CrossRef]
  • Haber, R. N., & Hershenson, M. (1965). The effects of repeated brief exposures on growth of a percept. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 40-46.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Halberstadt, J. B. & Rhodes, G. (2000). The attractiveness of nonface averages: Implications for an evolutionary explanation of the attractiveness of average faces. Psychological Science, 11, 285-289.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Halberstadt, J. B. & Rhodes, G. (2003). It's not just average faces that are attractive: Computer-manipulated averageness makes birds, fish, and automobiles attractive. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 149-156.
  • Harmon-Jones, E., & Allen, J. J. B. (2001). The role of affect in the mere exposure effect: Evidence from psychophysiological and individual differences approaches. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 889-898.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Hasher, L., Goldstein, D., & Toppino, T. (1977). Frequency and the conference of referential validity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 107-112.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Hekkert, P., & van Wieringen, P. C. W. (1990). Complexity and prototypicality as determinants of appraisal of cubist paintings. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 483-495.
  • Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Hill, W. F. (1978). Effects of mere exposure on preferences in nonhuman mammals. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1177-1198.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hochberg, J., & McAlister, E. (1953). A quantitative approach to figural "goodness." Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 1953-1953.
  • Humphrey, D. (1997). Preferences in symmetries and symmetries in drawings: Asymmetries between ages and sexes. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15, 41-60.
  • Ingarden, R. (1985). Selected papers in aesthetics (P. J. McCormick, Ed.). Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press.
  • Jacoby, L. L., Allan, L. G., Collins, J. C., & Larwill, L. K. (1988). Memory influences subjective experience: Noise judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 240-247.[CrossRef]
  • Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306-340.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., Brown, J., & Jasechko, J. (1989). Becoming famous overnight: Limits on the ability to avoid unconscious influences of the past. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 326-338.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., & Dywan, J. (1989). Memory attributions. In H. L. Roediger & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of memory and consciousness: Essays in honour of Endel Tulving (pp. 391-422). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Johnstone, R. A. (1994). Female preference for symmetrical males as a by-product of selection for mate recognition. Nature, 372, 172-175.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 136-153.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Kail, R. V., & Freeman, H. R. (1973). Sequence redundancy, rating dimensions and the exposure effect. Memory & Cognition, 1, 454-458.
  • Kalick, S. M., Zebrowitz, L. A., Langlois, J. H., & Johnson, R. M. (1998). Does human facial attractiveness honestly advertise health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychological Science, 9, 8-13.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Klinger, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (1994). Preferences need no inferences?: The cognitive basis of unconscious emotional effects. In P. M. Niedenthal & S. Kitayama (Eds.), The heart's eye: Emotional influences in perception and attention (pp. 67-85). New York: Academic.
  • Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Kubovy, M. (2000). Visual aesthetics. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 188-193). New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Lang, P. J., Greenwald, M. K., Bradley, M. M. & Hamm, A. O. (1993). Looking at pictures: Affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactions. Psychophysiology, 30, 261-273.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Langlois, J. H., & Roggman, L. A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115-121.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Leder, H. (2001). Determinants of preference. When do we like what we know? Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19, 201-211.
  • Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1962)
  • Lewenstein, M., & Nowak, A. (1989). Recognition with self-control in neural networks. Physical Review, 40, 4652-4664.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Mandler, G., Nakamura, Y., & Van Zandt, B. J. S. (1987). Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimuli that cannot be recognized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 646-648.
  • Manza, L., Zizak, D., & Reber, A. S. (1998). Artificial grammar learning and the mere exposure effect. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 201-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Maritain, J. (1966). Beauty and imitation. In M. Rader (Ed.), A modern book of Esthetics (3rd ed., pp. 27-34). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Martindale, C. (1984). The pleasures of thought: A theory of cognitive hedonics. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 5, 49-80.
  • Martindale, C., & Moore, K. (1988). Priming, prototypicality, and preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 661-670.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Martindale, C., Moore, K., & Borkum, J. (1990). Aesthetic preference: Anomalous findings for Berlyne's psychobiological theory. American Journal of Psychology, 103, 53-80.[CrossRef]
  • Mauro, R., & Kubovy, M. (1992). Caricature and face recognition. Memory & Cognition, 20, 433-440.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • McGlone, M. S., & Tofighbakhsh, J. (1999). The Keats heuristic: Rhyme as reason in aphorism interpretation. Poetics, 26, 235-244.[CrossRef]
  • McGlone, M. S., & Tofighbakhsh, J. (2000). Birds of a feather flock conjointly (?): Rhyme as reason in aphorisms. Psychological Science, 11, 424-428.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • McWhinnie, H. J. (1968). A review of research on aesthetic measure. Acta Psychologica, 28, 363-375.[CrossRef]
  • Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The primacy of perception, and other essays on phenomenological psychology, the philosophy of art, history, and politics. Chicago: Northwestern University Press.
  • Meyer, D. E., Schwaneveldt, R. W., & Ruddy, M. G. (1975). Loci of contextual effects on visual word recognition. In P. M. Rabbit & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance (Vol. 5, pp. 98-118). London: Academic.
  • Monahan, J. L., Murphy, S. T., & Zajonc, R. B. (2000). Subliminal mere exposure: Specific, general, and diffuse effects. Psychological Science, 11, 462-466.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Newell, B. R., & Bright, J. E. H. (2001). The relationship between the structural mere exposure effect and the implicit learning process. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 1087-1104.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Nicki, R. M., Lee, P. L., & Moss, V. (1981). Ambiguity, cubist works of art, and preference. Acta Psychologica, 49, 27-41.
  • Norman, K., & O'Reilly, R. (2001). Modeling hippocampal and neocortical contributions to recognition memory: A complementary learning systems approach (Tech. Rep.). Boulder: Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado.
  • Palmer, S. E. (1991). Goodness, Gestalt, groups, and Garner: Local symmetry subgroups as a theory of figural goodness. In G. R. Lockhead & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), The perception of structure (pp. 23-39). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Palmer, S. E., & Hemenway, K. (1978). Orientation and symmetry: Effects of multiple, near, and rotational symmetries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 691-702.
  • Perrett, D. I., Lee, K., Penton-Voak, I., Burt, D. M., Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., et al., (1998). Sexual dimorphism and facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884-886.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Perrett, D. I., May, K. A., & Yoshikawa, S. (1994). Facial shape and judgments of female attractiveness. Nature, 368, 239-242.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: Norton.
  • Posner, M. I., & Keele, S. W. (1968). On the genesis of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 353-363.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ramachandran, V. S., & Hirstein, W. (1999). The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6, 15-51.
  • Read, H. (1972). The meaning of art. London: Faber & Faber.
  • Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 855-863.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Reber, P. J., Stark, C. E. L., & Squire, L. R. (1998). Cortical areas supporting category learning identified using functional MRI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 95, 747-740.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Reber, R. (2002). Reasons for the preference for symmetry. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 415-416.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness and Cognition, 8, 338-342.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (2001) The hot fringes of consciousness: Perceptual fluency and affect. Consciousness and Emotion, 2, 223-231.
  • Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (in press). Perceptual fluency, preference, and evolution. Polish Psychological Bulletin.
  • Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45-48.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Reber, R., Wurtz, P., & Zimmermann, T. D. (2004). Exploring "fringe" consciousness: The subjective experience of perceptual fluency and its objective bases. Consciousness and Cognition, 13, 47-60.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rensch, B. (1957). Aesthetische Faktoren bei Farb- und Form-bevorzugungen von Affen [Aesthetic factors in color and form preferences in monkeys] & [The effects of aesthetic factors in vertebrates]. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 14, 71-99.
  • Rensch, B. (1958). Die Wirksamkeit ästhetischer Faktoren bei Wirbeltierent. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 15, 447-461.
  • Repp, B. (1997). The aesthetic quality of a quantitatively average music performance: Two preliminary experiments. Music Perception, 14, 419-444.
  • Rhodes, G., Brennan, S., & Carey, S. (1987). Identification and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 473-497.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. M., & Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 659-669.
  • Rhodes, G., Sumich, A., & Byatt, G. (1999). Are average facial configurations attractive only because of their symmetry? Psychological Science, 10, 52-58.
  • Rhodes, G., & Tremewan, T. (1996). Averageness, exaggeration, and facial attractiveness. Psychological Science, 7, 105-110.
  • Roederer, J. G. (1973). Introduction to the physics and psychophysics of music. New York: Springer.
  • Royer, F. (1981). Detection of symmetry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 1186-1210.[CrossRef]
  • Rubenstein, A. J., Langlois, J. H., & Kalakanis, L. (1999). Infant preferences for attractive faces: A cognitive explanation. Developmental Psychology, 35, 848-855.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rubin, D. C. (1995). Memory in oral traditions: The cognitive psychology of epic, ballads, and counting-out rhymes. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  • Rugg, M. D., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2003). Human recognition memory: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 313-319.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some test and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & the PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Saegert, S., Swap, W., & Zajonc, R. B. (1973). Exposure, context, and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 234-242.[CrossRef]
  • Santayana, G. (1955). The sense of beauty. New York: Dover. (Original work published in 1896)
  • Schellenberg, E. G., &Trehub, S. E. (1996). Natural music intervals: Evidence from infant listeners. Psychological Science, 7, 272-277.[CrossRef]
  • Schwarz, N. (1990). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 527-561). New York: Guilford.
  • Schwarz, N. (1998). Accessible content and accessibility experiences: The interplay of declarative and experiential information in judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 87-99.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Schwarz, N. (2004a). Meta-cognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 332-348.[CrossRef]
  • Schwarz, N. (2004b). Meta-cognitive experiences: Response to commentaries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 370-373.[CrossRef]
  • Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 195-202.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513-523.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1996). Feelings and phenomenal experience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 433-465). New York: Guilford.
  • Seamon, J. G., Brody, N., & Kauff, D. M. (1983). Affective discrimination of stimuli that are not recognized: Effects of shadowing, masking, and central laterality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 9, 544-555.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Seamon, J. G., McKenna, P. A., & Binder, N. (1998). The mere exposure effect is differentially sensitive to different judgment tasks. Consciousness and Cognition, 7, 85-102.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Simon, H. A. (1967). Motivational and emotional controls of cognition. Psychological Review, 74, 29-39.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Skurnik, I., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2000). Drawing inferences from feelings: The role of naive beliefs. In H. Bless & J. P. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior (pp. 162-175). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
  • Slater, A., von der Schulenburg, C., Brown, E., Badenoch, M., Butterworth, G., Parsons, S., et al., (1998). Newborn infants prefer attractive faces. Infant Behavior and Development, 21, 345-354.
  • Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., & Rips, L. J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: A feature model for semantic decisions. Psychological Review, 81, 214-241.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Smith, E. R. (2000). Subjective experience of familiarity: Functional basis in connectionist memory. In H. Bless & J. P. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior (pp. 109-124). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
  • Smith, J. D., & Melara, R. J. (1990). Aesthetic preference and syntactic prototypicality in music: 'Tis the gift to be simple. Cognition, 34, 279-298.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 6, 174-215.[CrossRef]
  • Sober, E. (1994). From a biological point of view: Essays in evolutionary philosophy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sollberger, B., & Reber, R. (2004). Artificial grammar learning as a potential mechanism for the acquisition of music preferiice. Manuscript submitted for publication.
  • Solso, R. L. (1997). Cognition and the visual arts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Swap, W. (1977). Interpersonal attraction and repeated exposure to rewarders and punishers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 248-251.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Tatarkiewicz, W. (1970). History of aesthetics. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Human facial beauty: Averageness, symmetry and parasite resistance. Human Nature, 4, 237-269.[ISI]
  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 452-460.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Tillmann, B., Bharucha, J. J., & Bigand, E. (2000). Implicit learning of tonality: A self-organizing approach. Psychological Reviews, 107, 885-913.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Trainor, L. J., & Heinmiller, B. M. (1998). Infants prefer to listen to consonance over dissonance. Infant Behavior and Development, 21, 77-88.
  • Turati, C. (2004). Why faces are not special to newborns: An alternative account of the face preference. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 5-8.
  • Vallacher, R. R., & Nowak, A. (1999). The dynamics of self-regulation. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. (Ed.), Perspectives on behavioral self-regulation (pp. 241-259). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Van den Bergh, O., & Vrana, S. R. (1998). Repetition and boredom in a perceptual fluency/attributional model of affective judgments. Cognition and Emotion, 12, 533-553.[CrossRef]
  • Vendler, H. (1997). Poems, poets, poetry. An introduction and anthology. Boston: Bedford.
  • Vitz, P. C. (1966). Affect as a function of stimulus variation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 74-79.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Walton, G. E., & Bower, T. G. R. (1993). Newborn form "prototypes" in less than 1 minute. Psychological Science, 4, 203-205.[CrossRef]
  • Whitfield, T. W. A., & Slatter, P. E. (1979). The effects of categorization and prototypicality on aesthetic choice in a furniture selection task. British Journal of Psychology, 70, 65-75.
  • Whittlesea, B. W. A. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1235-1253.[CrossRef]
  • Whittlesea, B. W. A., Jacoby, L. L., & Girard, K. (1990). Illusions of immediate memory: Evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 716-732.[CrossRef]
  • Whittlesea, B., & Price, J. (2001). Implicit/explicit memory versus analytic/nonanalytic processing: Rethinking the mere exposure effect. Memory and Cognition, 29, 234-246.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Shimizu, Y. (2001). The SCAPE framework and subjective experience, Part II: Pleasantness, interest, pre-dictability and alertness. Manuscript submitted for publication.
  • Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Williams, L. D. (1998). Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don't? The unexpected basis of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychologica, 98, 141-166.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Williams, L. D. (2000). The source of feelings of familiarity: The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 547-565.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Wilson, T. D., Lisle, D. J., Schooler, D., Hodges, S. D., Klaaren, K., & LaFleur, S. J. (1993). Introspecting about reason can reduce post-choice satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 331-339.[Abstract]
  • Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation leads to positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 989-1000.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Winkielman, P., & Fazendeiro, T. (2003). Effects of conceptual fluency on memory and liking. Manuscript in preparation.
  • Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., & Belli, R. F. (1998). The role of ease of retrieval and attribution in memory judgments: Judging your memory as worse despite recalling more events. Psychological Science, 9, 124-126.[CrossRef]
  • Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 189-217). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Witherspoon, D., & Allan, L. G. (1985). The effects of a prior presentation on temporal judgments in a perceptual identification task. Memory & Cognition, 13, 103-111.
  • Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Monograph Supplement, 9, 1-27.
  • Zajonc, R. B. (1998). Emotions. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 591-632). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  • Zajonc, R. B. (2000). Feeling and thinking: Closing the debate over the independence of affect. In J. P. Forgas (Ed), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 31-58). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Zajonc, R. B., Markus, H., & Wilson, W. R. (1974). Exposure effects and associative learning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 248-263.[CrossRef]
  • Zentner, M. R., & Kagan, J. (1996). Perception of music by infants. Nature, 383, 29-29.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
U. Nanda, S. L. Eisen, and V. Baladandayuthapani
Undertaking an Art Survey to Compare Patient Versus Student Art Preferences
Environment and Behavior, March 1, 2008; 40(2): 269 - 301.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Poetics TodayHome page
S. Zyngier, W. van Peer, and J. Hakemulder
Complexity and Foregrounding: In the Eye of the Beholder?
Poetics Today, December 1, 2007; 28(4): 653 - 682.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Learn. Mem.Home page
P. Peigneux, R. Schmitz, and S. Willems
Cerebral asymmetries in sleep-dependent processes of memory consolidation
Learn. Mem., June 6, 2007; 14(6): 400 - 406.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
N. Schwarz
When Thinking Feels Difficult: Meta-Cognitive Experiences in Judgment and Decision Making
Med Decis Making, January 1, 2005; 25(1): 105 - 112.
[PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Reber, R.
Right arrow Articles by Winkielman, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Reber, R.
Right arrow Articles by Winkielman, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?