The effects of valence-based and discrete emotional states on aesthetic response

References

• AdavalR. 2003. How good gets better and bad gets worse: Understanding the impact of affect on evaluations of known brands. Journal of Consumer Research. 30: 352–367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AgarwalJ, MalhotraNK. 2005. An integrated model of attitude and affect: Theoretical foundation and an empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research. 58: 483–493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BagozziRP, GopinathM, NyerPU. 1999. The role of emotions in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 27: 184–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BaronRM, KennyDA. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 51: 1173–1182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BlessH, MackieDM, SchwarzN. 1992. Mood effects on attitude judgments: Independent effects of mood before and after message elaboration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 63: 585–595.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BlijlevensJ, CarbonC, MuggeR, SchoormansJPL. 2012. Aesthetic appraisal of product designs: Independent effects of typicality and arousal. British Journal of Psychology. 103: 44–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BlochP. 1995. Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response. Journal of Marketing. 59: 16–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BlochPH, BrunelFF, ArnoldTJ. 2003. Individual differences in the centrality of visual product aesthetics: Concept and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research. 29: 551–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BowerGH. 1981. Mood and memory. American Psychologist. 36: 129–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CostleyC, BrucksM. 1992. Selective recall and information use in consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research. 18: 464–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ForgasJP, CiarrochiJ. 2001. On being happy and possessive: The interactive effects of mood and personality on consumer judgments. Psychology and Marketing. 18: 239–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HolbrookMB, OlneyTJ. 1995. Romanticism and wanderlust: An effect of personality on consumer preferences. Psychology and Marketing. 12: 207–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HolbrookTJ, BatraR. 1987. Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research. 14: 404–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HolbrookMB. . & Zirlin, R. B. (1985). Artistic creation, artworks, and aesthetic appreciation. Advances in Non-Profit Marketing, 1, 1–54.
   Google Scholar
• HomerPM, YoonS. 1992. Message framing and the interrelationships among ad-based feelings, affect, and cognition. Journal of Advertising. 21: 19–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IsenAM. 1987. Positive affect, cognitive processes, and social behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 20: 203–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IsenAM, GevaN. 1987. The influence of positive affect on acceptable level of risk and thoughts about losing: The person with a large canoe has a large worry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 39: 145–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansson-BoydCV. 2011. Designing aesthetic concepts: Can it be done?. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 5: 279–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JohnsonRD. 1987. Making judgments when information is missing: Inferences, biases, and framing effects. Acta Psychologica. 66: 69–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LernerJS, KeltnerD. 2000. Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgment and choice. Cognition and Emotion. 14: 473–493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LinY, LiaC. 2010. A study of the attitudes of Chinese consumers to aesthetic product designs. International Journal of Management. 27: 177–184.
   Google Scholar
• LocherP, FrensJ, OverbeekeK. 2008. The influence of induced positive affect and design experience on aesthetic responses to new product designs. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2: 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• MellersBA, SchwartzA, HoK, Ritovl. 1997. Decision affect theory: Emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science. 8: 423–429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NerbJ. 2007. Exporing the dynamics of the appraisal–emotion relationship: A constraint satisfaction model of the appraisal process. Cognition and Emotion. 21: 1382–1413.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OttavianiR, BeckAT. 1988. Cognitive theory of depression. Affect, cognition and social behavior. FiedlerK, ForgasJP. GottingenGermany: Hogrefe. 209–218.
   Google Scholar
• PonsF. . & Laroche, M. (2007). Cross-cultural differences in crowd assessment. Journal of Business Research, 60, 269–276.
   Google Scholar
• ReberR, SchwarzN, WinkielmanP. 2004. Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience?. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 8: 364–382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SchoormansJP, RobbenHSJ. 1997. The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation. Journal of Economic Psychology. 18: 271–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SchwarzN. 1990. Feeling as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. Handbook of motivation and cognition. SorrentinoRM, HigginsET. New YorkNY: Guilford Press. 2: 527–561.
   Google Scholar
• SmithCA, EllsworthPC. 1985. Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 48: 813–838.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SnyderCR, FromkinHL. 1980. Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New YorkNY: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• TatarkiewiczW. 1970. History of eesthetics. The HagueThe Netherlands: Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• TiedensLZ, LintonS. 2001. Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: The effects of specific emotions on information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 81: 973–988.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VeryzerRWJ. 1993. Aesthetic response and the influence of design principles on product preferences. Advances in Consumer Research. 20: 224–228.
   Google Scholar
• VeryzerRW, HutchinsonJW. 1998. The influence of unity and prototypicality on aesthetic responses to new product designs. Journal of Consumer Research. 24: 374–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VohsKD. Baumeister, R. F., & Chin, J.. Feeling duped: Emotional, motivational, and cognitive aspects of being exploited by others. Review of General Psychology, 11, 127–141.
   Google Scholar
• WangYJ, HernandezMD, MinorMS. 2010. Web aesthetics effects on perceived online service quality and satisfaction in an e-mail environment: The moderating role of purchase task. Journal of Business Research. 63: 935–942.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WiersemaDV, van der SchalkJ, van KleefGA. 2012. Who's afraid of red, yellow, and blue? Need for cognitive closure predicts aesthetic preferences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 6: 168–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WongPT, WeinerB. 1980. When people ask “why” questions, and the heuristics of attributional search. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 40: 650–663.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YenHR, ChuangS. 2008. The effect of incidental affect on preference for the status quo. Academy of Marketing Science. 36: 522–537.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZajoncRB. 1984. On the primacy of affect. American Psychologist. 39: 117–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZhaoX, LynchJGJr, ChenQ. 2010. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research. 37: 197–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar