GLOMO^sys: A Systems Account of Global Versus Local Processing

Abstract

Within GLOMO^sys (the GLObal versus LOcal processing MOdel, a systems account) we examine the functionalities of two processing systems that process information either globally or locally (looking at the forest vs. the trees). GLOMO^sys suggests that (a) global versus local perceptual processing carries over to other tasks; (b) perceptual processing is related to conceptual processing (e.g., creative/analytic tasks; face/verbal recognition; similarity/dissimilarity generation; abstract/concrete construals, distance estimates, inclusive/exclusive categorization; assimilation/contrast in social judgments); (c) perceptual and conceptual processing is elicited by real-world variables (e.g., mood, exteroceptive and interoceptive cues of approach/avoidance, promotion/prevention focus, high/low power, distance, obstacles, novelty/familiarity, love/sex, interdependent/independent selves); (d) regulatory focus, psychological distance, and novelty are driving effects; and (e) the global system (glo-sys) processes novelty and the local system (lo-sys) processes familiarity. We discuss whether glo-sys is responsible for understanding meaning, relate the systems to physiological research, and discuss new research questions.

Acknowledgments

We thank Sarah Horn for her comments on this article.

Notes

¹The primes were carefully pretested with respect to various dimensions. Importantly, abstractness and valence of the primes did not differ between conditions. Thus, differences in abstractness could not have been produced by features inherent in the stimuli. Rather, temporal distance triggered by love versus lust primes seemed to have driven effects.

²Some researchers differentiate between eudaimonic and hedonic pleasure (Deci & Ryan,. 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2001; Ryff & Singer, 1998). Although eudaimonia contains an “orientation of openness to the tension and excitement of life challenges and uncertainty” and is related to growth, expansion motives, and curiosity, hedonic pleasure contains a notion of “frequent and enduring positive affect” that is immediate (Kashdan & Steger, 2007). NCT proposes eudaimonia and curiosity as motives driving effects rather than (anticipation of) hedonic pleasure.

³We hasten to add that this is not an evaluation of existing theories in general, rather we attempt to examine some important concepts with respect to their explanatory value for the aforementioned effects on processing styles.

⁴This is especially important for those variables that are related to valence and might influence affect, such as arm positions, color, regulatory focus, novelty, or power.

⁵Approaching novelty and learning from difficult situations however may well be interesting (Turner & Silvia, 2006), or may elicit eudaimonic pleasure (i.e., the pleasure to develop ones’ potential and the excitement challenges and complex situations may produce, e.g., Kashdan & Steger, 2004).

⁶Some of the approach/avoidance manipulations used may directly relate to distance. The aforementioned arm flexion entails pulling something distant towards myself, whereas arm extension is used to create a distance between me and something that is too close.

⁷According to CLT anything that is not presently experienced by me, here and now is psychologically distant and leads to more global processing. Thus, the definition of novelty as lack of past experience makes it closely related to the common denominator of all psychological distances.

⁸Conceptually speaking, novelty is related to distance but it is not the same. Maybe the closest concept to novelty is (among the other distances, spatial, temporal, and social) hypotheticality. One may argue that novel objects, just like hypothetical objects, have not yet been experienced, however still, novelty cannot be reduced to hypotheticality. Objects and events can be unlikely (i.e., distant on the hypotheticality dimension) without being novel, and objects may be novel and likely (and even certain) at the same time (see for a detailed discussion, Förster, Liberman, & Shapira, 2009; Förster, 2009).

⁹The literature also reveals a proclivity for local processing in patients with high levels of obsessionality (Yovel, Revelle, & Mineka, 2005), anxiety (Mikulincer, Kedem, & Paz, 1990), and autism (see Wang et al., 2007). Psychological disorders, however are beyond the scope of our research.

¹⁰Recent analyses speak for independence of novelty/familiarity and valence (see Förster et al., 2010; Loewenstein, 1994; Scherer, 2001).

¹¹Researchers within this field also consider the possibility of two processes involved in the global-RHA link. For example, Hübner and Volberg (2005) suggested that at early stages information is encoded independent of processing level and is only later bound to global or local levels; the latter binding process being related to hemispheres. Our model allows for such a processing sequence. It is possible that first people perceive a stimulus and then, when it is appraised as novel (familiar), activate the global (local) level, including activation of the right (left) hemisphere.