It felt fluent but I did not like it: fluency effects in faces versus patterns

References

• Albrecht, S., & Carbon, C.-C. (2014). The fluency amplification model: Fluent stimuli show more intense but not evidently more positive evaluations. Acta Psychologica, 148, 195–203. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.02.002
   Google Scholar
• Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219–235. doi:10.1177/1088868309341564
   Google Scholar
• Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., Epley, N., & Eyre, R. N. (2007). Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 569–576. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.569
   Google Scholar
• Belke, B., Leder, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). When challenging art gets liked: Evidences for a dual preference formation process for fluent and non-fluent portraits. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0131796. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0131796
   Google Scholar
• Bindemann, M., Burton, A. M., Hooge, I. T. C., Jenkins, R., & De Haan, E. H. F. (2005). Faces retain attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(6), 1048–1053. doi:10.3758/BF03206442
   Google Scholar
• Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and metaanalyses of research 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265–289. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265
   Google Scholar
• 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. doi:10.1521/soco.1994.12.2.103
   Google Scholar
• Brinol, P., Petty, R. E., & Tormala, Z. L. (2006). The malleable meaning of subjective ease. Psychological Science, 17, 200–206. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01686.x
   Google Scholar
• Bukach, C. M., Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J. (2006). Beyond faces and modularity: The power of an expertise framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 159–166. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.02.004
   Google Scholar
• Constable, M. D., Bayliss, A. P., Tipper, S. P., & Kritikos, A. (2013). Self-generated cognitive fluency as an alternative route to preference formation. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(1), 47–52. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2012.11.006
   Google Scholar
• Crouzet, S. M., Kirchner, H., & Thorpe, S. J. (2010). Fast saccades toward faces: Face detection in just 100 ms. Journal of Vision, 10, 1–17. doi:10.1167/10.4.16
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, M. R., Barbee, A., & Philhower, C. (2002). Dimensions of facial physical attractiveness: The intersection of biology and culture. In G. Rhodes & L. Zebrowitz (Eds.), Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary, cognitive, and social perspectives (pp. 139–238). Westport, CT: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Dion, K., Walster, E., & Berscheid, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285–290. doi:10.1037/h0033731
   Google Scholar
• Fei-Fei, L., Iyer, A., Koch, C., & Perona, P. (2007). What do we perceive in a glance of a real-world scene? Journal of Vision, 7(1), 10–10. doi:10.1167/7.1.10
   Google Scholar
• Fink, B., Bunse, L., Matts, P. J., & D'Emiliano, D. (2012). Visible skin colouration predicts perception of male facial age, health and attractiveness. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 34(4), 307–310. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2494.2012.00724.x
   Google Scholar
• Fink, B., Matts, P. J., Roeder, S., Johnson, R., & Burquest, M. (2011). Differences in visual perception of age and attractiveness of female facial and body skin. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 33(2), 126–131. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2494.2010.00594.x
   Google Scholar
• Finkbeiner, M., & Palermo, R. (2009). The role of spatial attention in nonconscious processing: A comparison of face and nonface stimuli. Psychological Science, 20, 42–51. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02256.x
   Google Scholar
• Forster, M., Fabi, W., & Leder, H. (2015a). Do I really feel it? The contributions of subjective fluency and compatibility in low-level effects on aesthetic appreciation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00373
   Google Scholar
• Forster, M., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2015b). Everything's relative? Relative differences in processing fluency and the effects on liking. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0135944. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0135944
   Google Scholar
• Forster, M., Leder, H., & Ansorge, U. (2013). It felt fluent, and I liked it: Subjective feeling of fluency rather than objective fluency determines liking. Emotion, 13(2), 280–289. doi:10.1037/a0030115
   Google Scholar
• Gartus, A., & Leder, H. (2013). The small step toward asymmetry: Aesthetic judgment of broken symmetries. i-Perception, 4(5), 361–364. doi:10.1068/i0588sas
   Google Scholar
• Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2014). Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's is the fairest one of all? Influencing factors and effects of attractiveness. In P. L. Tinio & J. K. Smith (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of the psychology of aesthetics and the arts (pp. 420–446). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerger, G., Leder, H., Tinio, P. P. L., & Schacht, A. (2011). Faces versus patterns: Exploring aesthetic reactions using facial EMG. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 5(3), 241–250. doi:10.1037/a0024154
   Google Scholar
• Golle, J., Mast, F. W., & Lobmaier, J. S. (2013). Something to smile about: The interrelationship between attractiveness and emotional expression. Cognition & Emotion, 28(2), 298–310. doi:10.1080/02699931.2013.817383
   Google Scholar
• Halberstadt, J. (2006). The generality and ultimate origins of the attractiveness of prototypes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(2), 166–183. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_5
   Google Scholar
• Halberstadt, J., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., Wai, L. I., & Winkielman, P. (2013). Two faces of attractiveness: Making beauty in averageness appear and reverse. Psychological Science, 24(11), 2343–2346. doi:10.1177/0956797613491969
   Google Scholar
• Halberstadt, J., & Rhodes, G. (2003). It's not just average faces that are attractive: Computer-manipulated averageness makes birds, fish, and automobiles attractive. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10(1), 149–156. doi:10.3758/bf03196479
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, J., & Topolinski, S. (2011). An exploratory mindset reduces preference for prototypes and increases preference for novel exemplars. Cognition & Emotion, 25(4), 709–716. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2010.496994
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsen, T., & Höfel, L. (2001). Aesthetics electrified: An analyses of descriptive symmetry and evaluative aesthetic judgment processing using event-related brain potentials. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19, 177–190. doi: 10.2190/P7W1-5F1F-NJK9-X05B
   Google Scholar
• Kanwisher, N. (2000). Domain specificity in face perception. Nature Neuroscience, 3(8), 759–763. doi:10.1038/77664
   Google Scholar
• Koriat, A., & Levy-Sadot, R. (1999). Processes underlying metacognitive judgments: Information-based and experience-based monitoring of one's own knowledge. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology. (pp. 483–502). New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leder, H., & Nadal, M. (2014). Ten years of a model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments: The aesthetic episode - Developments and challenges in empirical aesthetics. British Journal of Psychology, 105(4), 443–464. doi:10.1111/bjop.12084
   Google Scholar
• Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2011). Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary based research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 366, 1638–1659. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0404
   Google Scholar
• Locher, P. J., Unger, R., Sociedade, P., & Wahl, J. (1993). At first glance: Accessibility of the physical attractiveness stereotype. Sex Roles, 28, 729–743. doi: 10.1007/BF00289990
   Google Scholar
• Locher, P. J., & Wagemans, J. (1993). Effects of element type and spatial grouping on symmetry detection. Perception, 22(5), 565–587. doi:10.1068/p220565
   Google Scholar
• Mackworth, J. F. (1963). The duration of the visual image. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 17, 62–81. doi:10.1037/h0083263
   Google Scholar
• Mandler, G., Nakamura, Y., & van Zandt, B. J. (1987). Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimuli that cannot be recognized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 13, 646–648.
   Google Scholar
• Martens, J. P., Tracy, J. L., & Shariff, A. F. (2012). Status signals: Adaptive benefits of displaying and observing the nonverbal expressions of pride and shame. Cognition & Emotion, 26, 390–406. doi:10.1080/02699931.2011.645281
   Google Scholar
• Newell, B. R., & Shanks, D. R. (2007). Recognising what you like: Examining the relation between the mere-exposure effect and recognition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 103–118. doi:10.1080/09541440500487454
   Google Scholar
• Olivola, C. Y., & Todorov, A. (2010). Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearance-based trait inferences and voting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34, 83–110. doi:10.1007/s10919-009-0082-1
   Google Scholar
• Olson, I. R., & Marshuetz, C. (2005). Facial attractiveness is appraised in a glance. Emotion, 5, 498–502. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.5.4.498
   Google Scholar
• Osborn, D. R. (1996). Beauty is as beauty does? Makeup and posture effects on physical attractiveness judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 31–51. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb01837.x
   Google Scholar
• Pflueger, L. S., Oberzaucher, E., Katina, S., Holzleitner, I. J., & Grammer, K. (2012). Cues to fertility: Perceived attractiveness and facial shape predict reproductive success. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 708–714. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.05.005
   Google Scholar
• Rashidi, M., Pazhoohi, F., & Hosseinchari, M. (2012). Effect of facial stimuli exposure time on evaluation of facial attractiveness. Australian Journal of Psychology, 64, 164–168. doi:10.1111/j.1742-9536.2011.00050.x
   Google Scholar
• Reber, R. (2002). Reasons for the preference for symmetry. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(03), 415–416. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X02350076
   Google Scholar
• Reber, R., Fazendeiro, T. A., & Winkielman, P. (2002). Processing fluency as the source of experiences at the fringe of consciousness. Psyche: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Consciousness, 8, 175–188.
   Google Scholar
• Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (2002). The hot fringes of consciousness: Perceptual fluency and affect. Consciousness & Emotion, 2, 223–231. doi:10.1075/ce.2.2.03re
   Google Scholar
• Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 364–382. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3
   Google Scholar
• Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45–48. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00008
   Google Scholar
• Schacht, A., Werheid, K., & Sommer, W. (2008). The appraisal of facial beauty is rapid but not mandatory. Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 8, 132–142. doi:10.3758/CABN.8.2.132
   Google Scholar
• Schein, S. S., & Langlois, J. H. (2015). Unattractive infant faces elicit negative affect from adults. Infant Behavior and Development, 38, 130–134. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2014.12.009
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, N., & Clore, L. C. (1983). Mood, missatribution, and judgements of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513–523. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513
   Google Scholar
• Seamon, J. G., McKenna, P. A., & Binder, N. (1998). The mere exposure effect is differentially sensitive to different judgment tasks. Consciousness and Cognition, 7(1), 85–102. doi:10.1006/ccog.1998.0334
   Google Scholar
• Simmons, J. P., & Nelson, L. D. (2006). Intuitive confidence: Choosing between intuitive and nonintuitive alternatives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 409–428. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.135.3.409
   Google Scholar
• Thielsch, M. T., & Hirschfeld, G. (2012). Spatial frequencies in aesthetic website evaluations - explaining how ultra-rapid evaluations are formed. Ergonomics, 55, 731–742. doi:10.1080/00140139.2012.665496
   Google Scholar
• Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(12), 452–460. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01403-5
   Google Scholar
• Tinio, P. P. L., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2013). Birds of a feather … Generalization of facial structures following massive familiarization. Acta Psychologica, 144, 463–471. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.08.003
   Google Scholar
• Tinio, P. P. L., Leder, H., & Strasser, M. (2011). Image quality and the aesthetic judgment of photographs: Contrast, sharpness, and grain teased apart and put together. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 5(2). doi:10.1037/a0019542
   Google Scholar
• Topolinski, S., & Strack, F. (2009). Scanning the “Fringe” of consciousness: What is felt and what is not felt in intuitions about semantic coherence. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 608–618. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2008.06.002
   Google Scholar
• Unkelbach, C., & Greifeneder, R. (2013). A general model of fluency effects in judgment and decision making. In C. Unkelbach & R. Greifeneder (Eds.), The experience of thinking: How the fluency of mental processes influences cognition and behaviour (pp. 11–32). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagemans, J. (1997). Characteristics and models of human symmetry detection. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1(9), 346–352. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(97)01105-4
   Google Scholar
• Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 989–1000. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.989
   Google Scholar
• Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., & Catty, S. (2006). Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological Science, 17, 799–806. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01785.x
   Google Scholar
• Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgements. Paper presented at the The Psychology of Evaluation.
   Google Scholar
• Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1–27. doi:10.1037/h0025848
   Google Scholar
• Zebrowitz, L. A., Fellous, J. M., Mignault, A., & Andreoletti, C. (2003). Trait impressions as overgeneralized responses to adaptively significant facial qualities: Evidence from connectionist modeling. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 194–215. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0703_01
   Google Scholar
• Zebrowitz, L. A., & Rhodes, G. (2004). Sensitivity to “bad genes” and the anomalous face overgeneralization effect: Cue validity, cue utilization, and accuracy in judging intelligence and health. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 167–185. doi:10.1023/B:JONB.0000039648.30935.1b
   Google Scholar