The categorization effect in hedonic contrast: Experts differ from novices

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 179-183

  Rota, Lauren M ^a   Zellner, Debra A ^a  

^a MONTCLAIR STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AFFECT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; FLOWER; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALITY; LEARNING; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION;

ADULT; AFFECT; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; FLOWERS; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; JUDGMENT; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 34447306060     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194047     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. BEEBE-CENTER, J. G. (1965). The psychology of pleasantness and unpleasantness. New York: Russell & Russell. (Original work published 1932)
2. CLIFF, N. (1993). Dominance statistics: Ordinal analyses to answer ordinal questions. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 494-509.
3. DOLESE, M. J., ZELLNER, D. A., VASSERMAN, M., AND PARKER, S. (2005). Categorization affects hedonic contrast in the visual arts. Bulletin of Psychology & the Arts, 5, 21-25.
4. FECHNER, G. T. (1898). Vorschule der Ästhetik II (2nd ed.). Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
5. HOLLANDER, M., & WOLFE, D. A. (1999). Nonparametric statistical methods (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
6. JOHNSON, K. E., & MERVIS, C. B. (1997). Effects of varying levels of expertise on the basic level of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 248-277.
7. MARASCUILO, L. A., & MCSWEENEY, M. (1977). Nonparametric and distribution-free methods for the social sciences. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
8. ROSCH, E., MERVIS, C. B., GRAY, W. D., JOHNSON, D. M., & BOYES-BRAEM, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382-439.
9. SCHWARZ. N., & BLESS, H. (1992). Constructing reality and its alternatives: An inclusion/exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment In L. L. Martin and A. Tesser (Eds.), Theconstruction of social judgments, pp. 217-245. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. STAPEL, D. A., & WINKIELMAN, P. (1998). Assimilation and contrast as a function of context-target similarity, distinctness, and dimensional relevance. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 634-646.
11. TANAKA, J. W., & TAYLOR, M. (1991). Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder? Cognitive Psychology, 23, 457-482.
12. WANKE, M., BLESS, H., & IGOU, E. R. (2001). Next to a star Paling, shining, or both? Turning interexemplar contrast into interexemplar assimilation. Personality A Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 14-29.
13. ZELLNER, D. A., KERN, B. B., & PARKER, S. (2002). Protection for the good: Subcategorization reduces hedonic contrast. Appetite, 38, 175-180.
14. ZELLNER, D. A., ROHM, E. A., BASSETTI, T. L., & PARKER, S. (2003). Compared to what? Effects of categorization on hedonic contrast. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 468-473.