When the others matter: Context-dependent effects on changes in appreciation of innovativeness

Swiss Journal of Psychology

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 75-83

  Gerger, Gernot ^a   Leder, Helmut ^a   Faerber, Stella J ^b   Carbon, Claus Christian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BAMBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Attractiveness; Consumer psychology; Context; Dynamics; Innovativeness; Repeated evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959608745     PISSN: 14210185     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1024/1421-0185/a000041     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Berlyne, D. E. (1970a). Esthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts
2. Berlyne, D. E. (1970b). Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Perception and Psychophysics, 8, 279-286.
3. Bornstein, R. F., & D'Agostini, P.R. (1994). The attribution and discounting of perceptual fluency: Preliminary tests of a perceptual fluency/attributional account. Social Cognition, 12, 103-128.
4. Bornstein, R.F., Kale, A.R.,&Cornell, K.R. (1990). Boredomas a limiting condition on the mere exposure effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 791-800. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.791
5. Cammann, R. (1990). Is there no MMN in the visual modality? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 234-234.
6. Carbon, C.C. (2010). The cycle of preference: Long-term dynamics of esthetic appreciation. Acta Psychologica, 134, 233-244. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.004
7. Carbon, C. C., Grüter, T., Grüter, M.,Weber, J. E., & Lüschow, A. (2010). Dissociation of facial attractiveness and distinctiveness processing in congenital prosopagnosia. Visual Cognition, 18, 641-654. doi: 10.1080/13506280903462471
8. Carbon, C. C., Hutzler, F., & Minge, M. (2006). Innovativeness in design investigated by eye movements and pupillometry. Psychology Science, 48, 173-186.
9. Carbon, C. C., & Leder, H. (2005). The repeated evaluation technique (RET): A method to capture dynamic effects of innovativeness and attractiveness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 587-601. doi: 10.1002/acp.1098
10. Carbon, C. C., Michael, L.,&Leder, H. (2008). Design evaluation by combination of repeated evaluation technique and measurement of electrodermal activity. Research in Engineering Design, 19, 143-149. doi: 10.1007/s00163-008-0045-2
11. Carbon, C. C., & Talker, C. (2006). Evaluating design perception of 36 car interiors. Unpublished research report, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). Psy-Scope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25, 257-271.
14. Cooper, R.G. (2001). Winning at new products. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15. Cox, G. (2005). The Cox review of creativity in business, HMTreasury. Retrieved from http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/coxreview_index.htm.
16. Dawson,M. E., Schell, M.S., & Filion, D. L. (2000). The electrodermal system. In J.T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G.G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (2nd ed., pp. 200-222). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Dunlap,W. P., Cortina, J. M.,Vaslow, J. B.,&Burke,M. J. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 1, 170-177. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.170
18. Faerber, S. J., Leder, H., Gerger, G., & Carbon, C.C. (2010). Priming semantic concepts affects the dynamics of esthetic appreciation. Acta Psychologica, 135, 191-200. doi: 10.1016/ j.actpsy.2010.06.006
19. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
20. Halberstadt, J. (2006). The generality and ultimate origins of the attractiveness of prototypes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 166-183. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_5
21. Halberstadt, J., & Rhodes, G. (2003). It's not just average faces that are attractive: Computer-manipulated averageness makesbirds, fish, and automobiles attractive. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10(1), 149-156.
22. Hekkert, P., & Leder, H. (2008). Product esthetics. In H. Schifferstein & P. Hekkert (Eds.), Product experience (pp. 259-286). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
23. Hekkert, P., Snelders, D., & Van Wieringen, P. C.W. (2003). Most advanced, yet acceptable: Typicality and novelty as joint predictors of esthetic preference in industrial design. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 111-124. doi: 10.1348/000712603762842147
24. Helson,H. (1948).Adaption level as a basis for a quantitative theory of frames of reference. Psychological Review, 55, 297-313.
25. Leder, H., Augustin, D., & Belke, B. (2005). Art and cognition! Consequences for experimental esthetics. Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, 5, 11-20.
26. Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of esthetic appreciation and esthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489-508. doi: 10.1348/0007126042369811
27. Leder, H., & Carbon, C.C. (2005). Dimensions in appreciation of car interior design. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 603-618. doi: 10.1002/acp.1088
28. Lee, A.Y. (2001). The mere exposure effect: An uncertainty reduction explanation revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1255-1266. doi: 10.1177/01461672012710002
29. Liu, Y. (2003). Engineering esthetics and esthetic ergonomics: Theoretical foundations and a dual-process research methodology. Ergonomics, 46, 1273-1292. doi: 10.1080/00140130310001610829
30. Mairesse, J.,&Mohnen, P. (2002). Accounting for innovativeness and measuring innovativeness: An illustrative framework and an application. American Economic Review, 92, 226-230. doi: 10.1257/000282802320189302
31. Moulson, T., & Sproles, G. (2000). Styling strategy. Business Horizons, 43, 45-52. doi: 10.1016/S0007-6813(00)80008-7
32. O'Hanlon, J. F. (1981). Boredom: Practical consequences and a theory. Acta Psychologica, 49, 53-82. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(81)90033-0
33. Parducci, A. (1995). Happiness, pleasure, and judgment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., &Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and esthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 364-382. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3
35. Rhodes, G., Jeffery, L.,Watson, T., Clifford, C., & Nakayama, K. (2003). Fitting the mind to the world: Face adaptation and attractiveness aftereffects. Psychological Science, 14, 558-566. doi: 10.1046/j.0956-7976.2003.psci_1465.x
36. Robinson, B. M., & Elias, L. J. (2005). Novel stimuli are negative stimuli: Evidence that negative affect is reduced in the mere exposure effect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 100, 365-372. doi: 10.2466/PMS.100.2.365
37. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27-48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93-105. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.54.2.93
39. Schwarz, N. (2007). Attitude construction: Evaluation in context. SocialCognition, 25, 638-656. doi: 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.638
40. Smith, E.R., & Semin, G.R. (2004). Socially situated cognition: Cognition in its social context. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 53-117. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(04)36002-8
41. Stang, D. J. (1974). Methodological factors in mere exposure research. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1014-1025. doi: 10.1037/ h0037419
42. Takeuchi, A.H., & Hulse, S.H. (1993). Absolute pitch. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 345-361. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.113.2.345
43. Tiitinen, H., May, P., Reinikainen, K., & Näätänen, R. (1994). Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by preattentive sensory memory. Nature, 372, 90-92. doi:10.1038/372090a0
44. Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychology Science, 10, 224-228. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00154