Fluency and Attitudes

Social and Personality Psychology Compass

Volumn 9, Issue 7, 2015, Pages 370-382

  Claypool, Heather M ^a   Mackie, Diane M ^b   Garcia Marques, Teresa ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE PSICOLOGIA APLICADA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84934294079     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17519004     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12179     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2006). Predicting short-term stock fluctuations by using processing fluency. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 9369-9372.
2. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). Easy on the mind, easy on the wallet: The roles of familiarity and processing fluency in valuation judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 985-990.
3. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 13, 219-235.
4. 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.
5. Bernstein, M. J., & Claypool, H. M. (2010, April/May). Familiarity's impact on attitudes as moderated by attribution instructions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
6. Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.
7. Bornstein, R. F., & D'Agostino, P. R. (1992). Stimulus recognition and the mere exposure effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63, 545-552.
8. 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.
9. Brickman, P., Redfield, J., Harrison, A. A., & Crandall, R. (1972). Drive and predisposition as factors in the attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 31-44.
10. Brinol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2003). Overt head movements and persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84, 1123-1139.
11. Brinol, P., Petty, R. E., & Tormala, Z. L. (2006). The malleable meaning of subjective ease. Psychological Science, 17, 200-206.
12. Campbell, M. C., & Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 292-304.
13. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
14. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66, 460-473.
15. Claypool, H. M., Housley, M. K., Hugenberg, K., Bernstein, M. J., & Mackie, D. M. (2012). Easing in: Fluent processing brings others into the ingroup. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15, 441-455.
16. Claypool, H. M., Hugenberg, K., Housley, M. K., & Mackie, D. M. (2007). Familiar eyes are smiling: On the role of familiarity in the perception of facial affect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 856-866.
17. Claypool, H. M., Mackie, D. M., Garcia-Marques, T., McIntosh, A., & Udall, A. (2004). The effects of personal relevance and repetition on persuasive processing. Social Cognition, 22, 310-335.
18. Dechene, A., Stahl, C., Hansen, J., & Wanke, M. (2009). Mix me a list: Context moderates the truth effect and the mere-exposure effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1117-1122.
19. Dechene, A., Stahl, C., Hansen, J., & Wanke, M. (2010). The truth about the truth: A meta-analytic review of the truth effect. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 14, 238-257.
20. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
21. Ferraro, R., Bettman, J. R., & Chartrand, T. L. (2009). The power of strangers: The effect of incidental consumer brand encounters on brand choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 729-741.
22. Garcia-Marques, T., & Mackie, D. M. (2001). The feeling of familiarity as a regulator of persuasive processing. Social Cognition, 19, 9-34.
23. Garcia-Marques, T., & Mackie, D. M. (2007). Familiarity impacts person perception. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 839-855.
24. Garcia-Marques, T., Mackie, D. M., Claypool, H. M., & Garcia-Marques, L. (2013). Once more with feeling! Familiarity and positivity as integral consequences of previous exposure. In C. Unkelbach & R. Greifeneder (Eds.), The Experience of Thinking: How the Fluency of Mental Processes Influences Cognition and Behavior (pp. 50-69). New York: Psychology Press.
25. Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692-731.
26. Gordon, P. C., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Implicit learning and generalization of the "mere exposure" effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 45, 492-500.
27. Haddock, G. (2002). It's easy to like or dislike Tony Blair: Accessibility experiences and the favourability of attitude judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 257-267.
28. Haddock, G., Rothman, A. J., Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Forming judgments of attitude certainty, intensity, and importance: The role of subjective experiences. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 771-782.
29. Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 513-541.
30. Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306-340.
31. Jones, I. F., Young, S. G., & Claypool, H. M. (2011). Approaching the familiar: On the ability of mere exposure to direct approach and avoidance behavior. Motivation & Emotion, 35, 383-392.
32. Kruglanski, A. W., Freund, T., & Bar-Tal, D. (1996). Motivational effects in the mere-exposure paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 479-499.
33. Labroo, A. A., Dhar, R., & Schwarz, N. (2008). Of frog wines and frowning watches: Semantic priming, perceptual fluency, and brand evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 819-831.
34. Laham, S. M., Alter, A. L., & Goodwin, G. P. (2009). Easy on the mind, easy on the wrongdoer: Discrepantly fluent violations are deemed less morally wrong. Cognition, 112, 462-466.
35. Laham, S. M., Koval, P., & Alter, A. L. (2012). The name-pronunciation effect: Why people like Mr. Smith more than Mr. Colquhoun. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 752-756.
36. Lee, A. Y. (2002). Effects of implicit memory on memory-based versus stimulus-based brand choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 440-454.
37. Lee, A. Y., & Labroo, A. A. (2004). The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 41, 151-165.
38. Lev-Ari, S., & Keysar, B. (2010). Why don't we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 1093-1096.
39. Mandler, G., Nakamura, Y., & Van Zandt, B. J. S. (1987). Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimuli that cannot be recognized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 646-648.
40. McCroskey, J. C., & Mehrley, R. S. (1969). The effects of disorganization and nonfluency on attitude change and source credibility. Speech Monographs, 36, 13-21.
41. Monahan, J. L., Murphy, S. T., & Zajonc, R. B. (2000). Subliminal mere exposure: Specific, general, and diffuse effects. Psychological Science, 11, 462-466.
42. Moons, W. G., Mackie, D. M., & Garcia-Marques, T. (2009). The impact of repetition-induced familiarity on agreement with weak and strong arguments. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 96, 32-44.
43. Moreland, R. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1982). Exposure effects in person perception: Familiarity, similarity, and attraction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 395-415.
44. Oppenheimer, D. M. (2006). Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity: Problems with using long words needlessly. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 139-156.
45. Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). The secret life of fluency. Trends in Cognitive Science, 12, 237-241.
46. Peretz, I., Gaudreau, D., & Bonnel, A.-M. (1998). Exposure effects on music preference and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 26, 884-902.
47. Petty, R. E., Brinol, P., & Tormala, Z. L. (2002). Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: The self-validation hypothesis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 82, 722-741.
48. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.
49. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 41, 847-855.
50. Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness & Cognition, 8, 338-342.
51. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality & Social Psychology Review, 8, 364-382.
52. Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45-48.
53. Reder, L. M., & Ritter, F. E. (1992). What determines initial feeling of knowing? Familiarity with question terms, not with the answer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 435-451.
54. Rhodes, G., Halberstadt, J., & Brajkovich, G. (2001). Generalization of mere exposure effects to averaged composite faces. Social Cognition, 19, 57-70.
55. Rubin, M., Paolini, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2010). A processing fluency explanation of bias against migrants. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 21-28.
56. Rydell, R. J., McConnell, A. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2008). Consequences of discrepant explicit and implicit attitudes: Cognitive dissonance and increased information processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1526-1532.
57. Schwarz, N. (2004). Metacognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 332-348.
58. Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 61, 195-202.
59. Seamon, J. G., McKenna, P. A., & Binder, N. (1998). The mere exposure effect is differentially sensitive to different judgment tasks. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 7, 85-102.
60. Shah, A. K., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2007). Easy does it: The role of fluency in cue weighting. Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 371-379.
61. Shapiro, S. A., & Nielsen, J. H. (2013). What the blind eye sees: Incidental change detection as a source of perceptual fluency. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 1202-1218.
62. Skurnik, I., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2000). Drawing inferences from feelings: The role of naïve beliefs. In H. Bless & J. P. Forgas (Eds.), The Message Within: The Role of Subjective Experience in Social Cognition and Behavior (pp. 162-175). New York: Psychology Press.
63. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131.
64. Smith, P. K., Dijksterhuis, A., & Chaiken, S. (2008). Subliminal exposure to faces and racial attitudes: Exposure to Whites makes Whites like Blacks less. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 50-64.
65. Smith, E. R., Miller, D. A., Maitner, A. T., Crump, S. A., Garcia-Marques, T., & Mackie, D. M. (2006). Familiarity can increase stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 471-478.
66. Tormala, Z. L., Petty, R. E., & Brinol, P. (2002). Ease of retrieval effects in persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1700-1712.
67. Wanke, M. (2013). Almost everything you always wanted to know about ease-of-retrieval effects. In C. Unkelbach & R. Greifeneder (Eds.), The Experience of Thinking: How the Fluency of Mental Processes Influences Cognition and Behavior (pp. 151-169). New York: Psychology Press.
68. Weisbuch, M., & Mackie, D. (2009). False fame, perceptual clarity, or persuasion? Flexible fluency attribution in spokesperson familiarity effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 62-72.
69. Weisbuch, M., Mackie, D. M., & Garcia-Marques, T. (2003). Prior source exposure and persuasion: Further evidence for misattributional processes. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 691-700.
70. Whittlesea, B. W. A., Jacoby, L. L., & Girard, K. (1990). Illusions of immediate memory: Evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality. Journal of Memory & Language, 29, 716-732.
71. Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Williams, L. D. (1998). Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don't? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychologica, 98, 141-165.
72. Wilson, W., & Nakajo, H. (1965). Preference for photographs as a function of frequency of presentation. Psychonomic Science, 3, 577-578.
73. 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 & Social Psychology, 81, 989-1000.
74. Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (2001). How pleasant was your childhood? Beliefs about memory shape inferences from experienced difficulty of recall. Psychological Science, 12, 176-179.
75. Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T. A., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The Psychology of Evaluation: Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion (pp. 189-217). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
76. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology Monographs, 9, 1-27.
77. Zajonc, R. B., Shaver, P., Tavris, C., & Van Kreveld, D. (1972). Exposure, satiation, and stimulus discriminability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 270-280.
78. Zebrowitz, L. A., White, B., & Wieneke, K. (2008). Mere exposure and racial prejudice: Exposure to other-race faces increases liking for strangers of that race. Social Cognition, 26, 259-275.