It felt fluent, and I liked it: Subjective feeling of fluency rather than objective fluency determines liking.

Abstract

According to the processing-fluency explanation of aesthetics, more fluently processed stimuli are preferred (R. Reber, N. Schwarz, & P. Winkielman, 2004, Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 8, pp. 364-382.). In this view, the subjective feeling of ease of processing is considered important, but this has not been directly tested in perceptual processing. In two experiments, we therefore objectively manipulated fluency (ease of processing) with subliminal perceptual priming (Study 1) and variations in presentation durations (Study 2). We assessed the impact of objective fluency on feelings of fluency and liking, as well as their interdependence. In line with the processing-fluency account, we found that objectively more fluent images were indeed judged as more fluent and were also liked more. Moreover, differences in liking were even stronger when data were analyzed according to felt fluency. These findings demonstrate that perceptual fluency is not only explicitly felt, it can also be reported and is an important determinant of liking.

Vision (im)possible? The effects of in-store signage on customers’ visual attention

“…Perceptual priming 2 (that is, improved processing of previously seen material, relative to unseen material; Wiggs & Martin, 1998) is one way of facilitating the identification of a given stimulus, and thereby enhancing the processing ease of its corresponding perceptual features (Forster et al, 2013;Oppenheimer, 2008;Reber et al, 2002;2004;Zajonc, 1968).…”

Stimulus Threat and Exposure Context Modulate the Effect of Mere Exposure on Approach Behaviors

“…A separate avenue of research has examined how differences in the subjective experience of processing novel and familiar stimuli contribute to ME effects. Specifically, this line of work finds that repeated exposure allows for fluent processing (e.g., Bornstein and D’Agostino, 1994), and this fluency is affectively positive (e.g., Reber et al, 2004), as seen on self-report and physiological outcome measures (e.g., facial muscle movements indicating smiling, Winkielman and Cacioppo, 2001). Though the ME effect is well-documented and likely reflects co-acting mechanisms (e.g., preference for “safe” familiar objects and fluent processing), other theoretically important questions remain under-explored.…”

“…Indeed, a powerful link exists between stimulus threat and avoidance reactions (e.g., Duckworth et al, 2002; Marsh et al, 2005) suggesting that, though ME might modulate affective reactions toward such stimuli, these effects might not extend to actual approach/avoidance behavior. Furthermore, given that repeated exposure can lead to fluent processing (e.g., Bornstein and D’Agostino, 1994), this fluency may serve to make the dangerous implications of threatening stimuli clearer, potentially overwhelming the normally positive effects of ME (Reber et al, 2004). Thus, one aim of the current research is to test these competing predictions.…”

Warholian Repetition and the Viewer’s Affective Response to Artworks from His Death and Disaster Series

“…In this model, preference for a stimulus is contingent upon the ease with which a stimulus can be identified and understood, such that fluent processing results in positive affect [31,32,33] In the case of initially negative stimuli, Reber states that fluency manipulations through repetition operate on a number of levels and to different ends. Largely, repetition affords more efficient perceptual and cognitive processing which leads to a positive affective response.…”