Measuring Processing Fluency: One versus Five Items

Abstract

While there is an ample amount of consumer behavior research that recruits processing fluency as an explanatory construct, the question how to best measure the fluency experience has received little attention. Therefore, there is a lack of consistency in measuring the construct, particularly with regard to the use of single‐item versus multi‐item measures. The current research, thus, aims to investigate how processing fluency can be consistently measured across different experimental fluency manipulations and which type of measure has the highest validity. Based on classic scale development procedures, we propose a reliable and valid multi‐item measure and compare this measure against a single‐item measure in terms of predictive validity. We show that both measures mediate the effect of five established fluency manipulations and that the single‐item measure is sufficient. In addition to providing a measure for future research that can be adapted to different empirical settings, we provide empirical evidence on the replicability of fluency effects and on the theoretical conjecture that people have a uniform fluency experience across different manipulations of fluency.

My username is IN! The influence of inward vs. outward wandering usernames on judgments of online seller trustworthiness

“…There is an ample number of studies in the cognitive psychology literature showing that the experience of high fluency has an affective positive tone, making easy-to-process stimuli to be preferred and liked more as compared to hard-to-process stimuli (for a review of fluency effects on evaluative judgments, see Winkielman, Schwarz, Fazendeiro, & Reber, 2003). Research in consumer psychology shows similar effects (see Graf, Mayer, & Landwehr, 2017). For instance, prior exposure to a brand leads to more positive attitudes toward it and increases the likelihood of brand choice (mere exposure effects in advertising and product placement strategies; e.g., Baker, 1999;Janiszewski, 1993;Shapiro, 1999;van Reijmersdal, Neijens, & Smit, 2007).…”

A MAP for effective advertising: the metaphoric advertising processing model

“…In terms of future research on metaphoric advertising, the MAP offers a conceptual framework for systematically examining the important research gaps identified in the literature review and summarized in the outer-right column of Table 2. Specifically, it suggests that the effects of metaphoric advertising can be traced to the experience of processing fluency, which suggests that established insights provided by the literature on processing fluency could be transferred to the study of metaphoric advertising (for a review of common fluency phenomena, see Graf et al 2018). To demonstrate these research opportunities, we highlight how the research gaps within the five domains of research summarized in Table 2 could be approached from a processing fluency perspective.…”

Evolution of Neuroaesthetic Variables in Portrait Paintings throughout the Renaissance

“…In this article, we begin with a series of statistical measurements on symmetry, balance, and complexity. We chose these variables because they have a direct relationship to processing fluency [13,14]. In this study, we expand the measurements to all three periods of the Renaissance and compare Italy with the rest of Europe.…”