Reaching for the (Product) Stars: Measuring Recognition and Approach Speed to Get Insights Into Consumer Choice

Genschow, Oliver; Florack, Arnd; Chib, Vikram S.; Shimojo, Shinsuke; Scarabis, Martin; Wänke, Michaela

doi:10.1080/01973533.2013.785399

Cited by 9 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(107 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After signing a statement of agreement, participants completed the RaBAT (Genschow et al, 2013), indicated basic demographic characteristics, and were then debriefed, thanked, and dismissed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A more elegant test of the theoretical assumption that threatening stimuli lead to fast recognition and slow approach responses would involve the assessment of recognition and approach latencies within the same response sequence. As described before, the RaBAT (Genschow et al, 2013) allows doing this in a most convenient manner.…”

Section: Responses Toward Threatening Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, tasks that would differentiate between approach and recognition responses could provide important insights into how and when the two concepts are related, when they are independent, or when they are negatively correlated. Interestingly, only few methods, such as the task from Bamford and Ward (2008) or the Recognition and Behavioral Approach Task (RaBAT; Genschow et al, 2013), allow disentangling the speed of a movement from the time individuals need to recognize a stimulus. As we relied on the RaBAT in the present study, we now describe this task in more detail.…”

Section: Responses Toward Positive and Negative Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because positive stimuli are generally recognized faster than negative stimuli (e.g., Genschow et al, 2013;Unkelbach et al, 2008), the hardest test of whether threat leads to a fast recognition is the comparison of threatening stimuli with positive stimuli (and not with neutral or negative stimuli). Therefore, the present study compares response latencies toward threatening and positive stimuli.…”

Section: Responses Toward Threatening Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants working on the RaBAT (Genschow et al, 2013) have to press the space bar on a computer keyboard as soon as they have recognized a picture on the screen. Afterwards, they have to press a key closer to the screen (the Z key on a Swiss keyboard; Y key on English language keyboards) as fast as possible, which elicits a virtual movement of the picture toward the participants to give the illusion that the stimulus actually moves toward participants (cf.…”

Section: The Recognition and Behavioral Approach Task (Rabat)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Recognition and Approach Responses Toward Threatening Objects

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Previous research suggests that positive stimuli are often approached as well as recognized faster than negative stimuli. We argue that this effect does not hold if negative stimuli are associated with threat. Based on fear module theory (Öhman & Mineka, 2001(Öhman & Mineka, , 2003, we argue that individuals recognize threatening stimuli faster than positive stimuli because of a constant monitoring of the environment for threatening objects. Moreover, based on the assumption of a motivational account underlying approach-avoidance responses (Krieglmeyer & Deutsch, 2010), we assume the recognition then directly evokes a careful and slow approach of threatening objects. Applying a response time task that measures approach movement and recognition times within the same task, we found that individuals recognize threatening pictures faster than positive pictures, but approach the threatening pictures slower than the positive pictures. In this article, we hypothesize that this might not hold true when negativity is related to threat. Based on fear module theory (Öhman & Mineka, 2001(Öhman & Mineka, , 2003 and the assumption of a motivational account underlying approach-avoidance responses (Krieglmeyer & Deutsch, 2010), we assume that individuals recognize threatening stimuli faster and approach them more slowly than positive stimuli. Responses Toward Positive and Negative StimuliResearch has repeatedly shown that individuals are faster at consciously recognizing positive stimuli than negative stimuli (Bargh et al., 1992;Unkelbach et al., 2008Unkelbach et al., , 2010. For example, Bargh et al. (1992) found that positive attitude objects were evaluated more quickly than negative ones. Similarly, Unkelbach et al. (2010) found that individuals are faster at identifying positive compared to negative words. In what they referred to as the density hypothesis, the authors account for this phenomenon by arguing that positive information is more densely organized than negative information and that this increased density in turn leads to faster identification of positive stimuli.Other research suggests that individuals approach positive stimuli faster than negative stimuli (Brendl et al

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Responses Toward Threatening Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Responses Toward Positive and Negative Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Responses Toward Threatening Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Recognition and Behavioral Approach Task (Rabat)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Recognition and Approach Responses Toward Threatening Objects

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Neural Correlates of Impulsive Buying Tendencies during Perception of Product Packaging

Hubert

Florack

et al. 2013

Psychol. Mark.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has shown that people differ in their susceptibility to impulsive buying. The appeal of product packaging has the potential to trigger impulsive buying even for consumers with no intention to make a purchase. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether individual differences in consumers’ impulsive buying tendencies affect unconscious neural responses during the perception of product packaging. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was applied to measure neural responses to the perception of product packages in participants with different impulsive buying tendencies. The results of the study support and expand prior research in impulsive and reflective information processing and behavior. First, attractive versus neutral packages evoked more intensive activity changes in brain regions associated with an impulsive system. Second, attractive and unattractive versus neutral packages led to less intensive activity changes in regions associated with a reflective system. Third, attractive packages activated regions associated with reward, whereas unattractive packages activated regions associated with negative emotions. The results suggest that there is indeed a corresponding relationship between stronger impulsive buying tendencies and activity in brain areas associated with impulsive and reflective processes.

show abstract

Eye-Tracking und reaktionszeitbasierte Verfahren zur Messung impliziter Kommunikationswirkungen

Palcu¹,

Florack²

2015

Handbuch Controlling Der Kommunikation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reaching for the (Product) Stars: Measuring Recognition and Approach Speed to Get Insights Into Consumer Choice

Cited by 9 publications

References 62 publications

Recognition and Approach Responses Toward Threatening Objects

Recognition and Approach Responses Toward Threatening Objects

Neural Correlates of Impulsive Buying Tendencies during Perception of Product Packaging

Eye-Tracking und reaktionszeitbasierte Verfahren zur Messung impliziter Kommunikationswirkungen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About