Beauty Beyond Compare: Effects of Context Extremity and Categorization on Hedonic Contrast

被引:40
作者
Cogan, Elizabeth [1 ]
Parker, Scott [2 ]
Zellner, Debra A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Montclair State Univ, Dept Psychol, Montclair, NJ 07043 USA
[2] American Univ, Dept Psychol, Washington, DC 20016 USA
关键词
contrast; attractiveness; categorization; hedonic contrast; extreme anchors; ADAPTATION-LEVEL THEORY; PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS; SIZE CONTRAST; ASSIMILATION; SIMILARITY; JUDGMENTS; CONSEQUENCES;
D O I
10.1037/a0031020
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Three studies investigated the effects of extreme context stimuli and categorization on hedonic contrast by having subjects judge the attractiveness of faces. Experiment I demonstrated hedonic contrast in both directions by using 2 sets of stimuli presented in different orders. Preceding moderately unattractive faces with moderately attractive faces made the unattractive faces more unattractive. When the order of presentation was reversed, the moderately attractive faces became more attractive. Experiment 2 found that this hedonic contrast was eliminated when the moderately attractive faces were replaced with extremely attractive faces. Experiment 3 showed that even with those 2 sets of extremely different stimuli, hedonic contrast occurred if subjects were instructed to think of both sets of stimuli as belonging to the same category. These findings, using hedonic judgments, parallel Sarris's (1967, 1968) finding with weights that when 2 sets of stimuli are too different in the dimension being judged, no contrast occurs. They also lend support to his explanation for this result. When the 2 sets of stimuli are too different they are not seen as belonging to the same category. They are therefore not compared, and contrast does not occur. The authors propose that these principles might apply to contrast in all settings.
引用
收藏
页码:16 / 22
页数:7
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Beebe-Center J.Gilbert., 1965, The psychology of pleasantness and unpleasantness
[2]   Sex-contingent face aftereffects depend on perceptual category rather than structural encoding [J].
Bestelmeyer, P. E. G. ;
Jones, B. C. ;
DeBruine, L. M. ;
Little, A. C. ;
Perrett, D. I. ;
Schneider, A. ;
Welling, L. L. M. ;
Conway, C. A. .
COGNITION, 2008, 107 (01) :353-365
[3]   STIMULUS-SIMILARITY AND THE ANCHORING OF SUBJECTIVE SCALES [J].
BROWN, DR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1953, 66 (02) :199-214
[4]   SIZE CONTRAST AS A FUNCTION OF CONCEPTUAL SIMILARITY BETWEEN TEST AND INDUCERS [J].
COREN, S ;
ENNS, JT .
PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 1993, 54 (05) :579-588
[5]   SIZE CONTRAST AS A FUNCTION OF FIGURAL SIMILARITY [J].
COREN, S ;
MILLER, J .
PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 1974, 16 (02) :355-357
[6]  
Dolese M., 2005, B PSYCHOL ARTS, V5, P21
[7]  
FECHNER GT, 1898, VORSCHULE AESTHETIK, V2
[8]   CONTEXT EFFECTS ON THE PERCEIVED PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS OF FACES [J].
GEISELMAN, RE ;
HAIGHT, NA ;
KIMATA, LG .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1984, 20 (05) :409-424
[9]   CONSEQUENCES OF PRIMING - JUDGMENT AND BEHAVIOR [J].
HERR, PM .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1106-1115
[10]   ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF PRIMING - ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST EFFECTS [J].
HERR, PM ;
SHERMAN, SJ ;
FAZIO, RH .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1983, 19 (04) :323-340