Perceptual fluency and affect without recognition

Abstract

A dichotic listening task was used to investigate the affect-without-recognition phenomenon. Subjects performed a distractor task by responding to the information presented in one ear while ignoring the target information presented in the other ear. The subjects' recognition of and affect toward the target information as well as toward foils was measured. The results offer evidence for the affect-without-recognition phenomenon. Furthermore, the data suggest that the subjects' affect toward the stimuli depended primarily on the extent to which the stimuli were perceived as familiar (i.e., subjective familiarity), and this perception was influenced by the ear in which the distractor or the target information was presented. These data are interpreted in terms of current models of recognition memory and hemispheric lateralization.

Vividness Effects: A Resource‐Matching Perspective

“…The above version of the resource-matching view can also account for studies indicating the greater persua-matching hypothesis (Anand and Sternthal 1987;Meyers-Levy and Peracchio 1995). According to this view, the siveness of vivid information when the resources allocated to the task are decreased.…”

Path to Purchase: A Mutually Exciting Point Process Model for Online Advertising and Conversion

“…Furthermore, it is also well documented that enhanced perceptual and conceptual fluency positively influence consumers' affective responses (e.g., Anand andSternthal 1991, Lee andLabroo 2004). Increased liking of the product, on one hand, will positively influence the attention and reception consumers give to marketing communications; on the other hand, it will directly increase the probability of purchase (Engel et al 1995).…”

Intuitive Hedonics: Consumer Beliefs About the Dynamics of Liking

“…"Words" that Zajonc's subjects had seen more often were more likely to be thought to mean something good. Abstract visual stimuli and music are also often used (Anand & Sternthal, 1991;Heingartner & Hall, 1974; for reviews see Bornstein, 1989, andHarrison, 1977). Zajonc & Rajecki (1969) ran ads of nonsense syllables in college newspapers, varying the number of exposures, and found that the more students had been exposed to the ads, the more they like them.…”