Abstract
Viewing hedonically negative paintings increased the hedonic ratings of subsequently viewed test paintings (positive hedonic contrast; Experiment 1) and also increased the degree of preference between the test paintings (Experiments 2 and 3). This result differs from the reduction in hedonic preference (hedonic condensation) that accompanies negative hedonic contrast. It also differs from the reduction in perceived differences that usually accompanies expansion of stimulus range and that is predicted by numerous theories.
Article PDF
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Dolese, M. J., Zellner, D. A., Vasserman, M., & Parker, S. (2005). Categorization affects hedonic contrast in the visual arts. Bulletin of Psychology & the Arts, 5, 21–25.
Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1969). Intensity perception: I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46, 372–383.
Gravetter, F., & Lockhead, G. R. (1973). Criterial range as a frame of reference for stimulus judgments. Psychological Review, 80, 203–216.
Helson, H. (1964). Adaptation-level theory. New York: Harper & Row.
Helson, H., & Kozaki, A. (1968). Anchor effects using numerical estimates of simple dot patterns. Perception & Psychophysics, 4, 163–164.
Lockhead, G. R., & Hinson, J. (1986). Range and sequence effects in judgment. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 53–61.
Luce, R. D., Green, D. M., & Weber, D. L. (1976). Attention bands in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 49–54.
Mellers, B. A., & Cooke, A. D. J. (1994). Trade-offs depend on attribute range. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 1055–1067.
Parducci, A. (1965). Category judgment: A rangefrequency model. Psychological Review, 72, 407–418.
Parducci, A. (1968). The relativism of absolute judgments. Scientific American, 219, 84–90.
Parducci, A. (1995). Happiness, pleasure, and judgment: The contextual theory and its applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Parducci, A., & Wedell, D. H. (1990). The context for evaluative judgments: Psychophysics and beyond. In H.-G. Geissler, M. H. Muller, & W. Prinz (Eds.), Psychophysical explorations of mental structures (pp. 94–103). Lewiston, NY: Hogrefe & Huber.
Parker, S., Bascom, J., Rabinovitz, B., & Zellner, D. [A.] (2008). Positive and negative hedonic contrast with musical stimuli. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, & the Arts, 2, 171–174.
Petzold, P. (1990). The influence of anchor stimuli on judgments of attributes. In H.-G. Geissler, M. H. Muller, & W. Prinz (Eds.), Psychophysical explorations of mental structures (pp. 138–146). Lewiston, NY: Hogrefe & Huber.
Poulton, E. C. (1977). Quantitative subjective assessments are almost always biased, sometimes completely misleading. British Journal of Psychology, 68, 409–425.
Poulton, E. C. (1989). Bias in quantifying judgments. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rota, L. M., & Zellner, D. A. (2007). The categorization effect in hedonic contrast: Experts differ from novices. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 179–183.
Rozin, P., & Zellner, D. A. (1985). The role of Pavlovian conditioning in the acquisition of food likes and dislikes. In N. S. Braveman & P. Bronstein (Eds.), Experimental assessments and clinical applications of conditional food aversions (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 443, pp. 189–202). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Rutherford, M. D., Chattha, M. H., & Krysko, K. M. (2008). The use of aftereffects in the study of relationships among emotion categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 27–40.
Sarris, V. (2006). Relational psychophysics in humans and animals: A comparative-developmental approach. New York: Psychology Press.
Stevenson, R. J., Tomiczek, C., & Oaten, M. (2007). Olfactory hedonic context affects both self-report and behavioural indices of palatability. Perception, 36, 1698–1708.
Ward, L. M., Armstrong, J., & Golestani, N. (1996). Intensity resolution and subjective magnitude in psychophysical scaling. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 793–801.
Wedell, D. H. (2008). A similarity-based rangefrequency model for two-category rating data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 638–643.
Wedell, D. H., Hicklin, S. K., & Smarandescu, L. O. (2007). Contrasting models of assimilation and contrast. In D. A. Stapel & J. Suls (Eds.), Assimilation and contrast in social psychology (pp. 45–74). New York: Psychology Press.
Zellner, D. A., Allen, D., Henley, M. & Parker, S. (2006). Contrast makes little difference: Good stimuli make mediocre stimuli less good and less different. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 235–239.
Zellner, D. A., Mattingly, M. C., & Parker, S. (2009). Categorization reduces the effect of context on hedonic preference. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 1228–1232.
Zellner, D. A., Rohm, E. A., Bassetti, T. L., & Parker, S. (2003). Compared to what? Effects of categorization on hedonic contrast. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 468–473.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zellner, D.A., Jones, K., Morino, J. et al. Increased hedonic differences despite increases in hedonic range. Atten Percept Psychophys 72, 1261–1265 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.5.1261
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.5.1261