Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience?

By Rolf Reber, Norbert Schwarz, Piotr Winkielman. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2004

2,762 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sensory Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fe1213b570cd919912ddd65b715f4a71556016bd

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Sensory Systems

Citations in the corpus

Physical attractiveness of the service worker in the moment of truth and its effects on customer satisfaction (2009, background): “Given that a physically attractive face has several properties that fosters processing fluency—such as symmetry and contrast—theory on processing fluency predicts more favorable evaluations for such faces as opposed to less physically attractive faces (Reber et al., 2004).”
Uniting the Tribes of Fluency to Form a Metacognitive Nation (2009, positive): “Using a more nuanced manipulation of temporal presentation, Reber et al. (1998) exposed participants to geometric patterns for 100ms, 200ms, 300ms, or 400ms.”
Imagery Fluency and Narrative Advertising Effects (2013, background): “———, and Piotr Winkielman (2004), “Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver’s Processing Experience?””
More than Words: On the Importance of Picture–Text Congruence in the Online Environment (2010, methodology): “According to processing fluency accounts, stimuli that can be easily processed are generally evaluated in positive terms and inspire favorable attitudes (Reber et al. 2004; Reber, Winkielman, and Schwarz 1998). Lee and Labroo (2004) extended this view by showing that when a product comes to mind mor”
Bias in Favor of the Status Quo (2012, background): “Finally, there’s no accounting for taste; aesthetic and gustatory evaluations are affected by existence and longevity (Eidelman et al., 2009, 2010), although neither is likely to be mediated by reason (e.g., Reber et al., 2004).”
Experiential product attributes and preferences for new products: The role of processing fluency (2014, background): “Drawing respondents' attention to specific attributes is consistent with the idea that predictive context facilitates fluent processing (Reber et al., 2004).”
FLUENCY AND THE DETECTION OF MISLEADING QUESTIONS : LOW PROCESSING FLUENCY ATTENUATES THE MOSES ILLUSION (2008, neutral): “Relevant variables include semantic (e.g., Reder, 1988) and phonetic (e.g., Shafto & MacKay, 2000) similarity as well as all presentation variables that facilitate fluent processing (for a review see Reber et al., 2004).”
Creativity.4in1: Four-Criterion Construct of Creativity (2014, background): “Reber, Schwarz, and Winkielman (2004) provided empirical evidence that judgments of beauty and judgments of truth both rely on the same mental operations (namely, perceptual and semantic fluency).”
Place the Logo High or Low? Using Conceptual Metaphors of Power in Packaging Design (2014, positive): “Although it may be well-known that conceptual links can create a fluency effect that manifests in preference (Reber, Schwarz, and Winkielman 2004), this line of research has yet to cross perceptual with conceptual space, as is common with metaphoric transfer.”
Feelings, Fit, and Funny Effects: A Situated Cognition Perspective (2006, background): “…numerous phenomena that are of interest to consumer researchers, from Zajonc’s (1968) mere exposure effect to determinants of aesthetic appeal (Reber, Schwarz, and Winkielman 2004) and Lee and Labroo’s (2004) observation of the beneficial effects of exposure to one product (e.g.,…”
Artistic Training and Interest in Visual Art: Applying the Appraisal Model of Aesthetic Emotions (2006, background): “Similarly, it’s unclear how the processing fluency model (Reber et al., 2004) would explain why stimuli that are harder to process (e.g., complex pictures) are more interesting (Experiment 1).”