Everything's Relative? Relative Differences in Processing Fluency and the Effects on Liking

Abstract

Explanations of aesthetic pleasure based on processing fluency have shown that ease-of-processing fosters liking. What is less clear, however, is how processing fluency arises. Does it arise from a relative comparison among the stimuli presented in the experiment? Or does it arise from a comparison to an internal reference or standard? To address these questions, we conducted two experiments in which two ease-of-processing manipulations were applied: either (1) within-participants, where relative comparisons among stimuli varying in processing ease were possible, or (2) between-participants, where no relative comparisons were possible. In total, 97 participants viewed simple line drawings with high or low visual clarity, presented at four different presentation durations, and rated for felt fluency, liking, and certainty. Our results show that the manipulation of visual clarity led to differences in felt fluency and certainty regardless of being manipulated within- or between-participants. However, liking ratings were only affected when ease-of-processing was manipulated within-participants. Thus, feelings of fluency do not depend on the nature of the reference. On the other hand, participants liked fluent stimuli more only when there were other stimuli varying in ease-of-processing. Thus, relative differences in fluency seem to be crucial for liking judgments.

Fig 1. Trial sequence with respective presentation durations to the left.

In Experiment 1, half of the participants were presented with targets with Gaussian noise, the other half of the participants were presented with targets without Gaussian noise. In Experiment 2, participants were presented with both types of targets (with and without Gaussian noise).

Fig 2. Mean ratings of felt fluency, liking, and certainty in Experiment 1.

Means are separated by ease-of-processing (presentation duration of 100, 200, 300, or 400 ms) and by stimulus condition (noise or no-noise). The error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean.

Fig 3. Mean ratings of felt fluency, liking, and certainty in Experiment 2.

Means are separated by ease-of-processing (presentation duration of 100, 200, 300, or 400 ms) and by stimulus condition (noise or no-noise). The error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean.