Abstract
Test stimuli are rated less “good” following very good context stimuli than when presented either alone or following neutral context stimuli. This diminution in rating is calledhedonic contrast. In two experiments, the degree of hedonic contrast depended on how subjects were instructed to categorize context and test stimuli. Contrast was substantially attenuated if context and test stimuli were said to belong to different categories. The effect was demonstrated for beverages (Experiment 1) and birds (Experiment 2). Stimuli’s hedonic ratings were far less affected by other stimuli declared to belong to a different category than by stimuli declared to belong to a common category.
Article PDF
References
Beebe-Center, J. G. (1965).The psychology of pleasantness and unpleasantness. New York: Russell & Russell. (Original work published 1932)
Bevan, W., &Pritchard, J. F. (1963). The anchor effect and the problem of relevance in the judgment of shape.Journal of General Psychology,69, 147–161.
Brown, D. R. (1953). Stimulus-similarity and the anchoring of subjective scales.American Journal of Psychology,66, 199–214.
Brown, J., Novick, N., Lord, K., &Richards, J. (1992). When Gulliver travels: Social context, psychological closeness, and self-appraisals.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,62, 717–727.
Conner, M., Land, D., &Booth, D. (1987). Effect of stimulus range on judgements of sweetness intensity in a lime drink.British Journal of Psychology,78, 357–364.
Coren, S., &Enns, J. T. (1993). Size contrast as a function of conceptual similarity between test and inducers.Perception & Psychophysics,54, 579–588.
Coren, S., &Miller, J. (1974). Size contrast as a function of figural similarity.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 355–357.
Fechner, G. T. (1898).Vorschule der Aesthetik II (2nd ed.). Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
Frederiksen, J. R. (1975). Two models for psychophysical judgment: Scale invariance with changes in stimulus range.Perception & Psychophysics,17, 147–157.
Harris, A. J. (1929). An experiment on affective contrast.American Journal of Psychology,41, 617–624.
Harris, A. J. (1932). Affective contrast between modalities.American Journal of Psychology,44, 289–299.
Herr, P. M. (1986). Consequences of priming: Judgment and behavior.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,51, 1106–1115.
Kamenetzky, J. (1959). Contrast and convergence effects in ratings of foods.Journal of Applied Psychology,43, 47–52.
Manis, M., Nelson, T. E., &Shedler, J. (1988). Stereotypes and social judgment: Extremity, assimilation, and contrast.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,55, 28–36.
Martin, L., Seta, J., &Crelia, R. (1990). Assimilation and contrast as a function of people’s willingness and ability to expend effort in forming an impression.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,59, 27–37.
Parducci, A. (1995).Happiness, pleasure, and judgment: The contextual theory and its applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pelham, B. W., &Wachsmuth, J. O. (1995). The waxing and waning of the social self: Assimilation and contrast in social comparison.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,69, 825–838.
Pol, H. E. H., Hijman, R., Baare, W. F. C., &van Ree, J. M. (1998). Effects of context on judgments of odor intensities in humans.Chemical Senses,23, 131–135.
Sarris, V. (1976). Effects of stimulus range and anchor value on psychophysical judgment. In H.-G. Geissler & Y. M. Zaprodin (Eds.),Advances in psychophysics (pp. 253–268). Berlin: VEB Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.
Stapel, D. A., &Koomen, W. (1997). Social categorization and perceptual judgment of size: When perception is social.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,73, 1177–1190.
Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., &van der Pligt, J. (1997). Categories of category accessibility: The impact of trait concept versus exemplar priming on person judgments.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,33, 47–76.
Stapel, D. A., &Winkielman, P. (1998). Assimilation and contrast as a function of context-target similarity, distinctness, and dimensional relevance.Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,24, 634–646.
Wanke, M., Bless, H., &Igou, E. (2001). Next to a star: Paling, shining, or both? Turning interexemplar contrast into interexemplar assimilation.Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,27, 14–29.
Wundt, W. (1894).Lectures on human and animal psychology (J. E. Creighton & E. B. Titchener, Trans.). New York: Macmillan. (Original work published 1892)
Zellner, D., Kern, B., &Parker, S. (2002). Protection for the good: Subcategorization reduces hedonic contrast.Appetite,38, 175–180.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Portions of this work have been presented to the International Society for Psychophysics.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zellner, D.A., Rohm, E.A., Bassetti, T.L. et al. Compared to what? Effects of categorization on hedonic contrast. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10, 468–473 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196508
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196508