RESEARCH ON REPEATED EXPOSURE EFFECTS OF THE STIMULI
RESEARCH ON REPEATED EXPOSURE EFFECTS OF THE STIMULI
复制标题
刺激物重复暴露效应的研究
DOI：
10.2130/jjesp.23.39
复制
发表时间：
1983
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Satoru Inomata
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Satoru Inomata
刺激暴露的频率和对这些刺激的喜好之间的对数关系被称为单纯暴露现象。莫兰和扎荣克断言，接触频率对喜欢的影响是独立的，不受主观识别的影响;换句话说，除了通过主观识别之外，刺激频率对喜欢还有一个旁路。Birnbaum & Mellers将熟悉度和喜欢等级视为主观识别的衡量标准，这是一个预设的潜在过程，并声称有一个因素干预了曝光频率对喜欢和刺激识别的影响。根据Birnbaum的观点，单中介模型中变量间的理论相关矩阵与实际相关矩阵之间的微小差异可能是由于某些因变量与单因素之间存在非线性关系所致，本文采用极大似然法对模型中的变量进行了一系列线性结构关系分析，莫兰和Zajonc验证了双中介变量模型比单中介变量模型对数据的拟合程度更好。在第一个实验中，受试者之前接触过频率为0、1、3、9和27的5个无意义数字，然后在第二个实验中，使用相同的频率向他们提供5个无意义单词。考虑到受试者从未两次看到五种频率的相同刺激。在这些暴露之后，受试者对与上次呈现的刺激相同的刺激以及与第一次呈现的刺激不同的刺激进行刺激识别和喜欢评级。在无意义数字的实验中，与重复刺激暴露相关的吸引力的改善带来了刺激熟悉度的增加。将先前系列中刺激的吸引力和识别率与它们的频率联系起来，相对于莫兰和扎荣茨的数据，评级措施之间的相关性在某种程度上被夸大了。与莫兰和Zajonc的数据相比，暴露频率（log [原始频率+1]）之间的相关性较小;对于无意义词，熟悉度与频率之间的关系几乎保持单调，情感与频率之间的关系呈倒U型趋势。结果，看起来一个中介者模型比两个中介者模型更有效，尽管在无意义数字的情况下差异并不是很大。此外，我们还发现，在无意义词的情况下，双中介模型的承诺仍然成立，与前一种情况。结果表明，无论是单介质还是双介质，刺激的性质都是特化的。
The logarithmic relationship between frequency of stimulus exposure and liking of those stimuli is referred to as the mere exposure phenomenon. Moreland & Zajonc asserted that there is an independent effect of exposure frequency on liking that is not operated by subjective recognition; in other words, there is a by-pass from stimulus frequency to liking, besides the pass through subjective recognition. Birnbaum & Mellers viewed familiarity and liking ratings as measures of subjective recognition that is a presupposed underlying process, and claimed that one factor intervenes the effect of exposure frequency on liking and stimulus recognition. According to Birnbaum's notion, the small discrepancy between theoretical and obtained correlation matrix among variables originated in one-mediator model may be caused by the fact that some of the dependent variables are non-linearly related to the single factor.After having carried out a series of linear structural relationships analyses by maximum likelihood methods, Moreland & Zajonc verified that the two-mediator model provided a significantly better degree of fit to their obtained data than the one-mediator model did.For the purpose of resolving these opposite arguments, two kinds of experiments were done. Subjects were confronted with prior exposures of 5 nonsense figures of 0, 1, 3, 9 and 27 frequencies in the first experiment, and then 5 nonsense words were given to them using the same frequencies in the second experiment. Consideration was paid to the fact that the subjects had never seen the same stimulus at five kinds of frequencies twice. Following these exposures, the subjects made stimulus recognition and liking ratings for the same stimuli as those that were presented the last time and for different stimuli from the ones that were showed for the first time.In the experiment of nonsense figures, the improvement in attractiveness associated with repeated stimulus exposure brought with it an increase of stimulus familiarity. Relating the rated attractiveness and recognition of the stimuli in the prior series to their frequencies, the correlation between the rating measures was somehow inflated, relative to Moreland & Zajonc data. On the other hand, the correlation between exposure frequency (log [raw frequency+1]) looked small compared with Moreland & Zajonc data.For nonsense words, the relationship between familiarity and frequency remained almost monotone, and there was a tendency toward reverse U-shaped relationship among affect and frequency.With respect to the correlation matrix of the obtained data, a computer program, LISREL IV was run. As a result, it looked as if the onemediator model worked better than the two-mediator model, although the differences weren't terribly large in the case of nonsense figures. Moreover, it was found that the promise of the two-mediator model could still hold in the case of nonsense words, together with the former case. It was concluded that properties of the stimuli which need either the one-mediator or two-mediator should be specialized.