Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Short Research Article

Disfluent, But Fast

Inverted-U Shaped Effect of Fluency on Decision Times

Published Online:October 11, 2019https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000456

Abstract

Abstract. Processing fluency, a metacognitive feeling of ease of cognitive processing, serves as a cue in various types of judgments. Processing fluency is sometimes evaluated by response times, with shorter response times indicating higher fluency. The present study examined existence of the opposite association; that is, it tested whether disfluency may lead to faster decision times when it serves as a strong cue in judgment. Retrieval fluency was manipulated in an experiment using previous presentation and phonological fluency by varying pronounceability of pseudowords. Participants liked easy-to-pronounce and previously presented words more. Importantly, their decisions were faster for hard-to-pronounce and easy-to-pronounce pseudowords than for pseudowords moderate in pronounceability. The results thus showed an inverted-U shaped relationship between fluency and decision times. The findings suggest that disfluency can lead to faster decision times and thus demonstrate the importance of separating different processes comprising judgment when response times are used as a measure of processing fluency.

References

  • Albrecht, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). The Fluency Amplification Model: Fluent stimuli show more intense but not evidently more positive evaluations. Acta Psychologica, 148, 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.02.002 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309341564 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Baayen, R. H., & Milin, P. (2015). Analyzing reaction times. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 12–28. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.807 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bahník, Š., & Vranka, M. (2017). If it’s difficult to pronounce, it might not be risky: The effect of fluency on judgment of risk does not generalize to new stimuli. Psychological Science, 28, 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616685770 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious mixed models. ArXiv e-print: 1506.04967 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Casasanto, D. (2014). Bodily relativity. In L. ShapiroEd., Routledge handbook of embodied cognition (pp. 108–117). London, UK: Routledge. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Laham, S. M., Koval, P., & Alter, A. L. (2012). The name-pronunciation effect: Why people like Mr. Smith more than Mr. Colquhoun. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 752–756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.12.002 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Monin, B., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2005). Correlated averages vs. averaged correlations: Demonstrating the warm glow heuristic beyond aggregation. Social Cognition, 23, 257–278. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2005.23.3.257 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Nickerson, C. A. (1995). Does willingness to pay reflect the purchase of moral satisfaction? A reconsideration of Kahneman and Knetsch. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 28, 126–133. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1995.1009 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Owen, H. E., Halberstadt, J., Carr, E. W., & Winkielman, P. (2016). Johnny Depp, reconsidered: How category-relative processing fluency determines the appeal of gender ambiguity. PLoS One, 11(2), e0146328. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146328 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 260–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00008 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Reber, R., Wurtz, P., & Zimmermann, T. D. (2004). Exploring “fringe” consciousness: The subjective experience of perceptual fluency and its objective bases. Consciousness and Cognition, 13, 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8100(03)00049-7 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Thomas, M., & Morwitz, V. G. (2009). The ease-of-computation effect: The interplay of metacognitive experiences and naive theories in judgments of price differences. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.46.1.81 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Unkelbach, C. (2007). Reversing the truth effect: Learning the interpretation of processing fluency in judgments of truth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.1.219 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Unkelbach, C., & Rom, S. C. (2017). A referential theory of the repetition-induced truth effect. Cognition, 160, 110–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.12.016 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Voss, A., Nagler, M., & Lerche, V. (2013). Diffusion models in experimental psychology. Experimental Psychology, 60, 385–402. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000218 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Whittlesea, B. W., Jacoby, L. L., & Girard, K. (1990). Illusions of immediate memory: Evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 716–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90045-2 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Winkielman, P., Olszanowski, M., & Gola, M. (2015). Faces in-between: Evaluations reflect the interplay of facial features and task-dependent fluency. Emotion, 15, 232–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000036 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., & Belli, R. F. (1998). The role of ease of retrieval and attribution in memory judgments: Judging your memory as worse despite recalling more events. Psychological Science, 9, 124–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00022 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment. In J. MuschK. C. KlauerEds., The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 189–217). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar