Six mediating explanations of exposure effects were reviewed. Existing evidence suggests that correlated hypotheses, response competition, or attitude formation can explain exposure effects on novel stimuli, but only attitude formation can explain exposure effects on meaningful stimuli. It was suggested that future research should resolve technical problems and then study all mediating processes as contributing factors rather than as sufficient causes if exposure effects are to be more fully understood.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brickman, P. , Redfield, J., Harrison, A. A., & Crandall, R.Drive and predisposition as factors in the attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1972, 8, 31-44.
2.
Burgess, T. D. G., II , & Sales, S. M.Attitudinal effects of "mere exposure": A reevaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1971, 7, 461-472.
3.
Grush, J. E.Attitude formation and mere exposure phenomena: A non-artifactual explanation of empirical findings . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 33, 281-290. (a)
4.
Grush, J. E.Attitude formation, novel stimuli, and exposure effects . Resources in Education, 1976, 11, 74. (b)
5.
Harrison, A. A.Response competition, frequency, exploratory behavior and liking . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 9, 363-368.
6.
Harrison, A. A. Mere exposure. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10). New York: Academic Press, 1977.
7.
Matlin, M. W.Response competition as a mediating factor in the frequency-affect relationship . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970, 16, 536-552.
8.
Moreland, R. L. , & Zajonc, R. B.A strong test of exposure effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1976, 12, 170-179.
9.
Moreland, R. L. , & Zajonc, R. B.Is stimulus recognition a necessary condition for the occurrence of exposure effects?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977, 35, 191-199.
10.
Perlman, D. , & Oskamp, S.The effects of picture content and exposure frequency on evaluations of Negroes and Whites. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1971, 7, 503-514.
11.
Saegart, S. , Swap, W., & Zajonc, R. B.Exposure, context, and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973, 25, 234-242.
12.
Sawyer, A. G.Demand artifacts in laboratory experiments in consumer research . Journal of Consumer Research, 1975, 1, 20-30.
13.
Staats, A. W. , & Staats, C. K.Effect of number of trials on the language conditioning of meaning. Journal of General Psychology, 1959, 61, 211-223.
14.
Stang, D. J.Intuition as artifact in mere exposure studies . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 30, 647-653.
15.
Stang, D. J.Effects of "mere exposure" on learning and affect . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 7-12.
16.
Suedfeld, P. , Epstein, Y. M., Buchanan, E., & Landon, P. B.Effect of set on the "effects of mere exposure."Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 17, 121-123.
17.
Zajonc, R. B.Attitudinal effects of mere exposure . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Monograph Supplement, 1968, 9 (2, Pt. 2), 1-27.
