Four experiments demonstrated that perceptual fluency can facilitate categorization of others as ingroup members. In Experiment 1 (replications A, B, and C), White participants were first exposed to a group of White target individuals and later judged whether fluent (repeated) and disfluent (novel) targets were members of a particular ingroup or not. In each replication, fluent targets were categorized as ingroup members more readily than were disfluent ones. Experiment 2 replicated and extended this finding by showing that both White (racial ingroup) and Black (racial outgroup) targets were more frequently perceived as school ingroup members when fluent (repeated). In Experiments 3 and 4, fluency was manipulated via visual clarity and, again, fluency engendered more ingroup categorizations than did disfluency, for both racial ingroup and outgroup targets. Moreover, findings from Experiment 4 suggested that liking fully mediated the fluency–ingroup categorization relation. Implications of these findings for the literatures on fluency and intergroup relations are discussed.
AlterA. L.OppenheimerD. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 13, 219–235.
2.
ArkesH. R.HackettC.BoehmL. (1989). The generality of the relation between familiarity and judged validity. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2, 81–94.
3.
BornsteinR. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265–289.
4.
BornsteinR. F. (1993). Mere exposure effects with outgroup stimuli. In MackieD. M.HamiltonD. L. (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 195–211). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
5.
BornsteinR. F.LeoneD. R.GalleyD. J. (1987). The generalizability of subliminal mere exposure effects: Influence of stimuli perceived without awareness on social behavior. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 53, 1070–1079.
6.
BrewerM. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324.
7.
BrewerM. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate?Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444.
8.
BrewerM. B.GardnerW. (1996). Who is this “we?” Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 71, 83–93.
9.
CantorG. N. (1972). Effects of familiarization on children’s ratings of pictures of Whites and Blacks. Child Development, 43, 1219–1229.
10.
CastanoE.YzerbytV.BourguignonD.SeronE. (2002). Who may enter? The impact of in-group identification on in-group/out-group categorization. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 315–322.
11.
ClaypoolH. M.HugenbergK.HousleyM. K.MackieD. M. (2007). Familiar eyes are smiling: On the role of familiarity in the perception of facial affect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 856–866.
12.
CrispR. J.HewstoneM. (1999). Differential evaluation of crossed category groups: Patterns, processes, and reducing intergroup bias. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2, 307–333.
13.
DeschampsJ.-C.DoiseW. (1978). Crossed category memberships in intergroup relations. In TajfelH. (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 141–158). New York, NY: Academic Press.
14.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.IsenA. M.LowranceR. (1995). Group representations and intergroup bias: Positive affect, similarity, and group size. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 856–865.
15.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2005). Understanding and addressing contemporary racism: From aversive racism to the common ingroup identity model. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 615–639.
16.
GaertnerS. L.MannJ.MurrellA.DovidioJ. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 57, 239–249.
17.
HamiltonD. L.TrolierT. K. (1986). Stereotypes and stereotyping: An overview of the cognitive approach. In DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L. (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 127–163). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
18.
HousleyM. K.ClaypoolH. M.Garcia-MarquesT.MackieD. M. (2010). “We” are familiar but “it” is not: Ingroup pronouns trigger feelings of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 114–119.
19.
HugenbergK.BodenhausenG. V. (2004). Ambiguity in social categorization: The role of prejudice and facial affect in race categorization. Psychological Science, 15, 342–345.
20.
JacobyL. L.DallasM. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306–340.
21.
JacobyL. L.KelleyC.BrownJ.JasechkoJ. (1989). Becoming famous overnight: Limits on the ability to avoid unconscious influences of the past. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 56, 326–338.
22.
JacobyL. L.TothJ. P.LindsayD. S.DebnerJ. A. (1992). Lectures for a layperson: Methods for revealing unconscious processes. In BornsteinR. F.PittmanT. S. (Eds.), Perception without awareness: Cognitive, clinical, and social perspectives (pp. 81–120). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
23.
JonesI. F.YoungS. G.ClaypoolH. M. (2011). Approaching the familiar: On the ability of mere exposure to direct approach and avoidance behavior. Motivation & Emotion, 35, 383–392.
24.
JuddC. M.KennyD. A.McClellandG. H. (2001). Estimating and testing mediation and moderation in within-subject designs. Psychological Methods, 6, 115–134.
25.
KundaZ. (1999). Social cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge: MIT Press.
26.
LevineM.CassidyC.BrazierG.ReicherS. (2002). Self-categorization and bystander non-intervention: Two experimental studies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1452–1463.
27.
LeyensJ-P.YzerbytV. Y. (1992). The ingroup overexclusion effect: Impact of valence and confirmation on stereotypical information search. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 549–569.
28.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93–120.
29.
MandlerG.NakamuraY.van ZandtB. J. S. (1987). Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimuli that cannot be recognized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 646–648.
30.
MigdalM. J.HewstoneM.MullenB. (1998). The effects of crossed categorization on intergroup evaluations: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 303–324.
31.
MinearM.ParkD. C. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36, 630–633.
32.
MorelandR. L.BeachS. R. (1992). Exposure effects in the classroom: The development of affinity among students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 255–276.
33.
MorelandR. L.ZajoncR. B. (1982). Exposure effects in person perception: Familiarity, similarity, and attraction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 395–415.
34.
OppenheimerD. M.FrankM. C. (2008). A rose in any other font would not smell as sweet: Effects of perceptual fluency on categorization. Cognition, 106, 1178–1194.
35.
PaladinoM.-P.LeyensJ.-P.RodriguezR.RodriguezA.GauntR.DemoulinS. (2002). Differential association of uniquely and non uniquely human emotions with the ingroup and the outgroup. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5, 105–117.
36.
PerdueC. W.DovidioJ. F.GurtmanM. B.TylerR. B. (1990). Us and them: Social categorization and the process of intergroup bias. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 475–486.
37.
ReberR.SchwarzN. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 8, 338–342.
38.
ReberR.SchwarzN.WinkielmanP. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience?Personality & Social Psychology Review, 8, 364–382.
39.
ReberR.WinkielmanP.SchwarzN. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45–48.
40.
RhodesG.ProffittF.GradyJ. M.SumichA. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 659–669.
41.
RubinM.PaoliniS.CrispR. J. (2010). A processing fluency explanation of bias against migrants. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 21–28.
42.
TajfelH.BilligM. G.BundyR. P.FlamentC. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178.
43.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
44.
UrbanL. M.MillerN. (1998). A theoretical analysis of crossed categorization effects: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 74, 894–908.
45.
YzerbytV. Y.LeyensJ.-P.BellourF. (1995). The ingroup overexclusion effect: Identity concerns in decisions about group membership. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 1–16.
46.
ZebrowitzL. A.WhiteB.WienekeK. (2008). Mere exposure and racial prejudice: Exposure to other-race faces increases liking for strangers of that race. Social Cognition, 26, 259–275.
