侯文霞¹, 田欣然¹, 刘立志¹, 易冰¹, 欧玉晓¹, 陈文锋¹(), 尚俊辰²()

¹ 中国人民大学心理学系, 北京 100872
² 东南大学人文学院医学人文学系, 南京 211189

收稿日期:2020-11-06出版日期:2021-07-15发布日期:2021-05-24
通讯作者:陈文锋,尚俊辰E-mail:wchen@ruc.edu.cn;junchen_20081@163.com

基金资助:中国人民大学科学研究基金(中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助)(18XNLG10);中国人民大学科学研究基金(中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助)(19XNLG20);国家自然科学基金项目(31400869);辽宁省社会科学规划基金项目(L19BSH005);中国人民大学“双一流”跨学科重大创新规划平台“哲学与认知科学交叉平台”支持项目成果

Continuum effect in assimilation process of facial attractiveness

HOU Wenxia¹, TIAN Xinran¹, LIU Lizhi¹, YI Bing¹, OU Yuxiao¹, CEHN Wenfeng¹(), SHANG Junchen²()

¹ Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China
² School of Humanities, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China

Received:2020-11-06Online:2021-07-15Published:2021-05-24
Contact:CEHN Wenfeng,SHANG Junchen E-mail:wchen@ruc.edu.cn;junchen_20081@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以往研究表明目标面孔的吸引力评价会偏向背景面孔, 产生同化效应。但同化效应的计算常常是对不同背景下目标面孔吸引力评分进行比较, 并没有考虑目标面孔单独呈现时的吸引力评分, 可能是虚假的同化效应。本文以单独呈现的目标面孔吸引力评分作为基准值计算同化效应, 考察了呈现时间和目标与背景面孔吸引力的差异对目标面孔吸引力评价的影响。结果发现, 个体对目标面孔吸引力的评分会偏向背景面孔的吸引力, 并表现出同化的连续性效应, 即目标和背景面孔的吸引力差异越大, 同化效应越小。

图/表 2

图1实验流程图
图1实验流程图



图23 s和100 ms呈现时间下, 不同AD条件同化效应的比较 注: 1) 除横坐标轴标注m.s. (边缘显著)和n.s. (不显著)外, 其他条件的同化效应都是显著的(ps < 0.01); 2) 3 s: 除了标出n.s.外, 其余水平两两差异均显著(ps < 0.05); 100 ms: 不同AD条件两两比较均不显著
图23 s和100 ms呈现时间下, 不同AD条件同化效应的比较 注: 1) 除横坐标轴标注m.s. (边缘显著)和n.s. (不显著)外, 其他条件的同化效应都是显著的(ps < 0.01); 2) 3 s: 除了标出n.s.外, 其余水平两两差异均显著(ps < 0.05); 100 ms: 不同AD条件两两比较均不显著

参考文献 33

[1]	寇慧, 苏艳华, 张妍, 孔繁昌, 胡媛艳, 王洋, 陈红. (2013). 面孔吸引力的影响因素: 观察者假设. 心理科学进展, 21(12), 2144-2153.
[2]	尚俊辰, 陈文锋, 季琭妍. (2018). 面孔吸引力在认知过程中的作用及其神经机制. 心理科学进展, 26(2), 241-253.
[3]	王妍, 罗跃嘉. (2005). 大学生面孔表情材料的标准化及其评定. 中国临床心理学杂志, 13(4), 396-398.
[4]	Bless, H., & Burger, A. M. (2016). Assimilation and contrast in social priming. Current Opinion in Psychology, 12, 26-31. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.04.018URL
[5]	Bless, H., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Mental construal and the emergence of assimilation and contrast effects: The inclusion/ exclusion model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 319-373.
[6]	Bosch, J., & Wilbert, J. (2020). Contrast and assimilation effects on self-evaluation of performance and task interest in a sample of elementary school children. Frontiers in Education, 4, 165. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00165URL
[7]	Cogan, E., Parker, S., & Zellner, D. A. (2013). Beauty beyond compare: Effects of context extremity and categorization on hedonic contrast. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(1), 16-22. doi: 10.1037/a0031020URL
[8]	Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146URL
[9]	Geiselman, R. E., Haight, N. A., & Kimata, L. G. (1984). Context effects on the perceived physical attractiveness of faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20(5), 409-424. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(84)90035-0URL
[10]	Gerger, G., Forster, M., & Leder, H. (2017). It felt fluent but I did not like it: Fluency effects in faces versus patterns. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 637-648. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2016.1145705URL
[11]	Kenrick, D. T., & Gutierres, S. E. (1980). Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 131-141. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.131URL
[12]	Kondo, A., Takahashi, K., & Watanabe, K. (2012). Sequential effects in face-attractiveness judgment. Perception, 41(1), 43-49. pmid: 22611662
[13]	Lei, Y. T., He, X. Y., Zhao, T. T., & Tian, Z. Y. (2020). Contrast effect of facial attractiveness in groups. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2258. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02258URL
[14]	Liu, C. H., & Chen, W. F. (2018). The boundary of holistic processing in the appraisal of facial attractiveness. Royal Society Open Science, 5(6)
[15]	Luo, A. X., & Zhou, G. M. (2018). Ensemble perception of facial attractiveness. Journal of Vision, 18(8), 7-19.
[16]	Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000). The “relative self” informational and judgmental consequences of comparative self-evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1), 23-38. pmid: 10909875
[17]	Pegors, T. K., Mattar, M. G., Bryan, P. B., & Epstein, R. A. (2015). Simultaneous perceptual and response biases on sequential face attractiveness judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(3), 664-673. doi: 10.1037/xge0000069URL
[18]	Pelham, B. W., & Wachsmuth, J. O. (1995). The waxing and waning of the social self: Assimilation and contrast in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 825-838. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.825URL
[19]	Rashidi, M., Pazhoohi, F., & Hosseinchari, M. (2012). Effect of facial stimuli exposure time on evaluation of facial attractiveness. Australian Journal of Psychology, 64(3), 164-168. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-9536.2011.00050.xURL
[20]	Rodway, P., Schepman, A., & Lambert, J. (2013). The influence of position and context on facial attractiveness. Acta Psychologica, 144(3), 522-529. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.09.004URL
[21]	Schwarz, N., & Bless, H. (1992). Constructing reality and its alternatives: An inclusion/exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp.217-245). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[22]	Seta, J. J., Seta, C. E., & McCormick, M. (2017). Commonalities and differences among frames: A unification model. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(5), 1113-1130. doi: 10.1002/bdm.v30.5URL
[23]	Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10), 1660-1672. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1660URL
[24]	Strack, F. (1992). The different routes to social judgments: Experiential versus informational strategies. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp.249-276). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[25]	Strane, K., & Watts, C. (1977). Females judged by attractiveness of partner. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 45(1), 225-226.
[26]	Stróżak, P., & Zielińska, M. (2019). Different processes in attractiveness assessments for unattractive and highly attractive faces-The role of presentation duration and rotation. Acta Psychologica, 200, 102946. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102946URL
[27]	van Osch, Y., Blanken, I., Meijs, M. H. J., & van Wolferen, J. (2015). A group’s physical attractiveness is greater than the average attractiveness of its members: the group attractiveness effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 559-574. doi: 10.1177/0146167215572799URL
[28]	von Sikorski, C., Heiss, R., & Matthes, J. (2020). How political scandals affect the electorate. Tracing the eroding and spillover effects of scandals with a panel study. Political Psychology, 41(3), 549-568. doi: 10.1111/pops.v41.3URL
[29]	Walker, D., & Vul, E. (2014). Hierarchical encoding makes individuals in a group seem more attractive. Psychological Science, 25(1), 230-235. doi: 10.1177/0956797613497969pmid: 24163333
[30]	Wedell, D. H., Parducci, A., & Geiselman, E. R. (1987). A formal analysis of ratings of physical attractiveness: Successive contrast and simultaneous assimilation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23(3), 230-249. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(87)90034-5URL
[31]	Wegener, D. T., & Petty, R. E. (1997). The flexible correction model: The role of naive theories of bias in bias correction. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp.141-208). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[32]	Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592-598. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.xURL
[33]	Wróbel, M. & Imbir, K. K. (2019). Broadening the perspective on emotional contagion and emotional mimicry: The correction hypothesis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(3), 437-451. doi: 10.1177/1745691618808523URL

相关文章 15

[1]	于全磊, 陈建文, 谭秀娟, 邓雪菲, 赵庆柏, 周治金. 父子(女)间面孔相似性的进化适应机制及其影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(3): 476-485.
[2]	雷怡, 梅颖, 张文海, 李红. 基于知觉的恐惧泛化的认知神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(8): 1391-1403.
[3]	张倩, 陈林林, 杨群. 审判决策过程中的面孔特征效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(4): 698-709.
[4]	尚俊辰, 陈文锋, 季琭妍. 面孔吸引力在认知过程中的作用及其神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(2): 241-253.
[5]	胡晶晶, 曹立人, John Mollonb. 掩蔽刺激与目标刺激的语义相似度对掩蔽效果的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(suppl.): 4-4.
[6]	陈丽君;江洁;任志洪;袁宏. “阳刚”还是“清秀”更具吸引力？ ——对男性面孔二态性不同偏好的元分析[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(4): 553-569.
[7]	徐华伟; 牛盾; 李倩. 面孔吸引力和配偶价值：进化心理学视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(7): 1130-1138.
[8]	李振兴;郭成;邓欢;毛俊;邹文谦;王芳. 维度比较：个体内不同领域的比较[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(4): 603-611.
[9]	常欣;王沛. 晚期二语者句法加工过程的调节因素及其效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2015, 23(2): 225-233.
[10]	张慧;徐富明;李彬;罗寒冰;刘程浩. 选择盲：你不一定知道自己在选择什么[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(8): 1312-1318.
[11]	张登浩;滕飞;潘雪. 他评：一种有效的人格评价手段[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(1): 38-47.
[12]	寇慧;苏艳华;张妍;孔繁昌;胡媛艳;王洋;陈红. 面孔吸引力的影响因素：观察者假设[J]. 心理科学进展, 2013, 21(12): 2144-2153.
[13]	杨昭宁;侯书伟. 基于候选人面孔的特质推理与投票决策[J]. 心理科学进展, 2011, 19(7): 1047-1053.
[14]	李鸥; 陈红. 面孔吸引力的回顾与前瞻[J]. 心理科学进展, 2010, 18(3): 472-479.
[15]	邢淑芬;俞国良. 社会比较：对比效应还是同化效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2006, 14(6): 944-949.

PDF全文下载地址:

http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=5504