230 /304
消費者情緒在九尾數定價效果的影響
230
Perceived Processing Fluency
On the level of perception, processing fluency is known as perceptual fluency and
describes the differing degrees of speed, effort and accuracy with which most stimuli are
processed. For example, Novemsky, Dhar, Schwarz, and Simonson (2007) stated that
perceptual fluency might be influenced by variables such as simple repetition, stimulus
clarity, form priming, figure-ground contrast and presentation duration. Other studies have
further demonstrated the relationship between perceptual fluency and incidental emotion.
For example, Reber, Schwarz, and Winkielman (2004) showed that individuals interpret
the positive emotions induced by processing fluency as their response to the target,
thereby resulting in more positive evaluations. That is, the influence of perceptual fluency
on judgment is mediated by the emotional reaction elicited by the target.
Study 1a did not examine how incidental emotion influences one’s perceptual
fluency. Many emotion-related theories indicate that incidental emotion influences the
individual’s cognitive responses. For example, Marcus et al. (2000) stated that negative
emotions lead to more thoughtful decision making because they promote increased
analytic processing and a low level of processing fluency. Moreover, the theory of
emotional intelligence holds that people tend to use emotions — negative ones in
particular — to think deeply about their opinions (Marcus et al., 2000).
Therefore, based on the investigations of Nielsen and Escalas (2010), Reber,
Winkielman, and Schwarz (1998), and Shah and Oppenheimer (2007), Study 1b measured
perceptual processing fluency by asking participants to rate their perceived processing
fluency to three items on a scale ranging from 1 (not at all easy, difficult, fluent, and
quick) to 7 (very easy, difficult, fluent, and quick). Cronbach’s alpha for the three items
measuring perceived processing fluency showed an adequate degree of convergence (α =
.93), indicating it was appropriate to use the averaged response for measurement purposes.
The response time from the end of the emotion induction to completion of all the
questions that followed was also measured to ensure an adequate level of processing
fluency. The results showed that the participants in the positive emotional condition group
spent less time completing the questions than those in the control group (
M
= 53.21, SD =
4.31 versus
M
= 64.16, SD = 9.66, respectively;
t
= 11.48,
p
< .01), who spent less time
answering the questions than those in the negative emotional condition group (
M
= 64.16,
SD = 9.66 versus
M
= 89.31, SD = 11.26, respectively;
t
= 14.23,
p
< .01). There were
significant differences in the response times among the participants in the three groups
(
F
(2, 234) = 71.96,
p
< .01). These results confirmed the appropriateness of the processing
fluency measure adopted.