Beware how you compare: comparison direction dictates stimulus-valence-modulated presentation-order effects in preference judgment.

Englund and Hellström (Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 25:82-94, 2012a) found a tendency to prefer the left (first-read) of two attractive alternatives but the right (second-read) of two unattractive alternatives-a valence-dependent word-order effect (WOE). They used stimulus pairs spaced horizontally, and preference was indicated by choosing one of several written statements (e.g., "apple I like more than pear"). The results were interpreted as being due to stimulus position, with the magnitude of the left stimulus having a greater impact on the comparison outcome than the magnitude of the right. Here we investigated the effects of the positioning of the stimuli versus the semantics of the response alternatives (i.e., comparison direction) on the relative impacts of the stimuli. Participants rated preferences for stimuli spaced horizontally with the response alternatives not dictating a comparison direction (Exp. 1), and stimuli spaced vertically using Englund and Hellström's (Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 25:82-94, 2012a) response alternatives, which dictate a comparison direction semantically (Exp. 2). The results showed that the valence-dependent WOE found by Englund and Hellström (Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 25:82-94, 2012a) was not due to the horizontal stimulus positioning per se, but to the induced comparison direction, with the effect probably being mediated by attention directed at the subject of the comparison. We concluded that a set comparison direction is required for the valence-dependent WOE to appear, and that using Hellström's sensation-weighting model to determine stimulus weights is a way to verify the comparison direction.

Presentation-order effects for aesthetic stimulus preference.

For preference comparisons of paired successive musical excerpts, Koh (American Journal of Psychology, 80, 171-185, 1967) found time-order effects (TOEs) that correlated negatively with stimulus valence-the first (vs. the second) of two unpleasant (vs. two pleasant) excerpts tended to be preferred. We present three experiments designed to investigate whether valence-level-dependent order effects for aesthetic preference (a) can be accounted for using Hellström's (e.g., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 460-477, 1979) sensation-weighting (SW) model, (b) can be generalized to successive and to simultaneous visual stimuli, and (c) vary, in accordance with the stimulus weighting, with interstimulus interval (ISI; for successive stimuli) or stimulus duration (for simultaneous stimuli). Participants compared paired successive jingles (Exp. 1), successive color patterns (Exp. 2), and simultaneous color patterns (Exp. 3), selecting the preferred stimulus. The results were well described by the SW model, which provided a better fit than did two extended versions of the Bradley-Terry-Luce model. Experiments 1 and 2 revealed higher weights for the second stimulus than for the first, and negatively valence-level-dependent TOEs. In Experiment 3, there was no laterality effect on the stimulus weighting and no valence-level-dependent space-order effects (SOEs). In terms of the SW model, the valence-level-dependent TOEs can be explained as a consequence of differential stimulus weighting in combination with stimulus valence varying from low to high, and the absence of valence-level-dependent SOEs as a consequence of the absence of differential weighting. For successive stimuli, there were no important effects of ISI on weightings and TOEs, and, for simultaneous stimuli, duration had only a small effect on the weighting.

Time- and space-order effects in timed discrimination of brightness and size of paired visual stimuli.

Despite the importance of both response probability and response time for testing models of choice, there is a dearth of chronometric studies examining systematic asymmetries that occur over time- and space-orders in the method of paired comparisons. In this study, systematic asymmetries in discriminating the magnitude of paired visual stimuli are examined by way of log odds ratios of binary responses as well as by signed response speed. Hierarchical Bayesian modeling is used to map response probabilities and response speed onto constituent psychological process, and processing capacity is also assessed using response time distribution hazard functions. The findings include characteristic order effects that change systematically in magnitude and direction with changes in the magnitude and separation of the stimuli. After Hellström (1979, 2000), sensation weighting (SW) model analyses show that such order effects are reflected in the weighted accumulation of noisy information about the difference between stimulus values over time, and interindividual differences in weightings asymmetries are related to the relative processing capacity of participants. An account of SW based on the use of reference level information and maximization of signal-to-noise ratios is posited, which finds support from theoretically driven analyses of behavioral data.

An inexpensive and accurate method of measuring the force of responses in reaction time research.

Together with reaction time (RT), the force with which people respond to stimuli can provide important clues about cognitive and affective processes. We discuss some of the issues surrounding the accurate measurement and interpretation of response force, and present a response key by which response force can be measured regularly and unobtrusively in RT research. The advantage of the response key described is that it operates like a standard response key of the type used regularly in classic RT experiments. The construction of the response key is described in detail and its potential assessed by way of an experiment examining response force in a simple reaction task to visual stimuli of increasing brightness and size.