Tài liệu Novelty and Human Aesthetic Preferences docx

LINK DOWNLOAD MIỄN PHÍ TÀI LIỆU "Tài liệu Novelty and Human Aesthetic Preferences docx": http://123doc.vn/document/1055916-tai-lieu-novelty-and-human-aesthetic-preferences-docx.htm

reported
an
initial increase in
liking
with
moderate
degrees
of
familiarization,
followed
by
a decline
with
increased
familiarization.
Our
own
studies,
discussed
later
in
this
chapter,
have
confirmed
this
finding
with
several classes
of
stimuli.
Several
theories,
all
but
the
most
recent
of
which
are
discussed
and
critically
evaluated
in
Harrison
(1977),
have
been
proposed
to
explain
the
empirical
evidence
on
familiarity
and
liking.
Some
of
these
theories
have
fared
badly
in
experimental
tests,
and
others
seem
either
inadequate
to
account
for the full
range
of
empirical
evidence
or
are
deficient
on
other
grounds.
The
most
per-
suasive
theories
share
the
common
assumption
that
the
universal
relationship
between
familiarity
and
liking
takes
the
form
of
an
inverted
U,
with
liking
rising
at
low levels
of
familiarity
and
then
declining.
Various
factors
have
been
proposed
to
account
for
the
parameters
of
this
hypothesized
function.
The
peak
of
the
curve
may
occur
at
very
high
levels
of
familiarity
under
certain
conditions,
leading
to a
monotonic
increase
in
liking
- a
mere-exposure
effect
- across
the
limited
range
of
exposure
that
it
is
possible to
investigate
in
experiments
based
on
the
methods
pioneered
by
Zajonc.
Under
different
conditions,
the
peak
may
occur
at
very
low levels
of
familiarity,
yielding
a
monotonic
decrease
in
liking
across
most
of
the
exposure
range
as
found
in
some
of
the
studies
mentioned
in
the
previous
paragraph.
The
inverted-U
curve,
in
the
form
originally
suggested
by
Wundt
and
later
adapted
by
Berlyne
(1971)
and
others,
is
depicted
in
Fig.
11.I(a).
According
to
Berlyne,
the
hedonic
value
of
a
stimulus
is a
function,
which
rises
to
a
peak
and
then
falls,
of
a
person's
arousal;
and
arousal
is
hypothesized
to
be
directly
related
to
the
novelty
of
the
stimulus.
We
have
indicated
elsewhere
(Sluckin
et
al., 1980)
that
the
notion
of
zero
novelty
implies
total
familiarity.
However,
such
complete
familiarity
can
never,
strictly
speaking,
be
achieved;
rather,
familiar-
ity
may
be
regarded
as
increasing,
with
continued
exposure
to
the
stimulus,
ad
infinitum.
Complete
unfamiliarity,
on
the
other
hand,
is
more
easily
conceived
of; it
occurs
with
nil
exposure
to
the
stimulus.
Fig. 11.1
(b)
shows
favourability
as a
function
of
familiarity,
the
latter
increasing
from
zero
to
infinity.
In
this
formulation,
a
strange
stimulus
is
assumed
to
be
initially
somewhat
unattractive
rather
than
of
neutral
affective
value;
this is
consistent
with
a
great
deal
of
empirical
evidence,
in
spite
of
the
widespread
belief
that
there
is
something
inherently
attractive
about
novelty
(Harrison,
1977).
The
most
influential
theories
concerning
the
relationship
between
familiarity
and
liking
are
the
response-competition
and
two-factor
theories.
These
theories
will
be
discussed
briefly
in
the
following
paragraphs.
We
shall also
say
a few
words
about
the
recently
proposed
scheme
theory.
According
to
response-competition
theory
(Harrison,
1968;
Matlin,
1970),
an
unfamiliar
stimulus
usually
contains
elements
reminiscent
of
a
diversity
of
previously
encountered
stimuli,
and
these
elements
generally elicit
mutually
incompatible
or
antagonistic
cognitive·
and
behavioural
tendencies.
The
coexistence
of
mutually
incompatible
response
tendencies
in a
person
con-
fronted
with
an
unfamiliar
stimulus
is
held
to
result
in
an
aversive
drive
state
leading
to
negative
affect
and
to
a dislike
of
the
stimulus.
Subsequent
exposure
leads to
cognitive
restructuring:
one
class
of
response
tendencies
typically
gains
249
+
Pleasantness (Wundt)
Hedonic value (Bedyne)
Stimulus intensity (Wundt)
Arousal (Bedyne)
Novelty (Bedyne)
o~ ~
+
(a) The Wundt/Berlyne curve
Favourability
+
Familiarity/time
o~~~ ~~
+
(b) The hypothesized curve linking favourability
to
familiarity/time
Fig.
11.1
Inverted
V-curves.
(Reproduced
from
W.
Sluckin,
A.
M.
Colman
and
D.
J.
Hargreaves
(1980)
British
Journal
tif Psychology,
71,
163-169,
by
permission.)
dominance
over
the
others
as
the
stimulus
is
fitted
into
a
meaningful
conceptual
framework,
and
incompatible
tendencies
are
weakened
or
suppressed.
The
reduction
of
response
competition
alleviates
tension
and
negative afTect,
and
leads to
increased
liking
-
or,
strictly
speaking,
decreased
disliking - for
the
stimulus.
In
its
original
form,
response-competition
theory
provides
an
explanation
for
the
mere-exposure
effect
but
fails to
account
for
the
negative
and
inverted-U
effects
found
in
some
experiments.
The
theory
has
therefore
been
modified
to
take
account
of
these findings.
Saegert
& J ellison (1970)
proposed
that
an
intermediate level
of
response
competition
is
maximally
pleasurable,
so
that
beyond
a
certain
point
increased
exposure,
by
reducing
response
competition
below
the
optimal
level, leads
to
a
decline
in liking.
The
number
of
exposures
required
to
reach
the critical
point
should
be
relatively small if
the
stimulus
is
simple, since in
that
case few associative
response
tendencies
will be elicited. If,
on
the
other
hand,
the
stimulus
is
complex,
the
optimal
level
of
response
competition
should
be
reached
only
after
a relatively
large
number
of
exposures,
since
many
potentially
antagonistic
response
tendencies
will initially
be elicited
by
it.
Two-factor
theories
are
based
on
the
assumption
that
exposure
produces
a
pair
of
opposing
tendencies
that
in
combination
may
result
in positive,
negative,
or
inverted-U
effects.
Berlyne
(1970, 1971)
suggested
that
exposure
generates
both
a habituation
or
reduction
oj
uncertainty effect
leading
to
increased
liking,
and
a satiation
or
boredom
effect whose
influence
on
liking
is
negative.
When
a
stimulus
is
unfamiliar,
habituation
predominates
and
exposure
therefore
leads
to
increased
liking.
Once
a
stimulus
has
become
familiar,
however,
satiation
gains
ascendancy
and
further
exposure
leads to
decreased
liking.
If
the
stimulus
is
simple,
the
habituation
phase
will be
completed
after
relatively few
exposures
and
the
predominant
trend
will be a decline
in
liking;
but
if
it
is
complex,
the
peak
of
the
favourability
curve
may
never
be
reached
through
laboratory
exposures.
A slightly
different
two-factor
theory
has
been
proposed
by
Stang
(1974, 1975):
according
to
this
version
the
opposing
tenden-
cies
are
progress
oj
learning
and
satiation.
According
to
Stang's
theory,
repeated
exposure
is
accompanied
by
learning
about
the
stimulus,
and
as
learning
progresses
the
stimulus
becomes
more
pleasing.
Once
the
stimulus
has
been
learned,
an
unpleasant
state
of
satiation,
or
boredom,
is
hypothesized
to
develop,
causing
the
pleasingness
of
the
sti-
mulus
to
decline.
If
this
theory
is
correct,
conditions
of
repeated
exposure
that
favour
learning
and
minimize
satiation
(e.g.,
spaced
exposure
of
complex,
novel
stimuli)
should
produce
familiarity-favourability
functions
resembling
learning
curves;
but
conditions
favouring
both learning
and
satiation
should
produce
inverted-
U functions
(Stang,
1975).
The
most
recent
theoretical
contribution
is
Eckblad's
(1981,
pp.
83-89)
scheme
theory.
According
to
this
theory,
the
process
oflearning
new
perceptual
schemes for
recognizing,
classifying
and
discriminating
among
unfamiliar
stimuli is
inherently
pleasurable,
but
repeated
exposure
to
stimuli
that
are
already
recognizable
in
terms
of
existing
perceptual
schemes
generates
neutral
251
or
negative
affect,
manifested
by
inattention
or
boredom.
The
location
of
the
peak
of
the
curve,
according
to
scheme
theory,
depends
on
the
degree
of
recog-
nizability
of
the
stimuli.
The
larger
the
number
of
exposures
required
to
build
up
the
schemes
necessary
for
recognizing
the
stimuli,
the
later
the
peak
of
the
curve.
When
the
requisite
schemes
are
more-or-less
complete,
liking
passes its
maximum
and
begins
to decline.
Response-competition,
two-factor,
and
scheme
theories
all
postulate
a
universal
inverted-U
function
linking
familiarity
and
liking.
The
parameters
of
the
curve
are
assumed
to
depend,
among
other
things,
on
the
complexity
or
recognizability
of
the
stimuli.
Monotonic
mere
exposure
effects,
such
as
those
discussed
earlier
in
this section,
are
assumed
to
represent
only
the
rising
part
of
the
underlying
inverted
U.
Using
the
traditional
experimental
procedures
pioneered
by.
Zajonc
(1968), initially
unfamiliar
stimuli
can
be
exposed
only
a
few
hundred
times
at
most,
and
the
peak
of
the
curve
may
often
lie
beyond
the
reach
of
such
investigations.
Our
own
research
methodology
discussed
in
the
following sections,
on
the
other
hand,
allows a vastly
wider
range
of
familiarity,
from
complete
novelty
to literally millions
of
exposures,
to
be
investigated.
11.2
Experimental
Procedures
Experimental
findings
and
conclusions in
studies
of
aesthetic
preferences
are
to
a
degree
determined
by
the
methods
used
in
the
experiments.
We
have
already
seen
that
if
the
type
of
stimulus
material
chosen
is
generally
unfamiliar
to
the
particular
group
of
subjects,
then
the
less
strange
the
stimuli
the
better
they
will
be
liked;
and
the
risk
is
that
a
generalization
will
be
formed
that
liking
is
simply
an
ever-increasing
function
of
stimulus
familiarity.
What
may
be
more
important
is
that
experimental
procedures
for assessing aesthetic
preferences
-
e.g.
whether
pair
comparisons
or
rankings
are
used
- could
influence
results.
Likewise,
experimental
findings
can
be
affected
by
the
choice
of
familiarity
measures
-
whether
a
su~jective
scale
of
familiarity
is
used,
or
an
objective
measure
of
time
or
frequency
of
exposure
of
subject
to
the
stimulus
is
employed.
Our
own
experimental
studies
have
tended
to differ
procedurally,
sometimes
slightly
and
sometimes
radically, from
previous
relevant
investigations.
Therefore,
it
seemed
worthwhile
to
focus
attention
in
the
first place
on
the
methodological
aspects
of
our
work,
and
only
afterwards
report
our
findings
stage
by
stage.
We
have
refrained
from
adopting
the
well-known
'before-and-after'
pro-
cedure
of
testing
attitudes.
In
some
of
our
work
we
have
used
stimuli
with
which
our
experimental
subjects
would
be
familiar
to
varying
degrees
as a
result
of
everyday
experience
outside
the
laboratory.
In
the
case
of
each
stimulus
we
obtained
an
assessment
of
our
subjects'
familiarity
with
it,
and
we
proceeded
to
assess
their
liking
for it.
Thus,
we
tested
each
subject
for
favourability
not
twice,
before
and
after
an
experimental
exposure
to
the
stimulus,
but
only
on
a single
occasion.
There
are
two
advantages
in
this
method.
One
may
be called
procedural:
a
once-only
testing
session is
simple
to
organize
and
enables
the
252
experimenter
to
'round
up'
relatively
large
numbers
of
subjects
without
worrying
about
getting
them
back
for a
second
testing
session
or
exposing
them
to
tedious
repetition.
The
other
advantage
may
be
described
as
methodological:
prior
real-life
experience
of
stimuli
can
provide
for a
very
wide
range
of
stimulus
familial-ity;
this
is
important
if
our
main
aim
is
to
study
liking
as a
function
of
familiarity.
In
some
of
our
more
recent
studies
wc
have
assigned
our
subjects
in a
random
manner
either
to a
group
in
which
each
subject
rates
stimuli
for
familiarity
or
to
a
group
in
which
each
subject
rates
stimuli
on
a scale
ofliking.
Technically
this
is a
between-subjects
experimental
design.
It
has
been
used
occasionally
in
earlier
studies
(Harrison,
1969;
Moreland
&
Zajonc,
1977).
The
advantage
of
this
design
over
the
within-subjects
one
is
that
judgments
of
familiarity
and
favourability
cannot
mutually
influence
each
other.
Such
influence
could
'contaminate'
findings
when
the
subjects
have
some
ideas,
as
many
might
have,
as
to
how
familiarity
and
liking
are
related.
In
some
of
our
experiments
stimulus
familiarity
was
inferred
from
the
sti-
mulus
type.
For
example,
nonsense
syllables
were
considered
to
be
unfamiliar
stimuli,
uncommon
words
were classed
as
somewhat
familiar,
and
very
common
words
as
very
familiar
stimuli.
In
other
experiments
we
used
the
subjects'
own
subjective
assessments
of
stimulus
familiarity.
Other
workers
pre-
ferred
in
the
past
to rcly
on
objective
measures
of
familiarity,
such
as
those
based
on
the
duration
of
exposure
of
the
subject
to
the
stimulus.
However,
subjective
measures
indicate
the
subject's
familiarity
with
the
stimulus
in
the
most
direct
manner.
Further,
it has
been
shown
(Harrison,
1977)
that
at
least
in
some
situations
subjective
assessments
are
better
than
objective
measures
of
familiarity
at
predicting
aesthetic
preferences.
11.3
Preferences
for
Letters
and
Words
It
is
somewhat
surprising
that
people
should
have
preferences
among
ordinary
letters
of
the
alphabet
-
that
they
should
like
some
and
not
others.
However,
whenever
presented
with
a
card
displaying
two
letters
children
in
our
own
investigations
have
always readily said
which
of
the
two
they
liked
the
better;
and
their
replies
have
turned
out
to
show
a
consistent
pattern.
An
early
study
involved
the
use
of
capital
Roman-alphabet
and
Cyrillic-alphabet
letters
as
stimuli
(Sluckin
et
al., 1973).
The
subjects
were
147
children
recruited
from
schools
in
Louisville,
Kentucky,
USA,
at
a
time
when
one
of
us
(W.S.)
was
on
a
research
assignment
at
the
University
of
Louisville.
One
group
of
subjects
ranged
in
age
from
4.3
years
to
6.6
years,
with
a
mean
age
of
5
years
1month.
The
other
group
ranged
from
9.4
years
to
11.11
years,
the
mean
age
being
10
years
7
months.
Very
briefly,
each
subject
was
tested
individually
by
the
pair
comparison
method;
hc/she
had
to
say
which
of
the
two
things
shown
on
a
card
he/she
liked
the
better.
72
cards
were
presented
to
each
subject
in
a
random
order.
The
Roman
and
Cyrillic
letters,
and
examples
of
cards
used,
are
shown
in
Fig.
11.2.
253
DEHTRN
6l'1Wu.<pn
Fig.
11.2
Roman
and
CyrilIic
letters
and
examples
of
cards
used.
(Reproduced
from
W.
Sluckin,
L.
B.
Miller
and
H.
Franklin
(1973)
British
Journal
of
Psychology,
64,
563-567,
by
permission.
The
younger
children
were
at
the stage
of
just
learning
to
read
whereas
the
older
children
were
already
well able
to
read.
Thus,
the
younger
group
were
fairly
familiar
with
ordinary
Roman
letters,
and
the
older
children
were
very
familiar
indeed
with
such
letters.
The
Cyrillic
letters
were,
from
the
point
of
view
of
all
the
children,
simply letter-like shapes. All in all, we
found
that
the
younger
children
very
strongly
preferred
the
Roman-alphabet
letters.
Since
the
two sets
of
letters
had
been
fairly alike
with
regard
to
straight
and
curved
line
components,
the
most
probable
reason
for
our
finding
was
that
the
letters
that
were
preferred
had
been
quite
familiar,
whereas
the
non-preferred
Cyrillic
letters
had
been
unfamiliar
to
the
younger
children.
The
older
children
also
liked
better
the
familiar
shapes
than
the
strange
ones,
but
this
preference
was
much
less
marked
than
in
the
case
ofthe
younger
children.
The
conclusion
from
our
study
was
that
the
liking
of
children
for
letters
was
initially a
direct
function
of
familiarity,
resulting
from
exposure
of
the
children
to
the
letters.
However,
much
more
exposure
to letters
did
not
lead
to
an
increased
preference
for
them
over
the
letter-like
shapes
and,
on
the
contrary,
extra
exposure
resulted
in a
reduction
of
preference
for
the
familiar
shapes.
There
could
also,
of
course,
be
less
fear
of
novelty
with
increasing
age in
children;
or
both
effects, less
neophobia
and
a
decline
in the
liking
for
highly
familiar
stimuli,
could
occur
all
at
once
as
children
advance
in age.
Some
years
later
some
of
us set
out
to
investigate
the
preferences
of
children
and
young
adults
for
common
words,
uncommon
words
and
nonsense
words
(Colman
et
al., 1975).
Two
separate
experiments
were
conducted.
In
the first
of
them,
the
subjects
were
(a)
156-
to 7
-year-old
children,
(b)
15
10- to
11-year-old
children,
both
from
a
primary
school
in
Northamptonshire,
and
(c)
17
18-
to
20-year-old
Combined
Studies
students
from
the
University
of
Leicester. All
the
stimuli
were
consonant-vowel-consonant
trigrams.
Eight
words
were
used,
VIZ.
BAG,
TAP,
LEG,
PEN,
LID,
DOT,JUGandCUP;
and
eight
non-words,
254
viz.
YAD,
VAB,
FEP,
KEB,
MIB,
JOM,
VUD
and
CUG.
Every
possible
combination
of
word
and
nonsense
syllable
was
printed
in lower-case
letters
on
a
separate
card,
once
with
the
word
on
the
left
and
once
with
the
word
on
the
right,
adding
up
to 128
cards
altogether.
The
children
were tested
individually
for
preference
as
between
the
two
stimuli
on
each
card.
In
this
experiment
all
the
groups
of
subjects
showed
a
preference
for
words
over
non-words.
Most
probably
this
simply
reflected a
preference
for
the
familiar
stimuli
over
the
unfamiliar
ones.
In
the
second
experiment
in
the
study
mentioned
above,
the
subjects
were
(a)
20
7-year-old
children,
(b)
20 9-
to
lO-year
old
children
and
(c)
20
18- to
21-year-old
students.
The
stimuli
this
time
were
six
very
common
words,
viz.
APPLE,
WINDOW,
TRUMPET,
BOTTLE,
RABBIT
and
TEACHER,
and
six
relatively
uncommon
words
(roughly
matching
the
common
ones),
viz.
GUAVA,
CORNICE,
CORNET,
CARAFE,
WOMBAT
and
MENTOR.
The
pair-comparison
method,
as
between
common
and
uncommon
words,
was
used
again.
The
results
were
this
time
markedly
different from
those
of
Experiment
I
(but
not
altogether
unexpected).
Children
in
both
groups
pre-
ferred
common
to
uncommon
words,
but
young
adults
showed
a
significant
preference
for
the
uncommon
words.
It
looked
as
if
the
uncommon,
less
familiar
words
were
perhaps
more
interesting
to
the
young
adults;
at
any
rate,
they
were
certainly
more
pleasing.
The
results
of
both
experiments
may
be
brought
together
to
make
sense
in
the
manner
shown
in
Fig. 11.3.
Within
the
Cartesian
coordinates
one
graph
repre-
sents
the
way
familiarity
and
favourability
are
related
in
the
case
of
children.
Broadly,
the
more
familiar
the
stimuli
- progressively
non-words,
uncommon
words
and
common
words
-
the
more
they
are
liked.
The
other
graph
repre-
sents
the
relationship
between
familiarity
and
favourability
for
young
adults.
Here
the
very
unfamiliar
stimuli
(non-words)
and
the very
familiar
ones
Children
Familiarity
Fig.
11.3

,
Non-words;
.,
uncommon
words;
.,
common
words.
(See
explanation
in
text.)
(Reproduced
from
A.
M.
Colman,
M.
WaIley
and
W.
Sluckin
(1975)
British
Journal
of
Psychology, 66,
481-486,
by
permission.
)
255
(common
words)
are
liked less
than
the
stimuli
of
intermediate
familiarity
(uncommon
words);
thus
the
relationship
for
adults
is,
at
least
partly,
of
the
inverted-U
kind.
It
may
be
surmised
that
in
the
case
of
children
even
the
common
words
are
not
yet
familiar
enough
to
have
reached
the
peak
of
the
inverted-U
curve;
a
great
deal
more
exposure
to
words
may
be
needed
before
some
of
them
can
become
so
ordinary
and
boring
as to
diminish
in
their
aesthe-
tic
appeal.
Several
years
later
we set
out
once
again
to
investigate
people's
likes
and
dis-
likes
of
words
as a
function
of
the
experienced
frequency
of
their
occurrence
(Sluckin
et
al., 1980).
The
method
of
investigation
this
time
was
quite
different.
Our
subjects,
33
adults,
ranging
in
age
from
19
to
43
years,
had
to
rate
either
the
familiarity
of
each
one
of
100
words
on
a
five-point
scale
or
the
liking
for
each
of
the
words,
also
on
a five-point scale.
Thus,
the
between-subject
design,
mentioned
in
a
previous
section,
was
used.
Seventeen
subjects
were
randomly
assigned
to
the
familiarity
condition
and
sixteen
to
the
favourability
condition.
The
words
were
selected
randomly
from
a
dictionary,
but
those
regarded
as
emotionally
charged
were
discarded.
Naturally,
some
objectively
very
uncommon
words
werejudged
by
our
subjects
as
entirely
unfamiliar;
and
at
the
other
end
of
the
scale,
some
words
were
judged
by
our
subjects as
very
familiar
indeed.
On
the
scale
of
liking,
the
distribution
of
ratings
was
pretty
even,
ranging
from
words
disliked
to
words
liked.
In
Fig.
11.4
each
dot
represents
the
position
of
each
word
in
relation
to
the
familiarity
and
favourability
co-ordinates.
An
inspection
of
the
scatter
diagram
shows
that
on
the
whole
unfamiliar
words
were
rated
low
or
lowish
on
favour-
ability;
very
familiar
words
were
on
the
average
marginally
less well
liked
than
the
moderately
familiar
words.
A full
statistical
analysis
confirmed
this
impression.
The
straight
rising
line
in
the
figure
shows
the fairly
steep
average
increase
of
liking
for
words
up
to
the
familiarity
rating
of
2.5
chosen
by
inspection.
Then,
at
the
high
levels
of
familiarity
there
is
some
decline,
albeit
less
steep,
in
favourability
as a
function
of
familiarity.
Our
published
paper
gives a full
mathematical
analysis
of
the
data
that
shows
clearly
that
our
results
fit a
theoretical
inverted-
U
function.
Our
data
so
far
do
not
allow
any
clear-cut
inference
as to
the
parameters
of
the
inverted-
U
curve
-
how
its
shape
in
any
given
circumstances
may
depend
for
instance
on
such
factors as
the
complexity
or
disc
rim
inability
of
stimuli.
We
shall offer,
however,
some
comments
on
this
matter
in
the
concluding
section
of
this
chapter.
11.4
Preferences
for
Names
and
the
Preference-Feedback
Hypothesis
Once
a
new
word
or
phrase
has
gained
a
foothold
in
the
language,
it
tends
to
win
rapid
popularity,
so
much
so
that
sometimes
the
'newcomer'
turns
into
a cliche
and
begins
to
be
shunned.
We
wondered
to
what
extent
something
similar
occurs
in
the
case
of
names.
Before
looking
more
closely
at
this, it
seemed
desirable
to
start
by
investigating
simply
the
relationship,
at
any
given
time,
256
1
3.5
•
3.0
•
•
•
•
•
+
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
2.5
• •
••
•
•
•
•
•
. ,
• • A
•

~-
;
•

: c
•

a:
•
2.0
•
•
••
.,
Familiarity
•
•
•
•
•
•
I·
•
B
•
1.5
•
•
•
j
1.0
•
0.5
0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Fig.
11.4
Scattergram
of
mean
familiarity
and
favourability
ratings
for
100
words,
with
regression
lines
(A) for
the
whole
sample,
(B)
for
those
words
with
familiarity
<
2.5
and
(C)
for
those
words
with
familiarity>
2.5
(Reproduced
from
W.
Sluckin,
A.
M.
Colman
and
D.
J.
Hargreaves
(1980)
BritishJournal
of
Psychology,
71,
163-169,
by
permission.)
between experienced familiarity with,
and
liking for,
Christian
names
among
various populations.
As it
happens,
the first
opportunity
for such research arose
when
one
of
us
(W.
S.)
was
on
Study
Leave
in
1978
in
Melbourne,
Australia.
We
were able
before
long
to
collect similar
data
in Leicester.
In
the
two experiments we used
in all 160 subjects.
In
each case there were
40
men
and
40 women.
Their
ages
ranged
in
Melbourne
from
18
to 50
(median,
22 years)
and
in
Leicester from
15
to 68
(median,
34
years). Briefly, 40 subjects
in
Melbourne
and
40 correspond-
ing subjects in Leicester
rated
their
own
familiarity
either
with 100
randomly
chosen
male
Christian
names
or
with 100 similarly chosen female
Christian
names. Likewise, 40
other
subjects
in
Melbourne
and
40 in Leicester
rated
their
liking for
the
same
male
and
female
names
(Colman
et
al., 1981a).
The
results
ofthe
two studies
are
summarized
in
Fig. 11.5. Significant
and
strong positive
linear
relationships between familiarity
and
favourability were
found for
male
and
for female
names,
whether
judged
by
males
or
females,
both
257
,
.'
, .

':
, .
, "
'.'
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
,',
, '
"
:',

-:
. "

, "
.'
, ' ,
,
'.
"
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
1.0 "
0.5
O' ~ :-'~-'-:-~~L:-~~~
0
0.5 1.0
1.5
2.0 2.5 3.0
3.5
4.0
. .

.

, ,
" ,
, ,
.

3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
. '
. '
'.'
(a)
Male
names: England
'.
,
, "
, ,

,
"
o~~~ ~-L~~~~~
0.5 1.0
1.5
2.0 2.5 3.0
3.5
4.0
(c)
Male
names: Australia
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
(b)
Female names: England
, .
. .
'

. . . .
:
2.0
','
.
'
,",
'
1.5
~.
':
~
< '
:"
l
,I:
"
1.0 ,
,',
,
0.5'
':
.•
' ,
o I ,
0.5' 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
(d) Female names: Australia
Familiarity
Fig,
11.5
Scattergrams
showing
the
mean
ratings
of
familiarity
and
favourability
(liking)
for
male
and
female
Christian
names
given
by
English
subjects
and
Australian
subjects.
(Reproduced
from
A,
M,
Coiman,
D,
J.
Hargreaves
and
W,
Sluckin
(1981)
BritishJournal
of
Social
Psychology,
20,
.3-5,
by
permission.
in
Melbourne
and
in
Leicester.
To
illustrate,
among
the
four
best liked
male
names
in
Australia
were
David
and
Peter;
and
these two
were
also
among
the
four
most
familiar
names.
In
England
the
best
liked
names
were
David,
Peter
and
Richard
in
that
order;
and
these
three
were
among
the
four
most
familiar
names.
Names
such
as
Cedric
and
Fulbert
were
both
unfamiliar
and
disliked
in
Australia.
Further
similar
examples
could
be
quoted;
full
details
will
be
found
in
Hargreaves
et
al. (1979)
and
in
Sluckin
et
al.
(1979).
It
may
at
first sight be
thought
that
the
essentially straight-line positive
258