The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation
Abstract
The effect of vividness on attitudinal judgments is a controversial issue. Experimental evidence indicates that vividness often has no effect on attitudinal judgments; however, there is also evidence that vividness can enhance or undermine the favorableness of attitudinal judgments. In this article, the authors introduce the availability-valence hypothesis to predict and explain the effects of vividness and to account for the frequent observation of a null effect.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
The serial position effect of free recall.
Murdock, B. B. (1962) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0045106 · Cited by 1,717
Stalking the elusive “vividness” effect
Taylor, S. E., & Thompson, S. C. (1982) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.89.2.155 · Cited by 913
Effects of message repetition and position on cognitive response, recall, and persuasion.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.97 · Cited by 813
The relation of cognitive and memorial processes to persuasion in a simulated jury trial
Calder, B. J., Insko, C. A., & Yandell, B. (1974) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1974.tb02808.x · Cited by 139
Cited by
Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/208570 · Cited by 2,142
Heart and Mind in Conflict: The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making
Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209563 · Cited by 2,044
Information Processing from Advertisements: Toward an Integrative Framework
MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298905300401 · Cited by 653
Product Placement in Movies: The Effect of Prominence and Mode on Audience Recall
Gupta, P. B., & Lord, K. R. (1998) · Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising · doi:10.1080/10641734.1998.10505076 · Cited by 587
Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2012) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/662614 · Cited by 549
Metadata
- Authors
- Kisielius, J., & Sternthal, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1986-03
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 418
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2082431087
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 3.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/208527
- The paper
- Kisielius, J., & Sternthal, B. (1986). Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/208527
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
