CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,299Aesthetic Perception and AnalysisMemory Processes and InfluencesSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mere Exposure: A Gateway to the Subliminal

Zajonc, R.B.·2001·Current Directions in Psychological Science
DOI 10.1111/1467-8721.00154
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In the mere-repeated-exposure paradigm, an individual is repeatedly exposed to a particular stimulus object, and the researcher records the individual's emerging preference for that object. Vast literature on the mere-repeated-exposure effect shows it to be a robust phenomenon that cannot be explained by an appeal to recognition memory or perceptual fluency. The effect has been demonstrated across cultures, species, and diverse stimulus domains. It has been obtained even when the stimuli exposed are not accessible to the participants’ awareness, and even prenatally. The repeated-exposure paradigm can be regarded as a form of classical conditioning if we assume that the absence of aversive events constitutes the unconditioned stimulus. Empirical research shows that a benign experience of repetition can in and of itself enhance positive affect, and that such affect can become attached not only to stimuli that have been exposed but also to similar stimuli that have not been previously exposed, and to totally distinct stimuli as well. Implications for affect as a fundamental and independent process are discussed in the light of neuroanatomical evidence.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-8721.00154

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. LeDoux J., 1996, The emotional brain.
  2. 10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.589 · DOI
  3. Zajonc R.B., 2000, Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition, 31

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 601–700 of 1,001

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Zajonc, R. B.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Zajonc, R.B.
Venue
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2001-12
Volume
10
Issue
6
Pages
224-228
ISSN
  • 0963-7214 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8721
DOI
10.1111/1467-8721.00154
OpenAlex
W2143046471
Cited by
1,299
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 73 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 78 · 2021: 81 · 2020: 157 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 77 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 60 · 2012: 46
FWCI
5.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Current Directions in Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
mere exposure effect, subliminal perception, preference formation, classical conditioning, positive affect, emotional attachment, unconscious awareness, prenatal exposure, recognition memory, perceptual fluency

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