Mere exposure effects depend on fluency misattributed to liking, not memory.

Evidence

Bornstein and D’Agostino (1992), pursuing a lead that came from Bernstein’s (1989) meta-analytic review, established that mere exposure effects are strongest when conditions reduce subjects’ memory for the effect-producing exposures. Under these circumstances, it appears that increased perceptual fluency of a repeatedly presented stimulus (that is, increased ease of its identification on re-exposure) is misattributed to liking, yielding a positive evaluation of the stimulus. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 103

Categorization

• XREF: This fluency-misattribution account of mere exposure directly parallels the MOC’s group-defense mechanisms as implicit rather than explicit processes; connects to the reader’s broader implicit-cognition program and to familiarity/truth illusions literature. — connects to: Accessible memories can shape judgments without the person recognizing their causal influence. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 85; Mere exposure effects strengthen as memory for exposures is reduced.; Mere exposure to subliminal affects can transfer value to neutral stimuli via misattribution — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 105 (+3 more)
• DEFINE: Defines perceptual fluency as increased ease of identification on re-exposure being misattributed to liking.

Broader Connections

• Mere exposure effects strengthen as memory for exposures is reduced. #expands (0.82)
• Mere exposure to subliminal affects can transfer value to neutral stimuli via misattribution #exemplifies (0.78) — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 105
• A small priming effect can still matter if widely applied over time #exemplifies (0.74) — Alexandra Snell, Miron Zuckerman, and Bonnie M. Le, Does Religious Priming Induce Greater…, 85
• Affective factors, not knowledge gain, drive contact’s prejudice-reducing effect #expands (0.72) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1831
• Conscious attention disrupts the influence of weak automatic cues on perception and memory. #complicates (0.71) — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 229