← Three short discoveries on WatWat
A wall of tiles in a repeating pattern
Psychology

The effect says familiarity breeds liking, and it is one of the most repeated findings in social psychology. If it were simply true, more exposure would always mean more liking. A meta-analysis pulled 268 out of 81 articles to see what shape the relationship actually has.

Tested in people

An inverted U. The effect has a positive slope and a negative quadratic term, so liking rises with repetition and then falls off. The curve showed up for all visual stimuli but not for , and for exposures shorter than ten seconds or longer than a minute.

The mere exposure effect is the finding that repeated exposure to something increases liking for it, with no argument or reward involved. It is well established, and models of why it happens disagree, which is what this analysis set out to test.

The method is unusual in a useful way. Rather than averaging effect sizes, the authors estimated parameters from 268 curve estimates drawn from 81 articles, covering liking, familiarity, recognition and other evaluations.

The result is a shape rather than a number. The effect is characterized by a positive slope and a negative quadratic effect, consistent with an , so liking climbs with repetition and then comes back down.

The conditions matter as much as the curve. It held for all visual stimuli but not for auditory stimuli, and for exposure durations shorter than ten seconds and longer than a minute. It also held for both homogeneous and heterogeneous presentation, and for ratings taken after all stimuli had been presented.

wat. Repetition raises liking up to a point, and past that point it works against you.

wat wat

An effect everybody quotes as a straight line turns out to have a peak, and the peak is where the practical advice lives.

How do we know?

Montoya and colleagues estimated parameters from 268 curve estimates drawn from 81 articles, covering liking, familiarity and recognition, and tested which conditions produced which shape.

Tested in peopleReview or meta-analysis

What is still unknown

A meta-analysis inherits the designs it pools, and the moderators here are study characteristics rather than things anybody manipulated on purpose.

Learn something?

Montoya et al., Psychological Bulletin· 2017· DOI 10.1037/bul0000085

Where to next

Phone, laptop and television at once. Does that really make you easier to distract?meta-analysisDoes a bigger range of options really make people choose worse?meta-analysisHow long does the dip in marital satisfaction after a first baby last?meta-analysis

Want another one worth repeating?

Start with three short discoveries. No sign-up, nothing to pick first.

Surprise me
Browse the topic libraryAbout WatWat, and how sources get checked