Search

Aesthetic judgments were investigated using a combined nomothetic and idiographic approach. Participants judged novel graphic patterns with respect to their own personal definitions of 'beauty.' Judgment analysis was employed to derive individual case models of judgment strategies as well as a group model. As predicted, symmetry had the highest correlations with aesthetic judgments of beauty. Stimulus complexity was the second-highest correlate of a positive evaluation. Thus, there was agreement at the group level. The judgment analyses, however, indicated substantial individual differences. These included use of symmetry or complexity cues that were contrary to the main group use, e.g., a few participants considered nonsymmetric patterns more beautiful. These findings suggest that exclusive consideration of the group model would have leveled the individual differences and been misleading. The group model is significant; however, the individual judgment analyses represent individual patterns of judgment in a notedly more accurate way.

People are frequently required to judge how particular group members measure up against others in their group. According to the local-comparisons--general-standards (LOGE) approach, in these member-to-group comparisons, people fail to use the normatively appropriate local (group) standard and are infelicitously affected by a more general standard (involving instances from outside the judged group). Within positive groups, target group members are judged superior to the other members of the group, and within negative groups, inferior. To date, these nonselective superiority and inferiority biases have been demonstrated solely in judgments about human beings. In 6 experiments, nonselective biases were found in perceptual, affective, and cognitive judgments of nonhuman targets, objects, and concepts, thus supporting a cognitive rather than a social account.

The creation of different subjective experiences by the interaction between explicit and implicit forms of memory was studied in a controlled situation. It was judged that the apparent normative frequency of English words could be biased by a single prior experience, but the subjects appeared aware of this bias and were often able to correct it.