Skip to main content
. 2015 Aug 26;10(8):e0131796. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131796

Table 2. Liking ratings for Experiment 1–4.

Mean Liking ratings for fluency and mastery portraits, depending on experimental condition, separated for groups of low and high art-expertise and by phase. Standard deviations are noted in brackets.

  Repeated Evaluation Familiarization Mere Exposure Replication   Transfer  
  Low art-expertise groups
  t1 t2 t1 t2 t1 t2 t1 t2 t1 t2
Fluency 4.30 (0.68) 4.42 (0.98) 4.02 (0.87) 4.22 (0.87) 4.04 (0.93) 4.30 (1.01) 4.43 (1.18) 4.13 (1.01) 4.62 (0.82) 3.60 (1.12)
Mastery 2.72 (0.86) 3.78 (1.09) 3.00 (0.76) 2.90 (0.65) 3.06 (0.80) 3.27 (0.88) 2.48 (0.96) 3.25 (1.34) 3.05 (0.98) 3.28 (1.35)
  High art-expertise groups
  t1 t2 t1 t2 t1 t2 t1 t2 t1 t2
Fluency 4.27 (1.01) 4.18 (0.74) 4.50 (0.81) 4.25 (1.05) 4.37 (1.12) 4.55 (1.12) 3.78 (1.23) 4.07 (1.04) 5.12 (0.98) 4.25 (0.83)
Mastery 3.57 (.54) 3.92 (0.62)  3.68 (0.86) 4.08 (0.96) 3.17 (1.39) 3.42 (1.20) 4.00 (0.86) 3.92 (0.89) 3.17 (1.36) 3.02 (1.20)

Note: Post-hoc assignment to groups of relative low and high art-expertise groups was even (N = 12) except for the mere exposure condition (low expertise: N = 11, high expertise: N = 13)