Reinterpreting the hedonic contrast effect

There is a longstanding belief in the hedonic contrast hypothesis; namely the pleasantness of objects like art, food, and faces seem more pleasant when compared to unpleasant (vs. pleasant) standards. Our review of the literature shows that while many findings are consistent with this hypothesis, many are inconsistent. Hedonic judgments often assimilate. The current research tests the attribute-hedonic model as an alternative. The attribute-hedonic model proposes that hedonic judgments (e.g. how do you feel about winning $100) operate differently from underlying attribute judgments (e.g. how much money is $100). Whereas attribute judgments exhibit a strong contrast effect, hedonic judgments exhibit a weaker assimilation effect. Since these effects are confounded, they can create the misleading appearance of a hedonic contrast. In two studies, using paintings and faces, we replicate the traditional contrast effect on the surface, but use mediation to show that hedonic judgments actually assimilate. A third study, using financial outcomes, clarifies the two paths: hedonic judgments assimilate whereas attribute judgments contrast. We further elaborate how the attribute-hedonic model can provide a more parsimonious account of existing literature. By reinterpreting the evidence, we suggest a new path for understanding comparative judgments.