TY - JOUR
T1 - Something for Nothing
T2 - Is Visual Encoding Automatic?
AU - Lang, Annie
AU - Potter, Robert F.
AU - Bolls, Paul D.
PY - 1999
Y1 - 1999
N2 - Two experiments tested the hypothesis that visual encoding of television messages is a relatively automatic process, whereas verbal encoding is a relatively controlled process. Subjects viewed 30 messages crossed on Production Pacing (slow, medium, fast) and Arousing Content (calming, arousing). It was argued that as pacing and arousal increased, the resources required to process the messages would increase, which would interfere with the controlled process of verbal encoding but not with the automatic process of visual encoding. As expected, visual recognition was not affected by the increased resource requirements, but verbal recognition declined.
AB - Two experiments tested the hypothesis that visual encoding of television messages is a relatively automatic process, whereas verbal encoding is a relatively controlled process. Subjects viewed 30 messages crossed on Production Pacing (slow, medium, fast) and Arousing Content (calming, arousing). It was argued that as pacing and arousal increased, the resources required to process the messages would increase, which would interfere with the controlled process of verbal encoding but not with the automatic process of visual encoding. As expected, visual recognition was not affected by the increased resource requirements, but verbal recognition declined.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0013040723&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1207/s1532785xmep0102_4
DO - 10.1207/s1532785xmep0102_4
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0013040723
VL - 1
SP - 145
EP - 163
JO - Media Psychology
JF - Media Psychology
SN - 1521-3269
IS - 2
ER -