Symbolic material objects such as art or certain artifacts (e.g., fine pottery, jewelry) share one common element: The combination of generating an expression, and the materialization of this expression in the object. This explains why people place a much greater value on handmade over machine-made objects, and originals over duplicates. We show that this mechanism occurs when a material object's symbolic property is salient and when the creator (artist or craftsman) is perceived to have agency control over the 1-to-1 materialized expression in the object. Coactivation of these 2 factors causes the object to be perceived as having high value because it is seen as the embodied representation of the creator's unique personal expression. In 6 experiments, subjects rated objects in various object categories, which varied on the type of object property (symbolic, functional, aesthetic), the production procedure (handmade, machine-made, analog, digital) and the origin of the symbolic information (person or software). The studies showed that the proposed mechanism applies to symbolic, but not to functional or aesthetic material objects. Furthermore, they show that this specific form of symbolic object valuation could not be explained by various other related psychological theories (e.g., uniqueness, scarcity, physical touching, creative performance). Our research provides a universal framework that identifies a core mechanism for explaining judgments of value for one of our most uniquely human symbolic object categories. (PsycINFO Database Record
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2018.
All research outputs
#21,628,726
of 34,360,889 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
#1,916
of 2,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,226
of 300,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,360,889 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,963 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
