La littérature en méthodologie pointe un important problème lié à l’utilisation des différentiels sémantiques pour mesurer les évaluations globales des individus. Au centre de ces continua bipolaires opposant une paire d’adjectifs antagonistes, sont en effet agrégées de manière artificielle et fâcheuse deux types d’évaluations : les réactions indifférentes et les réactions ambivalentes. Or, la distinction entre ces deux types d’évaluation est un enjeu dans la mesure où elles recouvrent des réalités différentes. En effet, l’indifférence correspond à l’absence de réaction positive ou négative, tandis que l’ambivalence décrit une évaluation composée à la fois de réactions positives et négatives. Cette recherche démontre l’intérêt d’utiliser un nouvel outil de mesure issu de recherches en psychologie, l’Evaluative Space Grid (Larsen & al., 2009), pour saisir la part d’ambivalence contenue dans les évaluations globales de consommateurs. A l’aide d’un design mixte comportant cinq études empiriques, nous montrons que l’Evaluative Space Grid présente des propriétés psychométriques aussi bonnes que le différentiel sémantique tout en permettant de différencier les réactions indifférentes des réactions ambivalentes, ce que ne peut pas faire un différentiel sémantique. Ce travail de recherche constitue donc une contribution méthodologique importante qui devrait intéresser chercheurs et praticiens. / Literature on methodology reveals a serious problem related to the use of semantic differential scales to measure individuals’ global evaluations. Two types of evaluations are incorporated—in an artificial and unsuitable way—into these bipolar continuums that contain two opposing adjectives: indifferent reactions and ambivalent reactions. The distinction between these two types of evaluation is significant because they reflect different realities. While indifference corresponds to an absence of positive or negative reactions, an ambivalent evaluation is composed of both positive and negative reactions. This research demonstrates the advantages of using a new measurement tool, the Evaluative Space Grid (Larsen & al., 2009), developed in psychology research; this tool is able to capture the ambivalent component in consumers’ global evaluations. Using a mixed design method comprising five empirical studies, we demonstrate that the Evaluative Space Grid has psychometric properties that match those of semantic differential scales; however, in contrast to semantic differential scales, the ESG is capable of differentiating between indifferent reactions and ambivalent reactions. This research therefore constitutes a major methodological contribution that will be of interest to both researchers and practitioners.

Thesis advisor: Timothy A. Duket / I studied whether or not people can feel happy and sad at the same moment in time. Participants used a computerized procedure to continuously rate their feelings as they viewed backwardly masked faces designed to elicit pleasant, unpleasant, or mixed feelings. The backward masking procedure and grid were poorly calibrated as participants found all conditions to be unpleasant. Evidence is presented that participants did not perceive the mask faces as neutral. Directions for future studies are discussed. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2003. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Psychology. / Discipline: College Honors Program.

The proposed research explores a contextual perspective in multiple object situations. Specifically, I focus on the context effect created by an object associated with strong attitude on the subsequent evaluative judgment of a target object. Through five studies, I find that the context effect of a strong attitude object is greater for objects with neutral-strength attitudes than for the objects with very strong or very weak attitudes, which result in a curved relationship between the magnitude of the context effect and the strength associated with attitudes towards targets. In addition, I find that the direction of the context effect of a strong attitude object is determined by the valence of the attitudes towards the target objects: targets with positive attitudes become less positive, and those with negative attitudes become less negative. That is, the results of the context effects represent as a form of decreased extremity of the attitudes towards targets. More importantly, it is found that these differing magnitudes and directions of the context effect of an object with strong attitude finally result in evaluative space distortion. I trace the underlying process mechanism of theses effects and find that: 1) the divergent magnitudes of the context effects are the result of the differing level of comparison difficulty between a contextual object and target objects; and 2) the divergent directions of the context effects are the product of perceived uncertainty about the attitude towards target objects.

No description available.