Publications

Current highlight publications

[104]    Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Interest is evoked by semantic instability and the promise of new insight. Perception, 45(S), 38-39.

[103]    Carbon, C. C. (2016). The simplest visual illusion of all time? The folded paper-size illusion. Perception, 45(S), 38-38.

[83]    Albrecht, S. & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Amplification effects of processing fluency on implicit affective evaluation. Perception, 43(S), 154-154.

[75]    Carbon, C. C. & Hesslinger (2014). Analyzing artworks by means of vision sciences: the case of two Mona Lisas generating a stereogram. Perception, 43(S).

Other publications (listed in ISI WebOfScience)

[111]    Raab, M. H., Mironova, A., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Yellow is more creative than you know: Exploring implicit color associations with the multidimensional IAT. Perception, 45(S), 220-221.

[110]    Ortlieb, S. A., Rutar, D., Stojilovic, I., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Blue, white and pink—A cross-cultural comparison of kitsch and kic concepts from Bavaria, Serbia, and Slovenia. Perception, 45(S), 216-216.

[109]    Fischer, U. C., Carbon, C. C., Rutar, D., Stojilovic, I., & Ortlieb, S. A. (2016). The big picture of aesthetics changes depending on the level of analysis. Perception, 45(S), 191-192.

[108]    Breitschaft, S. J., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Multisensory adaptation: How visual are haptics? Perception, 45(S), 147-147.

[107]    Schneider, T. M., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). An episodic face space model for representing faces. Perception, 45(S), 88-89.

[106]    Röder, S., Carbon, C. C., Shackelford, T. K., Pisanski, K., Weege, B., & Fink, B. (2016). Men’s visual attention to and perceptions of women’s dance movements. Perception, 45(S), 61-61.

[105]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Influences on the perception of the morphing face illusion. Perception, 45(S), 39-40.

[104]    Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Interest is evoked by semantic instability and the promise of new insight. Perception, 45(S), 38-39.

[103]    Carbon, C. C. (2016). The simplest visual illusion of all time? The folded paper-size illusion. Perception, 45(S), 38-38.

[102]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2016). Do children with Autism Spectrum Disorder perceive emotional faces differently? Journal of Vision, 16, 486-486. DOI: 10.1167/16.12.486

[101]    Ditye, T., Hiess, B., Petzka, M., Carbon, C. C. & Ansorge, U. (2016). Long-term face aftereffects are more robust following distributed adaptation. Journal of Vision, 16, 532-532. DOI: 10.1167/16.12.532

[100] Carbon, C. C. (2016). Beyond the predominance of the visual empire: A functional model on haptics & more. Electronic Imaging, 2016(16), 1-2.

[99]    Hörnig, F., Möller, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). The colorful stranger in the mirror – the strange-face-inthe-mirror illusion revisited. Perception, 44(S1), 218-218.

[98]    Albrecht, S. A., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). The Fluency Amplification Model (FAM). Perception, 44(S1), 172-172.

[97]    Carbon, C. C. (2015). The concept of fluency: Current streams, active models, new challenges, general limitations. Perception, 44(S1), 170-171.

[96]   Hesslinger, V. M., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Testing several hypotheses for dissociate colour perception on #TheDress. Perception, 44(S1), 148-148.

[95]   Albrecht, S., Pastukhov, A., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Startling fluency? Testing effects of processing fluency on           affect-modulated startle. Perception, 44(S1), 69-70.

[94]   Raab, M. H., Ortlieb, S. A., Gebauer, F., Ettner, J., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Vita brevis, kitsch longae—When death was salient, kitsch appears less kitschy. Perception, 44(S1), 67-67.

[93]   Deibel, S., Gebauer, F., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Investigating visual stimuli processing under mortality salience on a microgenetic level. Perception, 44(S1), 62-63.

[92]   Schneider, T. M., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). On the genesis and processing of facial representations and prototypes. Perception, 44(S1), 53-53.

[91]   Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Impaired configural processing for other-race faces revealed by a Thatcher illusion paradigm. Perception, 44(S1), 48-49.

[90]   Muth, C., Carbon, C. C., & Hesslinger, V. M. (2015). Unsolvable, yet insightful: The appeal of indeterminate and ambiguous artworks. Perception, 44(S1), 34-35.

[89]   Reiter, T., K., Ortlieb, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Kitsch: Is it better than its reputation? Comparing explicit and implicit aesthetic processing. Perception, 44(S1), 33-34.

[88]    Ortlieb, S., Fischer, U. C., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Burke’s fallacy: Is there a male gaze in empirical aesthetics? Perception, 44(S1), 30-30.

[87]    Röder, F. & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Average faces: Skin texture more than facial symmetry predicts attractiveness perceptions of female faces. Perception, 44(S1), 25-26.

[86]    Gebauer, F. & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Perceiving the Ukraine Crisis is a matter of visual depiction. Perception, 44(S1), 6-7.

[85]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Do task demands influence the perception of symmetry? Journal of Vision, 15(12), 147-147. DOI: 10.1167/15.12.147

[84]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Do task demands influence the perception of symmetry? Journal of Vision, 14(10):91-91. DOI: 10.1167/14.10.91

[83]    Albrecht, S. & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Amplification effects of processing fluency on implicit affective evaluation. Perception, 43(S), 154-154.

[82]    Utz, S. & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Face familiarity as a modulating but not a necessary factor for specific Thatcherization effects? Perception, 43(S), 18-18.

[81]    Roeloffs, H., Tredoux, C., Harsányi, G., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Cross-cultural categorization of black and white faces. Perception, 43(S), 128-128.

[80]    Schneider, T. M., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Why is this specific image of Madonna the most prototypical one? Predicting prototypicality on basis of inspection frequency and familiarity. Perception, 43(S), 17-17.

[79]    Hesslinger, V., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Red card for red: Questioning the positive effect of the colour red on male attractiveness. Perception, 43(S), 156-156.

[78]    Raab, M., Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). What can the pupil size tell us about aesthetics? Towards a multidimensional model of complex continuous experience. Perception, 43(S), 159-159.

[77]    Muth, C., Raab, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Stream along the aesthetic mind. The dynamics of elaborating artistic movies. Perception, 43(S), 10-10.

[76]    Carbon, C. C. & Hesslinger (2014). Analyzing artworks by means of vision sciences: the case of two Mona Lisas generating a stereogram. Perception, 43(S), 9-9.

[75]    Ortlieb, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). In the mood for kitsch? Towards a functional model linking aesthetic appreciation to the dynamics of social motivation and self-determinacy. Perception, 43(S), 159-159.

[74]    Hesslinger, V. M., & Carbon, C. (2013). Who is the best Gioconda of them all? On the relativity of artistic quality caused by prior visual elaboration. Perception, 42(S), 103-103.

[73]    Muth, C., Pepperell, R., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). In search of Gestalt. Detectability of objects within cubist artworks enhances appreciation. Perception, 42(S), 102-102.

[72]    Möller, M. K., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). „He’s got his father’s nose!“ – Factors involved in kinship – perception. Perception, 42(S), 200-200.

[71]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). Do first impressions count? – Influences on the perception of ambiguous pictures. Perception, 42(S), 106-106.

[70]    Carbon, C. C., & Jakesch, M. (2013). Empirical aesthetics from a haptic perspective: A functional model for haptic aesthetic processing. Perception, 42(S), 105-105.

[69]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Does the direction of dimensional changes influence reaction time costs in visual search. Journal of Vision, 13(9):688-688. DOI: 10.1167/13.9.688

[68]    Fischer, U. C., Carbon, C. C., Wagemans, J., & Augustin, M. D. (2012). Is there a common trait of aesthetic assessment or does it depends on the assessed content? Perception, 41(S), 96-96.

[67]    Wirth, B. E., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Matching unfamiliar faces under ecological conditions: Factors of stimulus similarity and feature exchange. Perception, 41(S), 101-101.

[66]    López Hernan Perez, T., & Carbon, C. C., & Hesslinger, V. (2012). High-level color adaptation for familiar objects. Perception, 41(S), 184-184.

[65]    Groh, M. K., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). How heavy is red? Towards a psychophysical framework of color weights. Perception, 41(S), 233-233.

[64]    Kraemer, P., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). How Expectation changes the appreciation of arts. Perception, 41(S), 181-181.

[63]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Does top-down information influence the afterimage illusion? Perception, 41(S), 54-54

[62]    Carbon, C. C., & Diener Rico, F. (2012). Forty years later: Are objects still mentally rotated as in 1971? Perception, 41(S), 116-116.

[61]    Albrecht, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Perceptual Fluency does not necessarily increase aesthetic appreciation: Evidence against the Hedonic Fluency Model. Perception, 41(S), 234-234.

[60]    Reiter, T. K., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). The spot that decides on the Gestalt: Gestalt psychology in the context of blindspot perception. Perception, 41(S), 100-100.

[59]    Harsanyi, G., Raab, M., Hesslinger, V., Düclos, D., Zink, J., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). The face of terrorism: Stereotypical Muslim facial attributes evoke implicit perception of threat. Perception, 41(S), 111-111.

[58]    Raab, M., Shengelia, N., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Towards an emotional footprint: Non-verbal analysis of emotionally processed visual stimuli via posturography. Perception, 41(S), 96-96.

[57]    Haertel, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). What is the main ingredient for transforming an ordinary object to a piece of art? Aesthetic Evaluations on objects of judgments ambiguous art quality. Perception, 41(S), 231-231.

[56]    Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). There’s more than one way to irritation! An attempt to categorize ambiguity in art. Perception, 41(S), 233-233.

[55]    Boehringer, J., Carbon, C. C., & Faerber, S. J. (2012). The specificity of art revealed by an empirical study on multi-cultural aesthetic material. Perception, 41(S), 231-231.

[54]    Schneider, T. M., Carbon, C. C., & Hecht, H. (2012). Estimating weight and height based on mental norms: A cross-cultural study from Germany and Japan. Perception, 41(S), 96-96.

[53]    Luedtke, R. A., Hesslinger, V. M., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Different facets of facial attractiveness: Specification of the relationship between attractiveness, beauty, prettiness and sexual attraction. Perception, 41(S), 116-116.

[52]    Hesslinger, V. M., & Görlitz, R., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). What 80 Lisas can reveal about Leonardo’s Mona Lisa: One step further in demystifying La Gioconda’s absorbing smile. Perception, 41(S), 232-232.

[51]    Faerber, S. J., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Adaptation transfer effects are moderated by the similarity to the adaptors. Perception, 41(S), 180-180.

[50]    Carbon, C. C. (2012). On the evolution of taste: Why and how taste emerges, changes, adapts. International Journal of Psychology, 47(S1), 371-371. {IF=0.404}

[49]    Carbon, C. C. (2012). Why cognitive deficits like congenital prosopagnosia are often overlooked and what we can do against this neglect. International Journal of Psychology, 47(S1), 110-110. {IF=0.404}

[48]    Carbon, C. C. (2012). Dynamics of aesthetic appreciation. Proceedings of SPIE (International Society for Optics and Photonics), 8291, 82911A.

[47]    Augustin, M. D., Carbon, C. C., & Wagemans, J. (2011). Measuring aesthetic impressions of visual art. Perception, 40(S), 219-219 {IF=1.293}

[46]    Schneider, T., Hecht, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Losing weight without dieting: viewpoint-dependent weight assessment on basis of faces. Perception, 40(S), 71-71 {IF=1.293}

[45]    Rockelmann, L., Zimmermann, R., Raab, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). How you look at art: Analyzing beholder’s movement pattern by radio-based identification. Perception, 40(S), 222-222 {IF=1.293}

[44]    Faerber, S. J., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Impact of priming and elaboration on the dynamics of aesthetic appreciation. Perception, 40(S), 217-217 {IF=1.293}

[43]   Gattol, V., Carbon, C. C., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2011). Depicting crosshairs can indeed promote violence. Perception, 40(S), 216-216 {IF=1.293}

[42]    Raab, M., Imhof, M. & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Eyes for an agent: simulation of dynamically evolving preferences for visual stimuli by a neural network and a multiple-trace memory model. Perception, 40(S), 205-205 {IF=1.293}

[41]    Harsanyi, G., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Adaptive categorization of own- and other-group faces. Perception, 40(S), 71-71 {IF=1.293}

[40]    Hesslinger, V., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Dynamics in aesthetic appreciation: Differential effects for average and non-average natural stimuli. Perception, 40(S), 222-222 {IF=1.293}

[39]    Muth, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). The relation between elaboration and liking in perceiving ambiguous aesthetic stimuli. Perception, 40(S), 217-217 {IF=1.293}

[38]    Härtel, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Cognitive and emotional associations evoked by the imagination of pieces of favorite music and visual art. Perception, 40(S), 218-218{IF=1.293}

[37]    Jakesch, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Humans prefer curved objects also on basis of haptic evaluation. Perception, 40(S), 219-219 {IF=1.293}

[36]    Jander, A., & Carbon, C. C. (2011). On the microgenesis of facial attractiveness. Perception, 40(S), 69-69 {IF=1.293}

[35]    Carbon, C. C., & Hergovich, A. (2011). Using computer-animated magic tricks as a promising experimental paradigm for investigating perceptual processes. Perception, 40(S), 169-169 {IF=1.293}

[34]    Carbon, C. C., Gruber, P., & Sommer, P. (2010). On the search for the Super-Jesus. Which features does a depiction in art history need to be identified as Jesus? Perception, 39(S), 115-115 {IF=1.360}.

[33]    Wirth, B. E., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). How do prototypes of visual objects develop and establish? Exemplars perceived early in life might have an essential influence. Perception, 39(S), 129-129 {IF=1.360}.

[32]    Raab, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Objective measures for complexity and curvature in visual objects and scenes. Perception, 39(S), 114-115 {IF=1.360}.

[31]    Neuhauser, K., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). That’s typical! Isn’t it? About the microgenesis of art perception as a function of expertise. Perception, 39(S), 113-113 {IF=1.360}.

[30]    Lüdtke, R., Grüter, T., Derntl, B., Grüter, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Reduction of facial emotion processing in congenital prosopagnosia. Perception, 39(S), 93-93 {IF=1.360}.

[29]    Löffler, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Processing of style in artworks: A highly complex matter. Perception, 39(S), 116-116 {IF=1.360}.

[28]    Kaltenbach, R. N., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Compatibility of context sizes in face perception – a different perspective on holistic effects. Perception, 39(S), 130-130 {IF=1.360}.
[27]    Jakesch, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Touched by the moment? Factors modulating haptic and visually – based mere exposure effects. Perception, 39(S), 131-132 {IF=1.360}.

[26]    Imhof, M., Straif, M., Stein, C. W., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Implicit classification reveals priority of processing physical properties in novices but processing of higher cognitive properties in experts. Perception, 39(S), 103-103 {IF=1.360}.

[25]    Hesslinger, V., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Cues of being watched enhance pro-social attitudes. Perception, 39(S), 93-93 {IF=1.360}.

[24]    Harsanyi, G., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Matching style and content in art perception. Perception, 39(S), 115-115 {IF=1.360}.

[23]    Faerber, S. J., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). On the role of visual adaptations on aesthetic appreciation via changes of the object space. Perception, 39(S), 76-76 {IF=1.360}.

[22]    Augustin, M. D., Wagemans, J., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Visual aesthetics: Relevant measures and their dependence on object class. Perception, 39(S), 114-114 {IF=1.360}.

[21]    Albrecht, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Bartlett’s theory of visual reproduction revisited: Ambiguous face-like stimuli do not necessarily transform to prototypical face schemata. Perception, 39(S), 40-40 {IF=1.360}.

[20]    Carbon, C. C., & Jagsch, R. (2009). Abnormal facial outward appearances and their impact on facial attractiveness and attribution of personality. Perception, 38(S), 81-81. {IF=1.617}.

[19]    Carbon, C. C. (2009). What is the cognitive basis of impairments in congenital prosopagnosia? International Journal of Psychology, 43(3-4), 38-38. {IF=0.272}.

[18]    Carbon, C. C. (2008). How strong is a car’s brand from a visual perspective? Searching for an objective measure. Perception, 37(S), 31-31. {IF=1.585}.

[17]    Jakesch, M., Zachhuber, M., Leder, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2008). Scenario-based cross-modal touching. How top-down processes influence tactile appreciation. Perception, 37(S), 92-92. {IF=1.585}.

[16]    Zachhuber, M., Jakesch, M., Leder, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2008). Developing a reference frame for testing cross-modality effects of vision and touch. Perception, 37(S), 92-92. {IF=1.585}.

[15]    Bohrn, I., Nabecker, G., & Carbon, C. C. (2008). Are Curved Visual Objects Always Preferred? Perception, 37(S), 75-75. {IF=1.585}.

[14]    Augustin, M. D., Schild, M., Gross, C., & Carbon, C. C. (2008). Towards a psychophysics of art perception. Perception, 37(S), 116-116. {IF=1.585}.

[13]    Augustin, M. D., Leder, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2007). The microgenesis of style and content in art perception. Perception, 36(S), 16-16. {IF=1.585}.

[12]    Gerger, G., Leder, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2007). Contributions of boredom to liking judgments over time. Perception, 36(S), 17-17. {IF=1.585}.

[11]    Farber, S., Carbon, C. C., & Leder, H. (2007). From exposure to evaluation: Dynamic changes in appreciation of innovative designs. Perception, 36(S), 17-17. {IF=1.585}.

[10]    Ditye, T., & Carbon, C. C. (2007).Dynamics and flexibility in mental representations of familiar faces. Perception, 36(S), 147-147. {IF=1.585}.

[09]    Gattol, V., Ditye, T., Carbon, C. C., & Hutzler, F. (2007).A Call for Attention! - TV News Broadcasts and the Effects of Competing News Feeds on Perception. Perception, 36(S), 27-27. {IF=1.585}.

[08]    Carbon, C. C., Leder, H., & Ditye, T. (2007).When style matters – Art specific adaptation effects. Perception, 36(S), 17-17. {IF=1.585}.

[07]    Carbon, C. C., Ditye, T., & Leder, H. (2006). Setting the trend: When attractiveness is a matter of adaptation. Perception, 35(S), 199-199. {IF=1.585}.

[06]    Carbon, C. C. (2006). What can we learn from prosopagnosia about face processing? Perception, 35(S), 135-135. {IF=1.585}.

[05]    Carbon, C. C. (2006). Face adaptation effects: When stable representations are quite flexible. Perception, 35(S), 210-210. {IF=1.585}.

[04]    Carbon, C. C. (2006). The Repeated Evaluation Technique or 'How can we measure attractiveness in a valid way'? Perception, 35(S), 200-201. {IF=1.585}.

[03]    Carbon, C. C.  (2005). Innovation in Design and Aesthetics. How attributes of Innovation influence Attractiveness on the long run. Perception, 34(S), 8-8. {IF=1.585}.

[02]    Carbon, C. C., Schweinberger, S., Kaufmann, J., & Leder, H. (2004).Early face processing investigated by ERP. Perception, 33(S), 13-13. {IF=1.585}.

[01]    Carbon, C. C., & Leder, H. (2004). Face recognition is not template-based. Perception, 33(S), 103-103. {IF=1.585}

Further publications
(varia 1)

[11]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Do task demands influence the perception of symmetry? Journal of Vision, 14(10), 91-91.

[10]   Renzi, C., Schiavi, S., Carbon, C. C., Vecchi, T., Silvanto, J., & Cattaneo, Z. (2007). Featural and Configural processing of faces are dissociated in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A TMS study. Clinical Neurophysiology, 124(10), e86.

[09]    Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). Does the direction of dimensional changes influence reaction time costs in visual search? Journal of Vision, 13(9), 688-688.

[08]    Carbon, C. C. (2012). Dynamics of aesthetic appreciation. Proceedings of the SPIE (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 8291, 82911A.

[07]    Carbon, C. C. (2009). What “exactly” is a prototype? Not sure, but average objects are not necessarily good candidates for..... Journal of Vision, 9(8), 512-512.

[06]    Augustin, M. D., Fuchs, H., Defrancheschi, B., Carbon, C. C., & Hutzler, F. (2009). Style follows content revisited: Evidence from an ERP study. Journal of Vision, 9(8), 1080-1080.

[05]    Carbon, C. C. (2007). When stability means flexibility! Familiar faces under permanent adaptation. Journal of Vision, 7(9), 880-880.

[04]    Carbon, C. C., Leder, H., Grueter, T., Grueter, M., Weber, J. E., & Lueschow, A. (2006). Reduced configural processing abilities in congenital prosopagnosia. Journal of Vision, 6(6), 433-433.

[03]   Lueschow, A., Weber, J., Sander, T., Carbon, C. C., Grueter, T., Grueter, M., Trahms, L., & Curio, G. (2007). A combination of electrophysiological and behavioural data as objective measure of the impairment in congenital prosopagnosia. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118(4), 72-72.

[02]     Lueschow, A., Weber, J. E., Sander, T., Carbon, C. C., Grueter, T., Grueter, M., et al. (2006). A combination of electrophysiological and behavioural data as objective measure of the impairment in congenital prosopagnosia. Klinische Neurophysiologie, 37, A145.

[01]    Weber, J. E., Sander, T., Carbon, C. C., Grueter, T., Grueter, M., Curio, G., Trahms, L., Lueschow, A. (2006). Characterization of subjects with congenital prosopagnosia by combined electrophysiological and behavioural data. Journal of Vision, 6(6), 657-657.

 

Further publications
(varia 2)

[17] Carbon, C. C. (2015). Predicting Preferences for Innovative Design: The “Repeated Evaluation Technique” (RET). GfK Marketing Intelligence Review, 7(2), 34-39. [PDF][DirectLink GfK]

[16] Carbon, C. C. (2014). Warum wollen Menschen bei uns braun werden? [Why do people like a teint?]. National Geographic, 8, 22-22.

[15] Raab, M. & Carbon, C. C. (2014). Mona Lisa lächelt in 3D [Mona Lisa smiles in 3D]. Denken – Fühlen – Handeln, uni.vers Forschung, 10-13.

[14] Carbon, C. C., & Albrecht, S. (2013). Towards a culture of an ongoing reconsideration and replication of findings in psychological science. The Irish Psychologist, 39(12), 304-205.

[13] Raab, M. H., Muth, C., Carbon, C. C. (2013). M5oX: Methoden zur multidimensionalen und dynamischen Erfassung des Nutzererlebens. Mensch & Computer, Workshopband, 155-163.

[12] Harsányi, G., Gebauer, F., Kraemer, P., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). Design Evaluation: Zeitliche Dynamik ästhetischer Wertschätzung. Mensch & Computer, Workshopband, 145-153.

[11] Carbon, C. C. (2013). Haptische User Experience. Mensch & Computer, Workshopband, 165-172.

[10] Ortlieb, S., Streffing, G., & Carbon, C. C. (2013). Ein System für alle Fälle: Entwicklung eines intelligenten Hausnotrufsystems im Dialog mit den zukünftigen Nutzern. Mensch & Computer, Workshopband, 345-348.

[09] Carbon, C. C. (2012). Top oder Flop? Wie man zukünftiges Gefallen erforscht [Top or Flop? How to find out what will be liked in the future]. InteriorFashion, 2, 1-2.

[08] Schmid, U., Grossmann, P., Wachter, M., Raab, M., Carbon, C.-C., Faerber, S. J. (2011). How visible are different variations of spatial features and relations in logos and how does visibility affect prototype generation? Post-Proceedings of the KI'11 Workshop Visibility in Information Spaces and in Geographic Environments, 25-36

[07] Schmid, U., Faerber, S. J., Raab, Marius, Björn, Ivens, & Carbon, C. C. (2011). Schön ist, was man kennt [Beautiful is, what someone knows]. Digital Humanities: Technologien für die Geisteswissenschaften, 40-43.

[06] Carbon, C. C. (2011). Living on a sphere does not prevent to think and behave like living on a plain. SciTopics. http://www.scitopics.com/ [PDF]

[05] Carbon, C. C. (2010). Adaptation as a basis of triggering long-term design and fashion trends. SciTopics. http://www.scitopics.com/ [PDF]

[04]    Schabmann, A., Leidenfrost, B., Gomes, C., Strassnig, B., Feuchtl, S. & Carbon, C. C. (2007). Support for Freshmen at a Mass-University Program - The Cascaded Blended Mentoring Project (CBM). http://edoc.mpg.de

[03]    Carbon, C. C., Schwarz, M., Jenkel, N., & Harsanyi, G. (2004). Banking der Zukunft: Entwicklung des Retailbanking im Spannungsfeld von Kundenwünschen und Rentabilitätsforderungen. Eine empirische Studie zur Zufriedenheit der Bankkunden im deutschsprachigen Raum. Nominated for the Postbank Finance Award 2003/2004.

[02]    Schumacher, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2000). Telearbeit. Entwicklung einer Strategie zur Integration von behinderten Menschen. In Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (Eds.), Berufliche Integration durch Innovationen in der Arbeitsorganisation in Verbindung mit neuen Technologien (112 pages).

[01]    Carbon, C. C. (2001). The DADA faces. A standardized face databank: Faces with different affective states from different angles. Unpublished manuscript. Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin.

 

Book Chapters

[04]    Carbon, C. C. (2015). Wahrnehmungspsychologie [Perceptual Psychology]. In A. Schütz, M. Brand, H. Selg & S. Lautenbacher (Eds.), Psychologie. Eine Einführung in ihre Grundlagen- und Anwendungsfelder [Psychology. An introduction to its basic and applied fields] (pp. 42-52; 5. ed.). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

[03]    Carbon, C. C. (2009). European Publication issues from an Austrian perspective. In E. Weichselgartner, M. Uhl & G. Krampen (Hrsg.), European publication issues in Psychology (S. 184-193).

[02]    Strassnig, B., Leidenfrost, B., Schabmann, A., & Carbon, C. C. (2007). Cascaded Blended Mentoring Unterstützung von StudienanfängerInnen in der Studieneingangsphase. In M. Merkt, K. Mayrberger, R. Schulmeister, A. Sommer & I. van den Berk (Hrsg.), Studieren neu erfinden – Hochschulen neu denken (S. 318-327). Münster: Waxmann.

[01]    Schwaninger, A., Carbon, C. C., & Leder, H. (2003). Expert face processing: Specialisation and constraints. In Schwarzer, G., & Leder, H. (Eds.), The Development of Face Processing (pp. 81-97). Ashland, OH, US: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.

 

Book Reviews

[02]    Carbon, C. C. (2014). Carbon on G. Gabrielle Starr’s “Feeling Beauty: The Neuroscience of Aesthetic Experience“. Perception, 43(2/3), 226-228.

[01]    Pohlandt, A., & Carbon, C. C. (2010). Human Factors. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 54(3), 142-144.

 

Theses

[4]    Carbon, C. C. (2006). On the processing and representation of complex visual objects. (Habilitation thesis). University of Vienna, Vienna. 451 pages.

[3]    Carbon, C. C. (2003). Face Processing: early processing in the recognition of faces. (Doctoral thesis). Berlin: DARWIN, Freie Universität Berlin, URL:http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/2003/35/. 216 pages.

[2]    Carbon, C. C. (1999). Konnektionistische Systeme: Simuliertes 'Bewußtsein' oder Bewußtsein selbst? [Connectionism: may connectionist systems develop a form of consciousness?]. M.A. thesis for Philosophy (Magisterarbeit). Universität Trier. 109 pages.  

[1]    Carbon, C. C. (1998). Emotionale und konfigurale Einflüsse auf die Verarbeitung räumlicher Informationen [Influences of emotional and configural variables on the processing of spatial information]. Diploma thesis for Psychology (Diplomarbeit). Universität Trier. 128 pages.