The Effect of Counterconditioning on Evaluative Responses and Harm Expectancy in a Fear Conditioning Paradigm

In fear conditioning, extinction targets harm expectancy as well as the fear response, but it often fails to eradicate the negative affective value that is associated with the conditioned stimulus. In the present study, we examined whether counterconditioning can serve to reduce evaluative responses within fear conditioning. The sample consisted of 70 nonselected students, 12 of whom were men. All participants received acquisition with human face stimuli as the conditioned stimuli and an unpleasant white noise as the unconditioned stimulus. After acquisition, one third of the sample was allocated to an extinction procedure. The other participants received counterconditioning with either a neutral stimulus (neutral tone) or a positive stimulus (baby laugh). Results showed that counterconditioning (with both neutral and positive stimuli), in contrast to extinction, successfully reduced evaluative responses. This effect was found on an indirect measure (affective priming task), but not on self-report. Counterconditioning with a positive stimulus also tended to enhance the reduction of conditioned skin conductance reactivity. The present data suggest that counterconditioning procedures might be a promising approach in diminishing evaluative learning and even expectancy learning in the context of fear conditioning.     

Expectancy-learning and evaluative learning in human classical conditioning: affective priming as an indirect and unobtrusive measure of conditioned stimulus valence

It has been argued that in classical conditioning two processes might be operative. First, one may learn that the conditioned stimulus (CS+) is a valid predictor for the occurrence of the biologically negative or positive event (US; expectancy-learning). Second, one may learn to perceive the conditioned stimulus itself as a negative or positive stimulus, depending on the valence of the event it has been associated with (evaluative learning). Until the present, however, both forms of learning have been investigated using rather different conditioning procedures. Using a differential aversive conditioning preparation with pictures of human faces as CSs and an electrocutaneous stimulus as US, we were able to demonstrate that both forms of learning can co-occur. Moreover, the extent of evaluative learning in this aversive conditioning procedure did not significantly differ from the amount of evaluative learning in an evaluative conditioning procedure with positive and negative adjectives as USs, which was administered to the same participants. In the present study evaluative learning was not only indexed by direct evaluative ratings, but we introduced affective priming as an indirect and unobtrusive, reaction time based measure of stimulus valence. Finally, imagery instructions during acquisition did not facilitate expectancy-learning nor evaluative learning.     

When two paradigms meet: Does evaluative learning extinguish in differential fear conditioning?

Contemporary theories of Pavlovian conditioning propose a distinction between signal learning (SL), in which a conditioned stimulus (CS) becomes a predictor for a biologically significant unconditioned stimulus (US), and evaluative learning (EL), in which the valence of the US is transferred to the CS. This distinction is based largely on the different susceptibilities of EL and SL to extinction. This study compared the extinction of indices of EL (online valence ratings) and SL (US-expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses, SCRs) in a differential fear conditioning design using complex CSs. Only half of the participants gave online valence ratings, allowing us to confirm that online valence measurement did not influence SCRs. In line with the distinction between EL and SL, SCRs extinguished rapidly while valence ratings showed resistance to extinction. US-expectancy ratings, however, were not distinguishable from valence ratings indicating that verbal indicators of EL and SL share a similar time course.     

Shaking That Icky Feeling: Effects of Extinction and Counterconditioning on Disgust-Related Evaluative Learning

Learned disgust appears to play an important role in certain anxiety disorders, and can be explained by the process of evaluative conditioning, in which an affective evaluative reaction evoked by an unconditional stimulus (US) is transferred to a conditional stimulus (CS). Much remains unknown about how disgust-related evaluative learning can be effectively eliminated. Study 1 of the present investigation examined the effects of extinction on reducing the negative evaluation of a CS that was acquired during disgust conditioning. Participants completed acquisition trials, with a disgusting picture as US and two neutral pictures as CS (CS + was paired with the US; CS- was unpaired), followed by extinction trials ("CS only"; experimental condition) or a filler task (control condition). Extinction trials reduced acquired US expectancy to the CS +, but did not extinguish negative evaluations of the CS +. Study 2 examined the effects of counterconditioning on evaluative learned disgust. After disgust acquisition trials, counterconditioning trials followed in which the CS + was paired with a pleasant US (experimental condition) or a filler task (control condition). Counterconditioning trials reduced acquired US expectancy to the CS + and reduced evaluative conditioned disgust. Implications of the potential differential effects of extinction and counterconditioning on evaluative learning for exposure-based treatment of specific anxiety disorders are discussed.     

Reevaluating evaluative conditioning: a nonassociative explanation of conditioning effects in the visual evaluative conditioning paradigm.

In 2 studies, the authors investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) is an associative phenomenon. Experiment 1 compared a standard EC paradigm with nonpaired and no-treatment control conditions. EC effects were obtained only when the conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (UCS) were rated as perceptually similar. However, similar EC effects were obtained in both control groups. An earlier failure to obtain EC effects was reanalyzed in Experiment 2. Conditioning-like effects were found when comparing a CS with the most perceptually similar UCSs used in the procedure but not when analyzing a CS rating with respect to the UCS with which it was paired during conditioning. The implications are that EC effects found in many studies are not due to associative learning and that the special characteristics of EC (conditioning without awareness and resistance to extinction) are probably nonassociative artifacts of the EC paradigm.     

Evaluative conditioning in social psychology: Facts and speculations

The aim of the present paper is to examine the contribution of evaluative conditioning (EC) to attitude formation theory in social psychology. This aim is pursued on two fronts. First, evaluative conditioning is analysed for its relevance to social psychological research. We show that conditioned attitudes can be acquired through simple co‐occurrences of a neutral and a valenced stimulus. Moreover, we argue that conditioned attitudes are not confined to direct contact with a valenced stimulus, but can be formed and dynamically reformed indirectly, through association chains. Second, social research is examined in an effort to identify evaluative learning mechanisms. We suggest that several important phenomena in social psychology (e.g., ingroup favouritism, prejudice, name letter effect) are at least partly due to simple mechanisms of evaluative learning. The implications for attitude formation theory and for applied settings are discussed.     

Evaluative conditioning in social psychology: Facts and speculations

The aim of the present paper is to examine the contribution of evaluative conditioning (EC) to attitude formation theory in social psychology. This aim is pursued on two fronts. First, evaluative conditioning is analysed for its relevance to social psychological research. We show that conditioned attitudes can be acquired through simple co-occurrences of a neutral and a valenced stimulus. Moreover, we argue that conditioned attitudes are not confined to direct contact with a valenced stimulus, but can be formed and dynamically reformed indirectly, through association chains. Second, social research is examined in an effort to identify evaluative learning mechanisms. We suggest that several important phenomena in social psychology (e.g., ingroup favouritism, prejudice, name letter effect) are at least partly due to simple mechanisms of evaluative learning. The implications for attitude formation theory and for applied settings are discussed.     

非条件刺激降低再评估对条件性恐惧消退的影响

诸多情绪障碍治疗的关键在于促进条件性恐惧反应的消退, 研究证明非条件刺激再评估能够引起恐惧反应的变化。本研究将非条件刺激降低再评估范式应用于消退训练, 以主观预期值、皮电反应作为恐惧反应指标, 考察恐惧习得后非条件刺激强度降低对条件性恐惧消退的影响, 并运用评价性条件作用探讨非条件刺激再评估的作用机制。结果表明：在消退阶段, 降低组对条件刺激的皮电反应显著低于控制组。同时评价性条件作用结果显示：经过非条件刺激再评估, 降低组较控制组对条件刺激的评价更为正性。说明非条件刺激降低再评估有效改变条件刺激的负性效价, 降低个体的恐惧反应、促进恐惧消退。     

Positive affect predicts less reacquisition of fear: relevance for long-term outcomes of exposure therapy

Much emphasis in fear conditioning research is placed on understanding extinction learning, partly because of its application in treating anxiety disorders. Return of fear after extinction is a problem affecting long-term maintenance of treatment gains. The present study evaluated whether positive affect (PA) is associated with lower rates of reacquisition, or, an increase in fear following re-pairings of the conditional stimulus (CS+) and unconditional stimulus (US; e.g. electric shock) after extinction. Results showed that higher PA before and after extinction was associated with less CS+ fear during reacquisition as measured by skin conductance arousal and US expectancy. Conversely, negative affect was not associated with reacquisition of fear using any measure. These results provide implications for reducing reacquisition with exposure therapy for anxiety disorders.     

Evaluative conditioning in the picture-picture paradigm with random assignment of conditioned stimuli to unconditioned stimuli

Human participants were allocated to 1 of 3 groups. In the conditioning group, each conditioned stimulus (CS)-unconditioned stimulus (US) pair was presented 7 times during the acquisition phase. Participants who were assigned to the extinction group saw 5 additional presentations of each CS in isolation after the 7 presentations of each CS-US pair. In the latent inhibition group, the CS-only trials were presented before the CS-US trials. Overall, a significant evaluative conditioning effect was observed. This effect cannot be dismissed on the basis of the arguments developed by A. P. Field and G. C. L. Davey (1997, 1998, 1999), and the results thus provide strong evidence for the associative nature of evaluative conditioning. The results are also in line with other findings, which showed that evaluative conditioning is resistant to extinction.     

Changing likes and dislikes through the back door: The US-revaluation effect

US-revaluation refers to the observation that subsequent changes in the valence of an unconditioned stimulus (US) after pairing it with a neutral, conditioned stimulus (CS) also changes the valence of the associated CS. Experiment 1 found evidence for the US-revaluation effect using an unobtrusive measure of evaluation. However, US-revaluation effects were more pronounced for positive-to-negative compared to negative-to-positive revaluations. Experiment 2 replicated this finding for self-reported evaluations, further showing that US-revaluation effects are stable over time and independent of explicit memory for the revaluating information. Using a modified paradigm, Experiment 3 ruled out method-related explanations for these findings and showed that changes in CS evaluations are correlated with parallel changes in US evaluations. These findings encourage the view of evaluative conditioning as an instance of stimulus–stimulus (S–S) rather than stimulus-response (S–R) learning. Implications for basic and applied research are discussed.     

Effects of US-Alone Presentations on Human Evaluative Conditioning

In the context of evaluative conditioning, the effects of additional presentations of the unconditioned stimulus (US) prior to conditioning (US preexposure) or after conditioning (US postexposure) were examined using between- and within-subjects control conditions. Two experiments that differed with respect to the nationality of the subjects were conducted. In both experiments, US-alone presentations reduced the magnitude of the evaluative response. The US pre- and postexposure effects were observed in subjects classified as aware as well as in subjects classified as unaware of the experimental contingencies. Another finding is that the evaluative conditioning procedure described by Martin and Levey (1978; Levey & Martin, 1975) resulted in reliable conditioning effects also in an American sample, thus extending the scope of that special evaluative conditioning paradigm. The findings are discussed in the context of recent models of classical and evaluative conditioning. Especially, the unexpected US postexposure effect gives rise to speculations concerning the learning process underlying evaluative conditioning.     

Goal relevance moderates evaluative conditioning effects

An important process by which preferences emerge is evaluative conditioning, defined as a change in the evaluation of a stimulus by pairing it repeatedly and consistently with an affective stimulus. The current research focuses on the role of motivation in this learning process. Specifically, it was investigated whether a conditioning procedure that is relevant to an individual's current goals is more effective than an irrelevant procedure. To this end, beverages were conditioned with either disgusted faces (relevant) or fearful faces (irrelevant). The results showed that thirsty(rather than non-thirsty) participants’ choice and evaluation of beverages were influenced by pairing beverages with disgust but not with fear. As similar results were obtained under optimal and suboptimal presentation of the conditioned stimuli, it is suggested that goals can affect automatic, associative learning, adding to the emerging body of research demonstrating that goals unconsciously affect evaluative processes.     

What you see is what will change: Evaluative conditioning effects depend on a focus on valence

This study investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) effects depend on an evaluative focus during the learning phase. An EC effect is a valence change of an originally neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus or CS) that is due to the former pairing with a positive or negative stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or US). In three experiments, the task focus during the conditioning phase was manipulated. Participants judged CS–US pairings either with respect to their valence or with respect to another stimulus dimension. EC effects on explicit and implicit measures were found when valence was task relevant but not when the non-valent stimulus dimension was task relevant. Two accounts for the valence focus effect are proposed: (1) An additional direct learning of the relation of CS and evaluative responses in the valence focus condition, or (2) a stronger activation of US valence in the valence focus condition compared to the non-valent focus condition.     

What you see is what will change: evaluative conditioning effects depend on a focus on valence

This study investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) effects depend on an evaluative focus during the learning phase. An EC effect is a valence change of an originally neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus or CS) that is due to the former pairing with a positive or negative stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or US). In three experiments, the task focus during the conditioning phase was manipulated. Participants judged CS-US pairings either with respect to their valence or with respect to another stimulus dimension. EC effects on explicit and implicit measures were found when valence was task relevant but not when the non-valent stimulus dimension was task relevant. Two accounts for the valence focus effect are proposed: (1) An additional direct learning of the relation of CS and evaluative responses in the valence focus condition, or (2) a stronger activation of US valence in the valence focus condition compared to the non-valent focus condition.     

状态焦虑对条件恐惧习得和消退的影响

采用44名正常女性大学生作为被试, 通过心理社会压力暴露的方法诱发焦虑组被试的状态焦虑, 采用主观预期值作为指标, 考察焦虑对条件恐惧习得和消退的直接影响, 并探讨这种影响是否也表现在评价性条件作用上。结果表明：心理社会压力暴露显著提高了焦虑组被试的状态焦虑。在习得阶段, 状态焦虑降低了被试对条件刺激的辨别条件恐惧反应, 具体而言, 状态焦虑降低了被试对CS+的主观预期值, 但是却提高了对CS?的主观预期值; 在消退阶段, 状态焦虑抑制了被试对条件刺激的消退。状态焦虑的影响也表现在评价性条件作用上, 和控制组相比, 焦虑组在习惯化和消退阶段对条件刺激表现出了更为负性的效价评定。     

Resistance to extinction of human evaluative conditioning using a between-subjects design

Two experiments were conducted to examine whether the resistance to extinction obtained in evaluative conditioning (EC) studies implies that EC is a qualitatively distinct form of classical conditioning (Baeyens, Eelen, & Crombez, 1995 a) or whether it is the result of an nonassociative artefact ( Field & Davey, 1997 , 1998 , 1999 ). Both experiments included between-subjects control groups in addition to standard within-subjects control conditions. In Experiment 1, only verbal ratings were measured in order to evaluate the effect of postacquisition CS-only exposures on EC whereas in Experiment 2, verbal ratings and postextinction priming effects were measured. The results showed that the EC effects are demonstrable in a between-subjects design and that the extinction procedure did not have any influence on the acquired evaluative value of CSs regardless of whether the verbal ratings or the priming effects were used as dependent variables. The present results provide evidence that EC is resistant to extinction and suggest an interpretation of EC as a qualitatively distinct form of associative learning.     

I like it because I said that I like it: evaluative conditioning effects can be based on stimulus-response learning

Evaluative conditioning (EC) effects are often assumed to be based on a learned mental link between the CS (conditioned stimulus) and the US (unconditioned stimulus). We demonstrate that this link is not the only one that can underlie EC effects, but that if evaluative responses are actually given during the learning phase also a direct link between the CS and an evaluative response-a CS-ER link-can be learned and lead to EC effects. In Experiment 1, CSs were paired with USs and participants were asked to evaluate the pairs during the conditioning phase. Resulting EC effects were unaffected by a later revaluation of the USs, suggesting that these EC effects can be attributed to CS-ER learning rather than to CS-US learning. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1 with the difference that no evaluative responses were given during the learning phase. EC effects in this study were influenced by US revaluation, suggesting that these EC effects are mainly based on CS-US learning. In Experiment 3, it was shown that EC effects can be found even if the USs are entirely removed from the procedure and the CSs are only paired with enforced evaluative responses. Together the experiments show that the valence of a stimulus can change because of a contingency with an evaluative response. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).     

Human evaluative conditioning: acquisition trials, presentation schedule, evaluative style and contingency awareness.

Two different processes may be operative in human Pavlovian conditioning: signal learning and evaluative learning. Whereas most studies on evaluative conditioning focused on a mere demonstration of the phenomenon or on a theoretical analysis of the underlying processes, some basic parameters of evaluative learning are still unexplored. Hence, using the standard neutral picture--(dis)liked picture pairing paradigm (Baeyens, Eelen & Van den Bergh, 1990), in this study the effect of two parameters of evaluative conditioning was assessed on a between-subjects base, namely the Number of Acquisition Trials (2/5/10/20) and the Presentation Schedule of the stimulus pairs (blockwise or random). Additionally, the study included an exploratory analysis of the potential effects of the Evaluative Style of subjects (Feelers vs Thinkers, operationalized in terms of speed of emitting evaluations). Finally, the relationship between contingency awareness and evaluative learning was reassessed. Neutral-liked conditioning was found to be quadratically related to the number of acquisition trials (increase in effect up to 10 trials, decrease from 10 to 20 trials), whereas neutral-disliked conditioning linearly increased with increasing numbers of trials. Randomized vs blockwise presentation schedules of the stimulus pairs did differentially affect the overall pattern of conditioning, but in a way which was both unexpected and difficult to account for theoretically. Both the Evaluative Style of subjects and contingency awareness were demonstrated to be generally orthogonal to conditioned shifts in CS valence. Based on these findings, some practical suggestions are provided for the application of evaluating conditioning based therapeutical interventions to affective-behavioral disorders which are centred around inappropriate (dis)likes.     

A conceptual and theoretical analysis of evaluative conditioning

Evaluative conditioning is best defined as an effect, that is, as a change in the valence of a stimulus that results from pairing the stimulus with another stimulus. This definition has several advantages that are made explicit in this paper. One of the advantages is that it clarifies that evaluative conditioning can be due to multiple processes. Therefore, the conditions under which evaluative conditioning is observed can depend on the processes that underlie a particular manifestation of evaluative conditioning. This could explain why there are so many conflicting results about the conditions under which evaluative conditioning can be found. Future research should adopt a meta-conditional approach that focuses not only on whether a certain condition is crucial for obtaining evaluative conditioning but should also examine when a certain condition is crucial.