Reactance in affective-evaluative learning: Outside of conscious control?

Recent studies have shown that the basic evaluative conditioning (EC) effect (originally neutral stimuli acquiring an affective value congruent with the valence of the affective stimulus they were paired with) seems to be limited to participants who are unaware of the stimulus pairings. If participants are aware of the pairings, reactance effects occur (i.e., changes in the opposite direction of the valence of the affective stimulus). To examine whether these reactance effects are due to processes of conscious countercontrol or whether the ratings reflect intrinsic feelings towards the stimuli, a new procedure was developed that included a bogus-pipeline condition. In this procedure, which was adapted from attitude research, participants were connected to bogus lie detector equipment leading them to believe that their "true" affective-evaluative responses were being observed. In Experiment 1, reactance effects occurred also in this procedure, suggesting that the effect is spontaneous and not due to processes of conscious countercontrol. In Experiment 2, these effects were replicated using a between-subjects design in addition to the standard within-subjects control condition.     

Contextual influences on implicit evaluation: a test of additive versus contrastive effects of evaluative context stimuli in affective priming

Drawing on two alternative accounts of the affective priming effect (spreading activation vs. response interference), the present research investigated the underlying processes of how evaluative context stimuli influence implicit evaluations in the affective priming task. Employing two sequentially presented prime stimuli (rather than a single prime), two experiments showed that affective priming effects elicited by a given prime stimulus were more pronounced when this stimulus was preceded by a context prime of the opposite valence than when it was preceded by a context prime of the same valence. This effect consistently emerged for pictures (Experiment 1) and words (Experiment 2) as prime stimuli. These results suggest that the impact of evaluative context stimuli on implicit evaluations is mediated by contrast effects in the attention to evaluative information rather than by additive effects in the activation of evaluative information in associative memory.     

Context effects in evaluative conditioning of implicit evaluations

Propositional models of evaluative conditioning postulate that the impact of stimulus pairings on liking should depend not on the pairings themselves but on what the pairings imply about the relation between stimuli. Hence, context manipulations that change the implications of stimulus pairings should moderate evaluative conditioning. We manipulated context by varying the way in which context cues were paired with affective outcomes while keeping the pairings between target cues and affective outcomes constant. All participants saw one target cue compound that was followed by a positive outcome (XF+) and another target cue compound that was followed by a negative outcome (YG?). In condition Same, each context cue was consistently paired with a positive or negative outcome, regardless of whether it was presented alone or in compound with another cue (A+, B+, AB+; C?, D?, CD?). In condition Opposite, however, a context cue was paired with a certain outcome when presented alone and with an outcome of the opposite valence when presented in a compound with another cue (A+, B+, AB?; C?, D?, CD+). Employing several implicit measures, we assessed the implicit evaluations of the target cues X and Y. In all three studies, the outcome of the measurement procedure differed between conditions. In condition Same, the positively paired cue X was evaluated more positively than the negatively paired cue Y. In condition Opposite, however, this preference was not present. This pattern of results suggests that EC is determined not only by the objective pairings but also by the context in which these pairings occur. Implications for models of evaluative conditioning are discussed.     

On the intentional control of conditioned evaluative responses

The evaluative conditioning (EC) effect is defined as a change in the evaluation of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a valenced unconditioned stimulus (US). The current research investigated the controllability of EC effects by asking participants to either promote or prevent the influence of CS–US pairings before they provided evaluative ratings of the CS. Experiment 1 showed that instructions to maximize or minimize the influence of CS–US pairings moderated EC effects in line with task instructions. However, this moderation was observed only when participants were able to recall the valence of the US that had been paired with a given CS. When participants failed to remember the valence of the US, significant EC effects emerged regardless of control instructions. Experiment 2 tested whether the influence of CS–US pairings on CS evaluations can be intentionally reversed. The results showed that reversal instructions led to a reverse EC effect when participants were able to recall the valence of the US that had been paired with a given CS, but not when they were unable to recall the valence of the US. Taken together, these results suggest that US valence memory is a necessary precondition for controlling the expression of a conditioned evaluative response, but it is not a necessary precondition for the emergence of EC effects per se.     

Subjective,physiological, and behavioural responses towards evaluatively conditioned stimuli

Evaluative Conditioning (EC) is commonly defined as the change in liking of a stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) due to its pairings with an affective unconditioned stimulus (US). In Experiment 1, we investigated effects of repeated stimulus pairings on affective responses, i.e. valence and arousal ratings, pupil size, and duration estimation. After repeatedly pairing the CSs with affective USs, a consistent pattern of affective responses emerged: The CS_negative was rated as being more negative and more arousing, resulted in larger pupils, and was temporally overestimated compared to the CS_neutral. In Experiment 2, the influence of a mere instruction about the contingency between a CS and US on affective responses was examined. After mere instruction about upcoming pairings between the CS and US, subjective ratings also changed, but there was neither evidence for differential pupillary responses nor for differential temporal processing. The results indicate that EC via pairings or instructions can change the affective responses towards formerly neutral stimuli and introduce pupil size as a physiological measure in EC research. However, Experiment 2 suggests that there might be moderating factors based on the type of EC procedure involved.     

When All Is Revealed: A Dissociation between Evaluative Learning and Contingency Awareness

Three experiments are reported that address the issue of awareness in evaluative learning in two different sensory modalities: visual and haptic. Attempts were made to manipulate the degree of awareness through a reduction technique (by use of a distractor task in Experiments 1 and 2 and by subliminally presenting affective stimuli in Experiment 3) and an induction technique (by unveiling the evaluative learning effect and requiring participants to try to discount the influence of the affective stimuli). The results indicate overall that evaluative learning was successful in the awareness-reduction groups but not in the awareness-induction groups. Moreover, an effect in the opposite direction to that normally observed in evaluative learning emerged in participants aware of the stimulus contingencies. In addition, individual differences in psychological reactance were found to be implicated in the strength and direction of the effect. It is argued that these results pose serious problems for the contention that awareness is necessary for evaluative learning.     

The influence of extinction and counterconditioning instructions on evaluative conditioning effects

In three experiments, we tested the influence of instructions about an allegedly upcoming extinction or counterconditioning phase on evaluative conditioning (EC) effects. After an acquisition phase in which neutral stimuli were related to positive or negative stimuli via instructions (Experiments 1 and 2a) or actual pairings (Experiment 2b), three different groups of participants were either informed that in the next phase the neutral stimuli would be presented without positive or negative stimuli (extinction instruction), that the neutral stimuli in the next phase would be paired with stimuli of the opposite valence than before (counterconditioning instruction), or received no further instructions. Afterwards, liking of the originally neutral stimuli was measured either with an evaluative rating (Experiment 1) or with an Implicit Association Test (IAT; Experiments 2a and 2b). EC was reduced in the counterconditioning condition of Experiment 1 and in the joint analysis of Experiments 2a and 2b. The extinction instruction led to a reduction of EC only in Experiment 1. Finally, whether the acquisition phase consisted of instructions about CS–US pairings (Experiment 2a) or the actual experience of CS–US pairings (Experiment 2b) did not significantly impact the observed changes in liking. Overall, our results suggest that similar mechanisms might mediate instruction- and experienced-based EC. Our results are in line with propositional models of EC but can be explained also by association formation models and dual process models of EC, provided that certain auxiliary assumptions are made.     

Automatic influence of arousal information on evaluative processing: Valence–arousal interactions in an affective Simon task

Previous research showed that evaluation speed is faster for negative stimuli that are high in arousal and for positive stimuli that are low in arousal. The present study investigated whether arousal and valence analogously interact in automatic stimulus evaluations, i.e., if stimulus valence is irrelevant for the task. One sample of participants switched randomly between an evaluation task and an affective Simon task that assessed stimulus evaluations indirectly. Another sample completed a pure Simon task. In all conditions, the influence of affective stimuli on task performance was enhanced when valence and arousal were congruent (i.e., high-arousing negative and low-arousing positive stimuli) than when both stimulus dimensions were incongruent (i.e., low-arousing negative and high-arousing positive stimuli). These findings suggest that evaluative implications of stimulus arousal and valence are automatically inferred even when stimulus evaluation is irrelevant for the task at hand.     

The positivity proportion effect: A list context effect in masked affective priming

In the evaluative decision task, participants decide whether target words denote something positive or negative. Positive and negative prime words are known to engender so-called affective priming effects in this task. Primes were sandwich masked, and the proportion of positive to negative target words was manipulated. In Experiment 1, prime valence and positivity proportion interacted, so that primes of the less frequently presented target valence caused larger priming effects. Experiment 2 rendered an explanation of this interaction in terms of response bias unlikely, Experiment 3 ruled out a peripheral locus of the effect, and Experiment 4 ruled out an account in terms of stimulus repetition. The effect is explained by means of an attentional bias favoring the rare kind of valence.     

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.     

Automatic affective priming of recently acquired stimulus valence: Priming at SOA 300 but not at SOA 1000

In a recent series of studies, it was demonstrated that originally neutral stimuli that were predictive of an electrocutaneous stimulus in a differential aversive conditioning procedure not only acquired “signal-value” but also acquired a negative affective valence. These affective changes were not only evident from the evaluative ratings scales, but also from the data of an affective priming procedure. This response-latency based priming procedure has recently been employed as an indirect and unobtrusive index of stimulus valence (attitudes) (e.g., Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995). In the present experiment, the use of the affective priming procedure as an indirect measure of stimulus valence was further explored. Results showed that aversively conditioned stimuli revealed their newly acquired valence in this priming procedure. As predicted, this effect was obtained at the short SOA (300 ms) but not at the long SOA (1000 ms). The significant SOA X Priming interaction suggests that the affective priming procedure is less or not affected by demand effects and (self-presentational) response strategies. This makes the affective priming effect and excellent and unobtrusive measure of affective valence and an interesting alternative to subjective rating scales in situations where demand effects might otherwise influence responding. The results are also related to recent research on conditioning models of the acquisition of anxiety disorders, and to research on the co-occurrence of expectancy learning and affective learning within these models.     

Affective priming of nonaffective semantic categorization responses

Recent studies have shown that robust affective priming effects can be obtained when participants are required to categorize the targets on the basis of their valence, but not when participants are asked to categorize the targets on the basis of nonaffective features. On the basis of this pattern of results, it has been argued that affective priming is due to processes that operate at a response selection stage rather than to processes that operate at an encoding stage. We demonstrate (a) that affective priming of nonaffective semantic categorization responses can be obtained when participants assign attention to the affective stimulus dimension, and (b) that affective priming in the standard evaluative categorization task is strongly reduced when participants assign attention to nonaffective stimulus features. On the basis of these findings, we argue (a) that processes operating at an encoding stage do contribute to the affective priming effect, and (b) that automatic affective stimulus processing is reduced when participants selectively attend to nonaffective stimulus features.     

The Fluency Amplification Model: Fluent stimuli show more intense but not evidently more positive evaluations

Processing fluency plays a large role in forming judgments, as research repeatedly shows. According to the Hedonic Fluency Model, more fluently processed stimuli are rated more affectively positive than less fluently processed stimuli. Most research documenting such findings uses neutral or positive stimuli with low complexity, thus any potential impact of initial stimulus valence cannot be tested. In the present study, 60 IAPS stimuli ranging from very negative to very positive valence were rated on liking by participants. Processing fluency was manipulated through perceptual priming (7 ms). Results of Experiment 1 (N = 35) support the prediction of the Hedonic Fluency Model, but only for stimuli with an initially positive valence. However, when negative stimuli were processed more fluently, they were rated as more negative than when processed less fluently. Experiment 2 (N = 39) showed that enhancing the accessibility of the stimulus content (via prolonging the prime duration to 100 ms) cannot account for the results of Experiment 1, since Experiment 2 failed to replicate the findings obtained in Experiment 1. Potential factors influencing affective evaluation of negative stimuli are discussed. A model is offered for the reinterpretation of processing fluency as an amplifying factor for evaluative judgment.     

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.     

Evaluative conditioning can be modulated by memory of the CS–US pairings at the time of testing

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is the valence change of a (typically neutral) stimulus (CS) that is due to the previous pairing with another (typically valent) stimulus (US). It has been repeatedly shown that EC effects are stronger or existent only if participants know which US was paired with which CS. Knowledge of the CS–US pairings is usually measured temporally close to both the conditioning phase and the CS valence measurement phase. Hence, the relation between EC and knowledge about the pairings could indicate either that participants need to become aware of the pairings at some point or that they need to remember them during the CS valence test. We isolated the impact of memory during the CS valence test in a study that encompassed two sessions. During the first session, participants were presented with CS–US pairings. The valence of the CSs was measured in a second session several days later using both a rating scale and an affective priming procedure. Memory for the pairings was measured both during the first and the second session. Using item-based multilevel analysis, we found that EC in the second session was related to memory for the pairings during the second session, but not to the memory for the pairings measured immediately after the learning phase. For the pairs that were remembered during the first session, but not during the second session, no EC effect was found. These results suggest that memory for CS–US pairings during valence measurement can be relevant for EC effects to occur.     

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.     

Reducing automatically activated racial prejudice through implicit evaluative conditioning

The authors report a set of experiments that use an implicit evaluative conditioning procedure to reduce automatically activated racial prejudice in White participants in a short period and with relatively few trials. Experiment 1 demonstrated that participants were unaware of the repeated conditioned stimulus-unconditioned stimulus (CS-US) pairings of Black-good and White-bad. In Experiment 2, the procedure was found to be effective in reducing prejudice as indicated by an evaluative priming measure of automatically activated racial attitudes. In Experiment 3, this reduction in prejudice was found to persist throughout a 2-day separation between the conditioning procedure and the administration of the dependent measure. The implications of the present findings for the persistence of automatically activated racial prejudice are discussed.     

Effects of prime task on affective priming by facial expressions of emotion

Priming of affective word evaluation by pictures of faces showing positive and negative emotional expressions was investigated in two experiments that used a double task procedure where participants were asked to respond to the prime or to the target on different trials. The experiments varied between-subjects the prime task assignment and the prime-target interval (SOA, stimulus onset asynchrony). Significant congruency effects (that is, faster word evaluation when prime and target had the same valence than when they were of opposite valence) were observed in both experiments. When the prime task oriented the subjects to an affectively irrelevant property of the faces (their gender), priming was observed at SOA 300 ms but not at SOA 1000 ms (Experiment 1). However, when the prime task assignment explicitly oriented the subjects to the valence of the face, priming was observed at both SOA durations (Experiment 2). These results show, first, that affective priming by pictures of facial emotion can be obtained even when the subject has an explicit goal to process a non-affective property of the prime. Second, sensitivity of the priming effect to SOA duration seems to depend on whether it is mediated by intentional or unintentional activation of the valence of the face prime.     

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).