Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 505

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Automatic Evaluation Effect: Unconditional Automatic Attitude Activation with a Pronunciation Task

Open access
Bargh, John A., Chaiken, Shelly, Raymond, Paula, Hymes, Charles·1996·Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Abstract

Previous demonstrations of automatic attitude activation have used the same critical test of the presence of automaticity (Bargh, Chaiken, Govender, & Pratto, 1992; Chaiken & Bargh, 1993; Fazio, Sanbonmatsu, Powell, & Kardes, 1986). In this task, subjects first classify as quickly as they can each of a series of adjectives as to whether each adjective is good or bad in meaning. Subsequently, on each priming trial, a word corresponding to an attitude object briefly precedes the adjective target. Whether this attitude objectprimeautomatically activates its corresponding evaluation in memory is indicated by whether the presence of that prime word on a trial facilitates or interferes with the conscious and intended evaluation of the adjective target. Although there is some disagreement as to the generality of the automaticity effect (Chaiken & Bargh, 1993; Fazio, 1993), all relevant experiments have obtained it for at least some of the subject's attitudes. The present experiments investigated the role that the adjective evaluation task itself may play in producing the automaticity effect. If the effect is truly unconditional, requiring only the mere presence of the attitude object in the environment, it should not depend on the subject consciously thinking in terms of evaluation. Three experiments designed to remove all such evaluative features from the basic paradigm revealed that the automaticity effect does not depend on such strategic evaluative processing. In fact, consistent with theaffect primacyhypothesis (Murphy & Zajonc, 1993), removing conscious processing aspects from the paradigm serves to increase, rather than decrease, the generality of the automatic evaluation effect.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jesp.1996.0005

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 505

Metadata

Authors
Bargh, J. A., Chaiken, S., Raymond, P., & Hymes, C.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-01
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
104-128
ISSN
0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1995849455
Cited by
505
References
3
FWCI
45.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.