Cited by 219Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesSocial and Intergroup PsychologyAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Neural components of social evaluation.

Cunningham, William A., Johnson, Marcia K., Gatenby, J. Chris, Gore, John C., Banaji, Mahzarin R.·2003·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

Evaluative responses appear to involve 2 seemingly distinct sets of processes: those that are automatically activated and others that are more consciously controlled. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, the authors investigated the brain systems associated with automatic and controlled evaluative processing. Participants made either evaluative (good-bad) or nonevaluative (past-present) judgments about famous names. Greater amygdala activity was observed for names rated as "bad" relative to those rated as "good," regardless of whether the task directly involved an evaluative judgment (good-bad) or not (past-present). Good-bad judgments resulted in greater medial and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC) activity than past-present judgments. Furthermore, there was greater ventrolateral PFC activity in good-bad judgments marked by greater ambivalence. Together, these findings indicate a neural distinction between processes engaged for automatic and controlled evaluation. Whereas automatic processes are sensitive to simple valence, controlled processes are sensitive to attitudinal complexity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.639

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The observation of social stimuli in general (e.g., smiling faces) increases activity in medial prefrontal cortex and striatum in cases where the social stimuli have a high value.

    “The observation of social stimuli in general (e.g., smiling faces) increases activity in medial prefrontal cortex 33, 34 and striatum in cases where the social stimuli have a high value (e.g., participants will exert effort or pay to view an attractive face) 35–38.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 84 · Cited by 219

Authors
Cunningham, W. A., Johnson, M. K., Gatenby, J. C., Gore, J. C., & Banaji, M. R.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2003
Volume
85
Issue
4
Pages
639-649
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2168195534
Cited by
219
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH62196, MH-75672, P50MH062196)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
social evaluation, automatic processing, controlled processing, amygdala, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, ambivalence, valence, evaluative judgments, famous names
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Brain, Cues, Hemodynamics, Humans, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Reaction Time, Social Perception

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