Cited by 79Social and Intergroup PsychologyMemory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and Influences

Implicit misattribution of evaluative responses: Contingency-unaware evaluative conditioning requires simultaneous stimulus presentations.

Hütter, Mandy, Sweldens, Steven·2013·Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Abstract

Recent research has shown that evaluative conditioning (EC) procedures can change attitudes without participants' awareness of the contingencies between conditioned and unconditioned stimuli (Hütter, Sweldens, Stahl, Unkelbach, & Klauer, 2012). We present a theoretical explanation and boundary condition for the emergence of unaware EC effects based on the implicit misattribution of evaluative responses from unconditioned to conditioned stimuli. We hypothesize that such misattribution is only possible when conditioned and unconditioned stimuli are perceived simultaneously. Therefore we manipulate the simultaneity of the stimulus presentations and apply a process dissociation procedure to distinguish contingency-aware from contingency-unaware EC effects. A multinomial model indicates that with sequential presentations, EC effects do not occur without contingency awareness. However, unaware EC effects do occur with simultaneous presentations. The findings support dual-process theories of learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0029989

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Some studies found evidence for memory-independent EC, while other studies did not.

    “Depending on the procedure and analytic approach, some studies found evidence for memory-independent EC (e.g., Hütter & Sweldens 2013, Jurchiș et al. 2020, Walther & Nagengast 2006, Waroquier et al. 2020), while other studies did not (e.g., Kurdi et al. 2022, Mierop et al. 2017, Pleyers et al. 2007, Stahl et al. 2009).”

    From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Hütter & Sweldens 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hütter, M., & Sweldens, S.
Affiliations
Heidelberg University (DE)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
Published
2013
Volume
142
Issue
3
Pages
638-643
ISSN
  • 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2222
OpenAlex
W2333212355
Cited by
79
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5
FWCI
10.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
INSEAD
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
evaluative conditioning, contingency awareness, attitude change, implicit learning, dual-process theory, process dissociation, contingency learning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude, Awareness, Conditioning, Psychological, Female, Humans, Judgment, Learning, Male, Models, Psychological, Photic Stimulation, Psychological Theory

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