Associative Attitude Learning: A Closer Look at Evidence and How It Relates to Attitude Models
Abstract
Associative attitude learning is typically viewed as a low-level process that automatically registers mere co-occurrences between stimuli, independent of their validity and relational meaning. This view invites to critically examine how attitude formation conforms to four operating conditions (i.e., unawareness, efficiency, goal independence, and uncontrollability) and two operating principles (i.e., unqualified registration of mere co-occurrences between stimuli and formation of direct stimulus-response links), which is the main purpose of the present contribution. The general discussion examines how contemporary attitude models endorse these conditions and principles. Overall, this contribution calls for (a) a nuanced understanding of the nature and scope of associative attitude learning, (b) a fine-grained understanding of how contemporary attitude models endorse conditions and principles reviewed here and find them relevant to their theorization of attitude formation, (c) a clarification of how direct and indirect evaluative measures relate to these conditions and principles, and (d) enhanced efforts in specifying contemporary attitude formation models.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Studies using attentional load consistently found that EC effects vanish to nonsignificance under attentional load.
“Overall, studies using this approach consistently found that EC effects vanish to nonsignificance under attentional load (for a detailed review, see Corneille & Stahl 2019).”
From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Corneille & Stahl 2019
Recent studies relying on stronger designs and adequate measures of awareness have generally failed to support subliminal EC.
“Recent studies relying on stronger designs and adequate measures of awareness have generally failed to support subliminal EC.”
From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Corneille & Stahl 2019
Overall, there is little to no evidence for EC effects when using low-strength stimuli.
“Overall, there is little to no evidence for EC effects when using low-strength stimuli (for a detailed review, see Corneille & Stahl 2019).”
From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Corneille & Stahl 2019
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 132 · Cited by 129
- Authors
- Corneille, O., & Stahl, C.
- Affiliations
- UCLouvain (BE)
- University of Cologne (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Corneille, Olivier
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-03-24
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 161-189
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W2792846451
- Cited by
- 129
- References
- 132
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 39.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Kölner Universitäts PublikationsServer (Universität zu Köln) (publishedVersion)
- DIAL (Catholic University of Leuven) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- attitude formation, attitude models, stimulus-response associations, direct and indirect measures, unconscious learning, uncontrollability
- MeSH terms
- Association Learning, Attitude, Humans, Models, Psychological
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
