CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 327Social and Intergroup PsychologyBehavioral Health and InterventionsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The iterative reprocessing model: A multilevel framework for attitudes and evaluation

Cunningham, William A., Zelazo, Philip David, Packer, Dominic J., Van Bavel, Jay J.·2007·Social Cognition
DOI 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.736
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Dual–process models of attitudes highlight the fact that evaluative processes are complex and multifaceted. Nevertheless, many of these models typically neglect important interactions among processes that can contribute to an evaluation. In this article, we propose a multilevel model informed by neuroscience in which current evaluations are constructed from relatively stable attitude representations through the iterative reprocessing of information. Whereas initial iterations provide relatively quick and dirty evaluations, additional iterations accompanied by reflective processes yield more nuanced evaluations and allow for phenomena such as ambivalence. Importantly, this model predicts that the processes underlying relatively automatic evaluations continue to be engaged across multiple iterations, and that they influence andare influenced by more reflective processes. We describe the Iterative Reprocessing Model at the computational, algorithmic, and implementational levels of analysis (Marr, 1982) to more fully characterize its premises and predictions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.736

Cites

75 of 75 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?

  • The MMT proposes that linkages between mindfulness and reappraisal emerge at multiple levels of temporal resolution.

    “The MMT proposes that linkages between mindfulness and reappraisal emerge at multiple levels of temporal resolution, in keeping with iterative process models of emotional experience [85] and extended process models of emotion regulation [86].”

    From Testing the mindfulness-to-meaning theory: Evidence for mindful positive emotion regulation from a reanalysis of longitudinal data (2017) · cites this paper as [85]

  • Many physiological measures capture responses much faster than traditional self-report measures, so discrepancies between physiological and self-report measures may be driven by differences in the time window of measured responses rather than lack of awareness.

    “many physiological measures capture responses to stimuli that are much faster than responses on traditional self-report measures (e.g., event-related potentials). In these cases, discrepancies be- tween physiological and self-report measures may be driven by differences in the time window of the measured responses rather than lack of awareness (Cunningham et al. 2007,Moors 2016).”

    From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Cunningham et al. 2007

  • Responses on many indirect measures such as the IAT and EPT are much faster than responses on direct measures, so discrepancies between the two kinds of measures may be driven by differences in the time window of measured responses rather than lack of awareness.

    “responses on many indirect mea- sures (e.g., IAT, EPT) are much faster than responses on direct measures. Hence, discrepancies between the two kinds of measures may be driven by differences in the time window of the mea- sured responses rather than lack of awareness (Cunningham et al. 2007, Ranganath et al. 2008).”

    From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Cunningham et al. 2007

  • Many actions can be evaluated according to moral considerations.

    “we propose that many actions can be evaluated according to moral considerations [28].”

    From The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non-Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions (2012) · cites this paper as [28]

  • Highly moralized actions (like murder) are chronically and reflexively processed as moral and are therefore commonly evaluated in moral terms.

    “Although it is likely the case that highly moralized actions (like murder) are chronically and reflexively processed as moral (i.e., the representations rapidly stabilize in a way that reflects the moral construal) and are therefore commonly evaluated in moral terms, we propose that many actions can be evaluated according to moral considerations [28].”

    From The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non-Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions (2012) · cites this paper as [28]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 77 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cunningham, W. A., Zelazo, P. D., Packer, D. J., & Van Bavel, J. J.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Social Cognition
Publisher
Guilford Publications
Published
2007-10
Volume
25
Issue
5
Pages
736-760
ISSN
0278-016X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.736
OpenAlex
W2168759216
Cited by
322
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 17
FWCI
25.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Social Cognition (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
attitude measurement, dual-process models, attitude representation, reflective processing, ambivalence, automated assessment, levels of analysis

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