Attitudinal effects of mere exposure.

Zajonc, Robert B.

doi:10.1037/h0025848

Cited by 5,245 publications

(3,386 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

162

Mentioning

3,064

Contrasting

Unclassified

135

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, these data suggest that a greater frequency of exposure to certain types of stimuli during developmental learning may prompt a greater degree of attention to these stimuli subsequently, not unlike the association between repetitive exposure to stimuli and their subsequent deemed likeability (i.e., the mere-exposure effect; Bornstein, 1989;Zajonc, 1968). Unfortunately however, few studies have assessed the outcome of long-term exposure to threatening and aversive experiences on attentional processing for threat during development (for a recent exception see Taylor, Eisenberger, Saxbe, Lehman, & Lieberman,…”

Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 94%

Selective attention to threat versus reward: Meta-analysis and neural-network modeling of the dot-probe task

Frewen

Dozois

Joanisse

et al. 2008

Clinical Psychology Review

175

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two decades of research conducted to date has examined selective visual attention to threat and reward stimuli as a function of individual differences in anxiety using the dot-probe task. The present study tests a connectionist neural-network model of meta-analytic and key individual study results derived from this literature. Attentional bias for threatening and reward-related stimuli is accounted for by connectionist model implementation of the following clinical psychology and affective neuroscience principles: 1) affective learning and temperament, 2) state and trait anxiety, 3) intensity appraisal, 4) affective chronometry, 5) attentional control, and 6) selective attention training. Theoretical implications for the study of mood and anxiety disorders are discussed.Key Words: Dot-Probe Task, Selective Attention, Threat, Reward, Anxiety, Depression, Connectionism, Neural Network, Amygdala. A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPTSelective Attention for Reward & Threat 3 Selective Attention to Threat versus Reward: Meta-analysis and Neural-Network Modeling of the Dot-Probe TaskTheoretical constructs and research methodologies derived from cognitive psychology figure prominently in current emotion research, including investigations into the nature and function of anxiety. For example, cognitive researchers have been studying how individuals visually attend to threatening stimuli, and how between-subject variability in the functioning of attentional systems may correlate with individual differences in anxiety-related traits and disorders (e.g., Williams, Watts, MacLeod, & Matthews, 1997).Evolutionary models of emotion and attention hypothesize that nature may have programmed the visual-attention system to attend selectively to stimuli of biological significance, including both to cues of possible impending threat (e.g., predators), on the one hand, and to cues of potential reinforcement-reward value (e.g., food, mates), on the other (e.g., LeDoux, 1996;Panksepp, 1998;Rolls, 1999). Attentional mechanisms procuring the rapid detection of sources of potential environmental threat are therefore presumed to afford an obvious survival-facilitating mechanism (A. Mathews & Mackintosh, 1998;A. Mathews, Mackintosh, & Fulcher, 1997;. However, an equally integral attentional function to the biological fitness of organisms is to orient toward stimuli of potential reward-value in their environments (Panksepp, 1998;Rolls, 1999).It may be that reward-and threat-detection are performed by distinct attentional systems 1 . Specifically, threat detection attentional mechanisms may represent secondary interrupt programs that continuously perform a background analysis of stimuli regarding their likelihood of representing a source of danger, attaining foreground and conscious significance only to the extent that this analysis results in the detection of relatively significant sources of danger (e.g., LeDoux, 1996). Otherwise, the default and primary orientation of attention may be toward reward-relevant stimuli...

show abstract

Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 94%

Selective attention to threat versus reward: Meta-analysis and neural-network modeling of the dot-probe task

Frewen

Dozois

Joanisse

et al. 2008

Clinical Psychology Review

175

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the introduction of new foods between the ages of 5-7 months can be relatively easy and met with little resistance (Schwartz, Issanchou, & Nicklaus, 2009), parents may not associate the rejection of foods at around the age of two years with a developmental phase. This is concerning, as research with both weaning babies (Maier, Chabanet, Schaal, Leathwood, & Issanchou, 2007) and pre-school children (Carruth & Skinner, 2000;Carruth, Ziegler, Gordon, & Barr, 2004) has shown that parents typically do not persist in offering a rejected food beyond five attempts, and by ‗giving up' too soon, the diet of the child can become unnecessarily limited (Aldridge, Dovey, & Halford, 2009;Cashdan, 1994;Zajonc, 1968).…”

Section: Exposurementioning

confidence: 99%

Parental influences on children’s eating behaviour and characteristics of successful parent-focussed interventions

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the mere exposure paradigm (Zajonc, 1968), preference for a particular stimulus object is enhanced by repeated exposures to that object, even when the exposure is brief or masked and cannot be recalled in explicit memory. The amygdala is important for implicit (nonconscious) processing of affective stimuli (Hannula et al, 2005;Phelps & LeDoux, 2005) and also plays a key role in the formation of reward-based preference in humans and animals Gilbert et al, 2003).…”

Section: Mere Exposure Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intact emotion facilitation for nonsocial stimuli in autism: Is amygdala impairment in autism specific for social information?

South

Ozonoff

Suchy

et al. 2007

J Int Neuropsychol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Atypical amygdala development may play a key role in the emergence of social disability and other symptoms of autism (Baron-Cohen et al., 2000;Schultz, 2005). The mechanisms by which this may occur have received little attention, however, and most support from behavioral and imaging studies has been concerned with socially relevant stimuli such as faces. Given the complexity of amygdala function and its known role in many other emotional tasks, we examined whether individuals with autism would demonstrate impaired performance on several tasks that have been shown to require activation of the amygdala but that do not have any explicit social meaning. Relative to a typical comparison group matched for age and IQ, our sample of 37 adolescents and adults with autism (mean age 5 19.7 years) demonstrated equivalent facilitation for perception and learning of emotionally relevant stimuli. On each of four tasks, there were significant main effects of emotion condition on performance for both groups. Future research regarding atypical amygdala function and emotion processing in autism should consider whether the response to nonsocial emotion factors (including negative valence or high arousal) may be intact, despite difficulties in responding to socially relevant stimuli. (JINS, 2008, 14, 42-54.)

show abstract

Attitudinal effects of mere exposure.

Cited by 5,245 publications

References 73 publications

Selective attention to threat versus reward: Meta-analysis and neural-network modeling of the dot-probe task

Selective attention to threat versus reward: Meta-analysis and neural-network modeling of the dot-probe task

Parental influences on children’s eating behaviour and characteristics of successful parent-focussed interventions

Intact emotion facilitation for nonsocial stimuli in autism: Is amygdala impairment in autism specific for social information?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About