2011
DOI: 10.1002/mar.20399
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does Cue competition reduce conditioned liking of brands and products?

Abstract: The present studies investigated whether the visual co-presentation of a brand name and a product visual increases or decreases the acquisition of liking toward these stimuli in a conditioning paradigm. In Study 1, participants were presented with an elemental brand name, an elemental product visual, or a compound of both stimuli, along with liked faces. Results indicated that the mere pairing with the liked face led to increased liking in the elemental condition, but not in the compound condition (i.e., cue c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
8
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast, presenting both CS and US within the same modality resulted in impaired processing of CS-US pairs and therefore in weaker EC. This finding is consistent with the notion that stimuli compete for attentional resources if they are presented within the same modality (Alais et al, 2006;Duncan et al, 1997;Sweller, 1988;Walther et al, 2011). Moreover, attentional resources exerted their effect on EC independent of contingency awareness.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In contrast, presenting both CS and US within the same modality resulted in impaired processing of CS-US pairs and therefore in weaker EC. This finding is consistent with the notion that stimuli compete for attentional resources if they are presented within the same modality (Alais et al, 2006;Duncan et al, 1997;Sweller, 1988;Walther et al, 2011). Moreover, attentional resources exerted their effect on EC independent of contingency awareness.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…According to Burr, Silva, Cicchini, Banks, and Morrone (2009), "simultaneity of signals from different senses-such as vision and audition-is a useful cue for determining whether those signals arose from one environmental source or from more than one" (p. 1761). If CS and US are presented simultaneously within the same sensory modality, CS and US will compete for attentional resources, leading to less attention for each individual stimulus (Alais et al, 2006;Walther et al, 2011). The latter effect, however, may decrease if CS and US of the same modality are presented in a trace or delayed conditioning procedure (SOA > 0).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…First, the findings that EC does not depend on CS-US contingency awareness and that mere spatio-temporal CS-US co-occurrences (i.e., contiguity) are sufficient to provoke EC imply that it does not require full attention. Second, it is desirable that the learned association of a product and a positively valenced cue persist even when subsequently encountering the product in the absence of the appetitive US, as it is often the case in realword settings (for research on the application of EC to advertisement, see Walther, Ebert, & Meinerling, 2009). Changes in implicit attitudes based on associative learning have been demonstrated in several studies (e.g., Baccus, Baldwin, & Packer, 2004;e.g., Dijksterhuis, 2004;Gibson, 2008;Hermans, Vansteenwegen, Crombez, Baeyens, & Eelen, 2002;Karpinski & Hilton, 2001;Mitchell, Anderson, & Lovibond, 2003;Olson & Fazio, 2001;Rydell et al, 2006).…”
Section: Implicit Attitudesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During a learning phase, unknown arbitrary stimuli (e.g., names of Pokémon characters) were repeatedly paired with preexisting UCS stimuli (e.g., positive or negative pictures or words). When subsequently tested using an IAT, participants demonstrated an implicit preference for the Pokémon characters previously paired with positive stimuli over those paired with negative stimuli (for related findings see Dijksterhuis, 2004;Gibson, 2008;Mitchell, Anderson, & Lovibond, 2003;Walther, Ebert, & Meinerling, 2011).…”
Section: Implicit Attitude Formationmentioning
confidence: 99%