Evaluative Conditioning From the Perspective of the Associative-Propositional Evaluation Model

Abstract

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is defined as the change in the evaluation of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a positive or negative unconditioned stimulus (US). According to the associative-propositional evaluation (APE) model, EC effects can be the result of two functionally distinct learning mechanisms: associative and propositional learning. The current article reviews the core assumptions of the APE model regarding (1) the defining features of associative and propositional learning, (2) the mental representations resulting from the two learning mechanisms, (3) the processes involved in the behavioral expression of these representations, and (4) the automatic versus controlled nature of the processes underlying EC effects. In addition to reviewing the core assumptions of the APE model, the article reviews relevant evidence to illustrate the theory’s main hypotheses, its explanatory and predictive power, as well as empirical challenges for the theory.

Evaluative conditioning affects the subsequent acquisition of differential fear conditioning as indexed by electrodermal responding and stimulus evaluations

“…This transfer was evident not only in the measure that is common across the two emotional learning paradigms—self‐reported stimulus evaluation—but also in the physiological index of emotional arousal that is most commonly used in fear conditioning—electrodermal responses. This finding of transfer is not consistent with the view that evaluative and fear conditioning are independent (Baeyens & De Houwer, ; Gawronski & Bodenhausen, ). However, it is currently not clear whether this interdependence is indicative of a shared emotional learning mechanism, the convergence of distinct learning mechanisms onto shared response pathways, or a change in CS salience or valence that would affect the speed of fear conditioning.…”

“…In spite of the procedural and conceptual similarities, research on evaluative and fear conditioning has progressed largely independently with outputs published in different literatures (although it should be noted that the meta‐analysis on evaluative conditioning by Hofmann et al, , includes fear conditioning studies that reported self‐report data). This may, in part, reflect on past claims that evaluative conditioning is distinct from other forms of human Pavlovian learning (Baeyens & De Houwer, ; Gawronski & Bodenhausen, ). In particular, evaluative conditioning was said not to require participants' awareness of the CS−US contingency (Baeyens, Eelen, & van den Bergh, ), not to be subject to extinction (Baeyens, Crombez, van den Bergh, & Eelen, ), and not to be affected by manipulations of the CS−US contingency (Baeyens, Hermans, & Eelen, ).…”

Cognitive Load Impairs Evaluative Conditioning, Even When Individual CS and US Stimuli are Successfully Encoded

“…Because dual-learning of attitude theories explicitly state the efficiency of associative attitude learning (e.g., Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2014), the present findings challenge this theorization. Recently, however, attitude learning researchers have noted operating conditions may be agnostic to whether learning effects are driven by propositional or associative processes (De Houwer, 2018;Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2018).…”

How associative is evaluative conditioning? An empirical investigation at the attitude acquisition and attitude change stages

“…The absence of EC extinction is sometimes seen as a critical support for associative accounts of EC over propositional accounts (for a recent discussion, see Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2018). This is because associative learning is often described as dependent on the CS-US contiguities (i.e., the absolute number of pairings), not on the CS-US contingencies (i.e., the proportion of pairings).…”

“…In a recent update of the APE model, Gawronski and Bodenhausen (2018) now argue that (1) associations and propositions should not be distinguished as mental representations and (2) the underlying associative structure is constituted of multiple layers of associations with the lower layers containing the mental representations of the stimuli and the higher layers containing the ways these are related. This revised APE model is now able to accommodate the effect of relational and validity qualifiers on resulting CS evaluations, but at the cost of removing the discriminant validity of operating principles in distinguishing the acquisition of associations and propositions.…”