I Like It, but Only When I'm Not Sure Why: Evaluative Conditioning and the Awareness Issue

When All Is Revealed: A Dissociation between Evaluative Learning and Contingency Awareness

“…One view put forward by Field (2000aField ( , 2000b was that most studies in evaluative learning have not successfully demonstrated a dissociation or even associative learning at all due to several problems of measurement: (1) neutral and affective stimuli are not paired on a random basis but on perceptual similarity, hence the results can be understood within a visual categorization or concept learning framework; (2) only a within-subjects control condition is used (where the control stimuli consist of two neutral pairs); and (3) participants are categorized as being aware or unaware of stimulus contingencies overall and that this is then entered as a between-subjects variable in the analysis, hence crucial awareness measurements for specific stimulus pairs are not taken into account. These criticisms were addressed in Hammerl's response (Hammerl, 2000), who pointed out that (1) contrary to Field's claim, several studies have used random stimulus assignment and have observed evaluative learning (e.g., Baeyens, Eelen, Hammerl, Bloch, & Silverthorne, 1997;Hammerl & Grabitz, 1993, 1996Todrank, Byrnes, Wrzesniewski, & Rozin, 1995), and (2) that although all previous studies have used a withinsubjects control, when a between-subjects control is in place, evaluative learning is still observed . In support of Hammerl's position, several other recent studies are worth mentioning.…”

Implicit Acquisition And Manifestation Of Classically Conditioned Attitudes

“…But the role of awareness in attitudinal conditioning is still a contentious issue in that there is heated debate about what participants need to attend to for conditioning effects to obtain (Field, 2000;Field & Davey, 1998;Hammerl, 2000;Shanks & St. John, 1994). Some researchers argue that awareness of CS-US contingencies is a minimal necessity, and, in fact, several studies have shown successful conditioning only among participants who were aware of these contingencies (Allen & Janiszewski, 1989;Cohen, 1964;Insko & Oakes,1966;Shimp, Stuart, & Engle, 1991).…”

Do Political Attitudes Affect Consumer Choice? Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Study with Genetically Modified Bread in Switzerland

“…A transfer of affect might occur from the political aversion felt towards genetic engineering in agriculture to the market stand and the people who sell food derived from this technology [17][18][19]. The aversion felt in Switzerland is happening through the mass media framing of the technology as risky and hazardous, the broad rejection of GMOs across the political spectrum, and the national education system whose textbooks have almost an exclusive focus on the potential risks of genetic engineering in agriculture.…”