Implicit Acquisition And Manifestation Of Classically Conditioned Attitudes

Olson, Michael A.; Fázio, Russell H.

doi:10.1521/soco.20.2.89.20992

Cited by 119 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…using positive and negative US (Olsen, & Fazio, 2002). In the present study no differential influence of the valence of stimuli was found between the groups.…”

Section: Learning Of Affective Responses In Dementia 16contrasting

confidence: 67%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implicit Learning of Affective Responses in Dementia Patients: A Face-Emotion-Association Paradigm

Blessing

Zoellig

Dammann

et al. 2010

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…using positive and negative US (Olsen, & Fazio, 2002). In the present study no differential influence of the valence of stimuli was found between the groups.…”

Section: Learning Of Affective Responses In Dementia 16contrasting

confidence: 67%

“…Methodologically, it is well known from research in social psychology that attitudes of healthy subjects can be formed unconsciously through simple classical conditioning procedures (Olsen, & Fazio, 2002). A classical approach to assess conditioning of affective reactions is fear conditioning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Learning of Affective Responses in Dementia Patients: A Face-Emotion-Association Paradigm

Blessing

Zoellig

Dammann

et al. 2010

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding was replicated in several follow-up studies that used a subliminal affective priming task as a dependent measure (M. A. Olson & Fazio, 2002) and pictures of Black and White individuals as CSs (M. A. Olson & Fazio, 2006).…”

Section: Causes Of Implicit Attitude Changementioning

confidence: 58%

Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change.

Gawronski

Bodenhausen²

2006

Psychological Bulletin

2,169

167

2,441

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central theme in recent research on attitudes is the distinction between deliberate, "explicit" attitudes and automatic, "implicit" attitudes. The present article provides an integrative review of the available evidence on implicit and explicit attitude change that is guided by a distinction between associative and propositional processes. Whereas associative processes are characterized by mere activation independent of subjective truth or falsity, propositional reasoning is concerned with the validation of evaluations and beliefs. The proposed associative-propositional evaluation (APE) model makes specific assumptions about the mutual interplay of the 2 processes, implying several mechanisms that lead to symmetric or asymmetric changes in implicit and explicit attitudes. The model integrates a broad range of empirical evidence and implies several new predictions for implicit and explicit attitude change.Keywords: attitude change, cognitive consistency, dual-process models, evaluative conditioning, implicit measures If eras of psychological research can be characterized in terms of general ideas, a major theme of the current era is probably the notion of automaticity. Many aspects of human behavior that have previously been assumed to have their roots in higher order processes of deliberate reasoning are now viewed as resulting from automatic processes that may occur spontaneously and outside of people's awareness or control (Bargh, 1997;Moors & De Houwer, 2006). This perspective is also dominant in contemporary research on attitudes, in which deliberate, "explicit" attitudes are often contrasted with automatic, "implicit" attitudes (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995; Petty, Fazio, & Briñol, in press;Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000; Wittenbrink & Schwarz, in press). Whereas the former are usually equated with deliberative, self-reported evaluations, the latter are typically inferred from people's performance on response latency measures, such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) or sequential priming tasks (Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995;Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 1997).Even though previous models effectively account for the differential impact of implicit and explicit attitudes on spontaneous and deliberate behavior (e.g., Strack & Deutsch, 2004;Wilson et al., 2000), theories of attitude change still face a considerable asymmetry in integrating the available evidence. Contemporary models of persuasion have been very successful in explaining the influence of different kinds of message cues on self-reported explicit evaluations (Chen & Chaiken, 1999;Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999;Petty & Wegener, 1999; for a review, see Visser & Cooper, 2003). However, changes in implicit attitudes are still largely unexplained. This shortfall has its roots in at least two conceptual issues. First, several models of attitude change do not distinguish between implicit and explicit attitudes in the first place but treat attitudes as a unitary construct (e.g., Chaiken, Liberman, & Eagly, 1989...

show abstract

“…As Fazio and Olson (2003b) emphasized, no implicit measure speaks to the question of whether individuals are or are not aware of their attitudes. Additional evidence, well beyond the administration of an implicit measure, is required to make any such inference (see Olson & Fazio, 2002, for an example). In addition, no explicit measure guarantees the existence of a distinct representation in memory, independent of the attitude that is automatically activated when the object is encountered.…”

Section: The Model's Perspective Regarding a Few Contemporary Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes as Object–Evaluation Associations of Varying Strength

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historical developments regarding the attitude concept are reviewed, and set the stage for consideration of a theoretical perspective that views attitude, not as a hypothetical construct, but as evaluative knowledge. A model of attitudes as object-evaluation associations of varying strength is summarized, along with research supporting the model's contention that at least some attitudes are represented in memory and activated automatically upon the individual's encountering the attitude object. The implications of the theoretical perspective for a number of recent discussions related to the attitude concept are elaborated. Among these issues are the notion of attitudes as "constructions," the presumed malleability of automatically-activated attitudes, correspondence between implicit and explicit measures of attitude, and postulated dual or multiple attitudes.For nearly 25 years now, a particular view of attitudes has formed the underpinnings of my research program on the consequences of attitudes for attention, categorization, judgment, and behavior. It was in 1982 that my colleagues and I first proposed that attitudes can be viewed as object-evaluation associations in memory (Fazio, Chen, McDonel, & Sherman, 1982). The perspective has proven much more illuminating (and occupied us for much longer) than we had envisioned at the time. It has fostered examination of a wide variety of questions regarding attitudes, and it continues to provide a valuable perspective for considering new issues. In this article, I summarize the theoretical model and some of the research findings that support it, as well as the perspective the model provides regarding some recent discussions of attitudes as constructions, the presumed malleability of attitudes, correspondence between implicit and explicit measures of attitude, and postulated dual or multiple attitudes.

show abstract

Implicit Acquisition And Manifestation Of Classically Conditioned Attitudes

Cited by 119 publications

References 34 publications

Implicit Learning of Affective Responses in Dementia Patients: A Face-Emotion-Association Paradigm

Implicit Learning of Affective Responses in Dementia Patients: A Face-Emotion-Association Paradigm

Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change.

Attitudes as Object–Evaluation Associations of Varying Strength

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About