On the Prioritized Processing of Threat in a Dual Implicit Process Model of Evaluation

March, David S.; Gaertner, Lowell; Olson, Michael A.

doi:10.1080/1047840x.2018.1435680

Cited by 49 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 120 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whereas prior theories assumed that prejudice emerges from a single cognitive network of semantic concepts (i.e., stereotype knowledge), conditioned fear (a) involves threat associations, formed through highly-arousing aversive experiences and (b) is expressed primarily in behavior and autonomic arousal. Hence, this research revealed a second mechanism for social learning and prejudice and, by linking the study of prejudice to broader models of learning and memory, pointed to additional mechanisms of social learning and prejudice that had yet to be studied (Amodio & Ratner, 2011a;March et al, 2018).…”

Section: How Is Prejudice Learned Represented and Activated?mentioning

confidence: 72%

The Social Neuroscience of Prejudice

Amodio

Cikara

2021

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social neuroscience approach to prejudice investigates the psychology of intergroup bias by integrating models and methods of neuroscience with the social psychology of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. Here, we review major contemporary lines of inquiry, including current accounts of group-based categorization; formation and updating of prejudice and stereotypes; effects of prejudice on perception, emotion, and decision making; and the self-regulation of prejudice. In each section, we discuss key social neuroscience findings, consider interpretational challenges and connections with the behavioral literature, and highlight how they advance psychological theories of prejudice. We conclude by discussing the next-generation questions that will continue to guide the social neuroscience approach toward addressing major societal issues of prejudice and discrimination. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 72 is January 4, 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

Section: How Is Prejudice Learned Represented and Activated?mentioning

confidence: 72%

The Social Neuroscience of Prejudice

Amodio

Cikara

2021

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While still proposing a somewhat linear process, this model reflects a shift away from a strict implicit-explicit distinction and considers different stages of automatic filtering and interpretation. The dual implicit process model (March et al 2018) proposes a similar threat-processing system, whereby bodily threat is first rapidly and preferentially processed, then 9.8 Teachman et al Review in Advance first posted on January 11, 2019. (Changes may still occur before final publication.)…”

Section: Anxiety: Theoretical Proposalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Cognition and Psychopathology: Looking Back and Looking Forward

Teachman

Clerkin

Cunningham

et al. 2019

Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicit cognitive processing is theorized to have a central role in many forms of psychopathology. In the current review, we focus on implicit associations, by which we mean evaluative representations in memory that are difficult to control and do not require conscious reflection to influence affect, cognition, or behavior. We consider definitional and measurement challenges before examining recent empirical evidence for these associations in anxiety, obsessive–compulsive, posttraumatic stress, depressive, and alcohol use disorders. This examination is framed by a brief review of the ways that prominent models of psychopathology represent biased implicit processing of disorder-relevant information. We consider to what extent models reflect more traditional automatic/implicit versus strategic/explicit dual-process perspectives or reflect more recent dynamical systems perspectives in which mental representations are iteratively reprocessed, evolving continuously. Finally, we consider the future research needed to better understand the interactive and temporal dynamics of implicit cognition in psychopathology.

show abstract

“…Such a consideration is usually not considered in implicit prejudice work. Indeed, by functionally distinguishing threat vs. valence, we suggest that associations with Black individuals could represent dislike and/or a survival threat (March et al, 2018a). Consequently, Black faces might not facilitate responses to all negative targets, and instead might facilitate only negative targets that are relevant to threat or valence (e.g., Donders, Correll, & Wittenbrink, 2008;Wittenbrink et al, 2001).…”

Section: Reaction Time Measuresmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Lipp, Derakshan, Waters, & Logies, 2004). That advantage manifests in a faster and stronger perceptual, physiological, and ocular response to threatening stimuli (for a review, see March et al, 2018a). The threat we consider is not to self-esteem or happiness but is confined to subjective threats of bodily harm (i.e., stimuli the perceiver construes as immediate dangers to physical safety).…”

Section: Threat Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We recently argued that the mind uniquely evaluates threatening stimuli relative to other negatively (and positively) valenced stimuli (March, Gaertner, & Olson, 2018a, 2018b. Based on this evaluative difference, we suggest that the distinction between physical threat (the potential to cause injury or death) and valence (the evaluative continuum from negative to positive) is important in the interpretation of indirect measures as they relate to human evaluative responses, and that existing measures differ in their propensity to uncover threat responses versus evaluative responses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lions, and Tigers, and Implicit Measures, Oh My! Implicit Assessment and the Valence vs. Threat Distinction

March¹,

Olson²,

Gaertner³

2020

Social Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physically threatening objects are negative, but negative objects are not necessarily threatening. Moreover, responses elicited by threats to physical harm are distinct from those elicited by other negatively (and positively) valenced stimuli. We discuss the importance of the threat versus valence distinction for implicit measurement both in terms of the activated evaluation and the design of the measure employed to assess that evaluation. We suggest that accounting for the distinct evaluations of threat and valence better enables implicit measures to provide understanding and prediction of subsequent judgment, emotion, and behavior.

show abstract

On the Prioritized Processing of Threat in a Dual Implicit Process Model of Evaluation

Cited by 49 publications

References 120 publications

The Social Neuroscience of Prejudice

The Social Neuroscience of Prejudice

Implicit Cognition and Psychopathology: Looking Back and Looking Forward

Lions, and Tigers, and Implicit Measures, Oh My! Implicit Assessment and the Valence vs. Threat Distinction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About