| Autor: |
Moran T; Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University., Hughes S; Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University., Hussey I; Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University., Vadillo MA; Department of Psychology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid., Olson MA; Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee., Aust F; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Bading K; Institute of Psychology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena., Balas R; Institute of Psychology, Polish Academy of Sciences., Benedict T; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Corneille O; Psychological Sciences Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain., Douglas SB; Department of Psychology, University of Florida., Ferguson MJ; Department of Psychology, Cornell University., Fritzlen KA; Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee., Gast A; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Gawronski B; Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin., Giménez-Fernández T; Department of Psychology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid., Hanusz K; Institute of Psychology, Polish Academy of Sciences., Heycke T; Department Survey Design & Methodology, GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences., Högden F; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Hütter M; Department of Psychology, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen., Kurdi B; Department of Psychology, Cornell University., Mierop A; Psychological Sciences Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain., Richter J; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Sarzyńska-Wawer J; Institute of Psychology, Polish Academy of Sciences., Smith CT; Department of Psychology, University of Florida., Stahl C; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Thomasius P; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., Unkelbach C; Department of Psychology, University of Cologne., De Houwer J; Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University. |
| Abstrakt: |
Evaluative conditioning is one of the most widely studied procedures for establishing and changing attitudes. The surveillance task is a highly cited evaluative-conditioning paradigm and one that is claimed to generate attitudes without awareness. The potential for evaluative-conditioning effects to occur without awareness continues to fuel conceptual, theoretical, and applied developments. Yet few published studies have used this task, and most are characterized by small samples and small effect sizes. We conducted a high-powered ( N = 1,478 adult participants), preregistered close replication of the original surveillance-task study (Olson & Fazio, 2001). We obtained evidence for a small evaluative-conditioning effect when "aware" participants were excluded using the original criterion-therefore replicating the original effect. However, no such effect emerged when three other awareness criteria were used. We suggest that there is a need for caution when using evidence from the surveillance-task effect to make theoretical and practical claims about "unaware" evaluative-conditioning effects. |
