Contingency Learning With Evaluative Stimuli
Testing the Generality of Contingency Learning in a Performance Paradigm
Abstract
In two experiments, we tested the generality of the learning effects in the recently-introduced color-word contingency learning paradigm. Participants made speeded evaluative judgments to valenced target words. Each of a set of distracting nonwords was presented most often with either positive or negative target words. We observed that participants responded faster on trials that respected these contingencies than on trials that contradicted the contingencies. The contingencies also produced changes in liking: in a subsequent explicit evaluative rating task, participants rated positively-conditioned nonwords more positively than negatively-conditioned nonwords. Interestingly, contingency effects in the performance task correlated with this explicit rating effect in both experiments. In Experiment 2, all effects reported were independent of subjective and objective contingency awareness (which was completely lacking), even when awareness was measured at the item level. Our results reveal that learning in this type of performance task extends to nonword-valence contingencies and to responses different from those emitted during the performance task. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories about the processes that underlie contingency learning in performance tasks and for research on evaluative conditioning.
References
(2005). Learning of contingent relationships. Learning & Behavior, 33, 127–129.
(1990). Contingency awareness in evaluative conditioning: A case for unaware affective-evaluative learning. Cognition & Emotion, 4, 3–18.
(2003). On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 31, 353–359.
(2007). A conceptual and theoretical analysis of evaluative conditioning. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 230–241.
. (2002). E-Prime. Retrieved from www.pst-net.com
(1991). The tricky nature of skewed frequency tables: An information loss account of distinctiveness-based illusory correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 24–36.
(2011). I like it because I said that I like it. Evaluative conditioning effects can be based on stimulus-response learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 37, 466–476.
(2007). Implicit learning of semantic category sequences: Response-independent acquisition of abstract sequential regularities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 394–406.
(2010). Evaluative conditioning in humans: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 390–421.
(2009). Assessing valence indirectly and online. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 1615–1629.
(2002). The role of awareness in Pavlovian conditioning: Empirical evidence and theoretical implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 28, 3–26.
(1987). Learning and awareness in the Hebb digits task. Journal of General Psychology, 114, 75–88.
(1987). Priming is not necessary for selective-attention failures: Semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 419–434.
(1993). Implicit learning of colour-word associations using a Stroop paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 789–798.
(1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.
(2005). An Inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277–293.
(2007). Aware and (dis)liking: Item-based analyses reveal that valence acquisition via evaluative conditioning emerges only when there is contingency awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 130–144.
(1967). Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychological Review, 74, 71–80.
(
in press ). Human contingency learning. In , Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. Springer.(2008). The Stroop effect: Why proportion congruent has nothing to do with congruency and everything to do with contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 514–523.
(2005). Dissociating stimulus-stimulus and response-response effects in the Stroop task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 132–138.
(2007). Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control. Consciousness and Cognition, 16, 421–435.
(2011). Does temporal contiguity moderate contingency learning in a speeded performance task? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Advance online publication.
(2010). Contingency learning and unlearning in the blink of an eye: A resource dependent process. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 235–250.
(2009). Evaluative learning with single versus multiple USs: The role of contingency awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 35, 286–291.
