Evidence for an evaluative effect of stimulus co-occurrence may be inflated by evaluative differences between assimilative and contrastive relations.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition & Emotion Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1080/02699931.2025.2460099
Karoline Corinna Bading, Marius Barth, Klaus Rothermund
{"title":"Evidence for an evaluative effect of stimulus co-occurrence may be inflated by evaluative differences between assimilative and contrastive relations.","authors":"Karoline Corinna Bading, Marius Barth, Klaus Rothermund","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2025.2460099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent research on relational evaluative conditioning (relational EC) suggests that stimulus co-occurrence can have a direct effect on evaluations over and above the particular relation between the co-occurring stimuli. This research is based on a process dissociation approach where co-occurrence effects are demonstrated via attenuated evaluative learning for co-occurring stimuli that are connected by contrastive in comparison to assimilative relations. Instead of attributing such attenuations to an orthogonal influence of stimulus co-occurrence, we investigated whether (a) contrastive relations tend to produce weaker evaluations than their assimilative counterparts and (b) such evaluative differences can inflate evidence for co-occurrence effects on continuous as well as on categorical evaluation measures. A pilot study (<i>N</i> = 85) confirmed notion (a), while a first experiment (<i>N</i> = 42) produced preliminary evidence for notion (b) in the context of multinomial processing tree (MPT) modelling. In a second, high-powered experiment (<i>N</i> = 229), sub-sample MPT analyses (including only CSs with correct memory for the CS-US proposition) demonstrated that evidence for co-occurrence effects can be inflated by evaluative differences between assimilative vs. contrastive relations. The theoretical and methodological implications of these findings are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":" ","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2025.2460099","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent research on relational evaluative conditioning (relational EC) suggests that stimulus co-occurrence can have a direct effect on evaluations over and above the particular relation between the co-occurring stimuli. This research is based on a process dissociation approach where co-occurrence effects are demonstrated via attenuated evaluative learning for co-occurring stimuli that are connected by contrastive in comparison to assimilative relations. Instead of attributing such attenuations to an orthogonal influence of stimulus co-occurrence, we investigated whether (a) contrastive relations tend to produce weaker evaluations than their assimilative counterparts and (b) such evaluative differences can inflate evidence for co-occurrence effects on continuous as well as on categorical evaluation measures. A pilot study (N = 85) confirmed notion (a), while a first experiment (N = 42) produced preliminary evidence for notion (b) in the context of multinomial processing tree (MPT) modelling. In a second, high-powered experiment (N = 229), sub-sample MPT analyses (including only CSs with correct memory for the CS-US proposition) demonstrated that evidence for co-occurrence effects can be inflated by evaluative differences between assimilative vs. contrastive relations. The theoretical and methodological implications of these findings are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
期刊最新文献
Evidence for an evaluative effect of stimulus co-occurrence may be inflated by evaluative differences between assimilative and contrastive relations. Isolating delayed attentional disengagement from biased orienting to signals of threat in anxiety - not there yet. Priming using human and chimpanzee expressions of emotion biases attention toward positive emotions. Emotion malleability beliefs prompt cognitive reappraisal: evidence from an online longitudinal intervention for adolescents. Dissociating the roles of episodic retrieval and contingency awareness in valence contingency learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1