TY - JOUR
T1 - Processing goals moderate the effect of co-occurrence on automatic evaluation
AU - Moran, Tal
AU - Bar-Anan, Yoav
AU - Nosek, Brian A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2015/9/1
Y1 - 2015/9/1
N2 - We tested whether goals during the processing of evaluative information determine the relative sensitivity of automatic evaluation to the valance of co-occurring stimuli versus the relation between the target and the affective stimuli. For example, "Kindness is uncharacteristic of Phil" has Phil co-occurring with kindness, but the relation suggests that he is unkind. In Experiment 1 (. N=. 1248), targets co-occurred with positive or negative behaviors that were characteristic or uncharacteristic of them. In Experiment 2 (. N=. 185), the targets started or ended pleasant or unpleasant sounds. Thus, the valence that co-occurred with targets was sometimes the opposite of the targets' valence inferred from the relation. In both experiments, we found that automatic evaluation was more sensitive to relational than to co-occurrence information when participants were instructed to form impressions than when they were instructed to memorize co-occurrence. This suggests that processing goals moderate the effect of propositional versus associative information on automatic evaluation.
AB - We tested whether goals during the processing of evaluative information determine the relative sensitivity of automatic evaluation to the valance of co-occurring stimuli versus the relation between the target and the affective stimuli. For example, "Kindness is uncharacteristic of Phil" has Phil co-occurring with kindness, but the relation suggests that he is unkind. In Experiment 1 (. N=. 1248), targets co-occurred with positive or negative behaviors that were characteristic or uncharacteristic of them. In Experiment 2 (. N=. 185), the targets started or ended pleasant or unpleasant sounds. Thus, the valence that co-occurred with targets was sometimes the opposite of the targets' valence inferred from the relation. In both experiments, we found that automatic evaluation was more sensitive to relational than to co-occurrence information when participants were instructed to form impressions than when they were instructed to memorize co-occurrence. This suggests that processing goals moderate the effect of propositional versus associative information on automatic evaluation.
KW - Associative processes
KW - Attitude formation
KW - Automatic evaluation
KW - Processing goals
KW - Propositional processes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84931273430&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jesp.2015.05.009
DO - 10.1016/j.jesp.2015.05.009
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:84931273430
SN - 0022-1031
VL - 60
SP - 157
EP - 162
JO - Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
JF - Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
ER -