Relational information moderates approach-avoidance instruction effects on implicit evaluation

Who avoids being involved in personal carbon trading? An investigation based on the urban residents in eastern China

Personal carbon trading scheme has been pulled into the public eye with the increasing urgency of downstream carbon emission reduction, and its feasibility largely depends on public acceptability. This study established a hierarchical framework for urban residents' approach-avoidance responses to personal carbon trading; adopted Likert scale and manikin task methods to assess the current states of residents' responses by investigating 1892 respondents in eastern China; employed one-way analysis of variance to identify the demographic differences of their responses; and used regression analysis to explore the influences of psychological factors on their responses. The findings showed that urban residents' responses to personal carbon trading scheme and participation could be classified into five response hierarchies: deep avoidance, shallow avoidance, uncertain, shallow approach, and deep approach. The average of residents' responses denoted a shallow approach, with the characteristics of median stability, duration, and noise. Moreover, residents holding deep approach responses to the scheme and participation respectively accounted for 42.365% and 34.275% of the total, which indicated a gap between attitude and behavior. Urban residents' responses exhibited significant differences with respect to demographic characteristics. Most of the residents with the most avoidance response were young males (i.e., 18-20 years old), older first-line employees (i.e., older than 50 years old), and those on subsistence incomes (i.e., annual individual or household income was RMB 30,000-50,000 yuan). Additionally, residents who held egoistic values, had low senses of social responsibility, knew little about carbon reductions, and preferred comfortable life were likely to avoid the scheme and participation. Finally, policy suggestions are proposed for the enhancement of urban residents' attitudes towards personal carbon trading, thereby providing valuable references for its implementation.

Beliefs and biases

Philosophers are divided over whether implicit biases are beliefs. Critics of the belief model of implicit bias argue that empirical data show that implicit biases are habitual but unstable and not sensitive to evidence. They are not rational or consistently action-guiding like beliefs are supposed to be. In contrast, proponents of the belief model of implicit bias argue that they are stable enough, sensitive to some evidence, and do guide our actions, albeit haphazardly sometimes. With the help of revisionary notions of belief, such as fragmented, Spinozan, and dispositional belief, these theorists argue that implicit biases are beliefs. I argue that both the critiques and defenses of belief models of implicit bias are problematic. This methodological critique suggests that debates about nature of the implicit bias ought to shift away from the belief question and toward more fundamental questions about stability and evidential sensitivity of implicit biases. I chart the path forward for this prescribed shift in the debate.

Predicting Behavior With Implicit Measures: Disillusioning Findings, Reasonable Explanations, and Sophisticated Solutions

Two decades ago, the introduction of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) sparked enthusiastic reactions. With implicit measures like the IAT, researchers hoped to finally be able to bridge the gap between self-reported attitudes on one hand and behavior on the other. Twenty years of research and several meta-analyses later, however, we have to conclude that neither the IAT nor its derivatives have fulfilled these expectations. Their predictive value for behavioral criteria is weak and their incremental validity over and above self-report measures is negligible. In our review, we present an overview of explanations for these unsatisfactory findings and delineate promising ways forward. Over the years, several reasons for the IAT's weak predictive validity have been proposed. They point to four potentially problematic features: First, the IAT is by no means a pure measure of individual differences in associations but suffers from extraneous influences like recoding. Hence, the predictive validity of IAT-scores should not be confused with the predictive validity of associations. Second, with the IAT, we usually aim to measure evaluation ("liking") instead of motivation ("wanting"). Yet, behavior might be determined much more often by the latter than the former. Third, the IAT focuses on measuring associations instead of propositional beliefs and thus taps into a construct that might be too unspecific to account for behavior. Finally, studies on predictive validity are often characterized by a mismatch between predictor and criterion (e.g., while behavior is highly context-specific, the IAT usually takes into account neither the situation nor the domain). Recent research, however, also revealed advances addressing each of these problems, namely (1) procedural and analytical advances to control for recoding in the IAT, (2) measurement procedures to assess implicit wanting, (3) measurement procedures to assess implicit beliefs, and (4) approaches to increase the fit between implicit measures and behavioral criteria (e.g., by incorporating contextual information). Implicit measures like the IAT hold an enormous potential. In order to allow them to fulfill this potential, however, we have to refine our understanding of these measures, and we should incorporate recent conceptual and methodological advancements. This review provides specific recommendations on how to do so.

What do implicit measures measure?

We identify several ongoing debates related to implicit measures, surveying prominent views and considerations in each. First, we summarize the debate regarding whether performance on implicit measures is explained by conscious or unconscious representations. Second, we discuss the cognitive structure of the operative constructs: are they associatively or propositionally structured? Third, we review debates about whether performance on implicit measures reflects traits or states. Fourth, we discuss the question of whether a person's performance on an implicit measure reflects characteristics of the person who is taking the test or characteristics of the situation in which the person is taking the test. Finally, we survey the debate about the relationship between implicit measures and (other kinds of) behavior. This article is categorized under: Philosophy > Representation Psychology > Theory and Methods Psychology > Prediction Philosophy > Psychological Capacities.

How Do Actions Influence Attitudes? An Inferential Account of the Impact of Action Performance on Stimulus Evaluation

Over the past decade, an increasing number of studies have shown that the performance of specific actions (e.g., approach and avoidance) in response to a stimulus can lead to changes in how that stimulus is evaluated. In contrast to the reigning idea that these effects are mediated by the automatic formation and activation of associations in memory, we describe an inferential account that specifies the inferences underlying the effects and how these inferences are formed. We draw on predictive processing theories to explain the basic processes underlying inferential reasoning and their main characteristics. Our inferential account accommodates past findings, is supported by new findings, and leads to novel predictions as well as concrete recommendations for how action performance can be used to influence real-world behavior.

The effects of a gamified approach avoidance training and verbal suggestions on food outcomes

There is initial support for the effectiveness of approach-avoidance trainings in altering food-related health behaviors. Furthermore, outcome expectancies induced by verbal suggestions might optimize the effectiveness of these interventions, as shown in placebo research. The present study investigated the effectiveness of a gamified approach-avoidance training on food-related outcomes and whether verbal suggestions could strengthen those effects. A total of 120 participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 conditions: serious gaming only, verbal suggestions only, serious gaming combined with verbal suggestions, or a gaming control condition. Virtual food preference and food choice were assessed with a food choice task, with pairs differing in healthiness or in healthiness and attractiveness. Implicit food preference was assessed with an Implicit Association Test and food intake with a bogus taste test. Participants in both serious gaming conditions made healthier food choices for pairs differing in healthiness and attractiveness and had healthier implicit food preferences compared to gaming control. No effects were found on food intake. These findings provide the first preliminary support for the effects of a gamified approach-avoidance training on virtual food choice and implicit food preference. Future studies should further elucidate these effects, also in other health domains such as physical activity.

The Mere Exposure Instruction Effect

Abstract. The mere exposure effect refers to the well-established finding that people evaluate a stimulus more positively after repeated exposure to that stimulus. We investigated whether a change in stimulus evaluation can occur also when participants are not repeatedly exposed to a stimulus, but are merely instructed that one stimulus will occur frequently and another stimulus will occur infrequently. We report seven experiments showing that (1) mere exposure instructions influence implicit stimulus evaluations as measured with an Implicit Association Test (IAT), personalized Implicit Association Test (pIAT), or Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP), but not with an Evaluative Priming Task (EPT), (2) mere exposure instructions influence explicit evaluations, and (3) the instruction effect depends on participants’ memory of which stimulus will be presented more frequently. We discuss how these findings inform us about the boundary conditions of mere exposure instruction effects, as well as the mental processes that underlie mere exposure and mere exposure instruction effects.