This paper describes a study designed to investigate the efficacy of two traditional classical conditioning procedures in generating evaluative conditioning (EC) in the picture–picture paradigm in human participants. Differential EC was found using both simultaneous and trace conditioning procedures. In addition, the use of a block–subblock (BSB) nonpaired control condition and full counterbalancing of conditioned stimulus–unconditioned stimulus (CS–UCS) pairings across participants indicated that the observed EC effects were the result of associative learning. Examination of whether successful conditioning could take place with or without conscious awareness of CS–UCS contingencies was inconclusive. The results provide evidence for EC as an associative process and also provide some insight into the possible conditioning parameters that might successfully generate EC.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaeyensFCrombezGVan den BerghOEelenP (1988). Once in contact always in contact: Evaluative conditioning is resistant to extinction.Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy10, 179–199.
2.
BaeyensFDe HouwerJ (1995). Evaluative conditioning is a qualitatively distinct form of classical conditioning: A reply to Davey (1994).Behaviour Research & Therapy33, 825–831.
3.
BaeyensFEelenPCrombezG (1995). Pavlovian associations are forever: On classical conditioning and extinction.Journal of Psychophysiology9, 127–141.
4.
BaeyensFEelenPCrombezGVan den BerghO (1992). Human evaluative conditioning: Acquisition trials, presentation schedule, evaluative style, and contingency awareness.Behaviour Research & Therapy30, 133–142.
5.
BaeyensFEelenPVan den BerghO (1990). Contingency awareness in evaluative conditioning: A case for unaware affective-evaluative learning.Cognition and Emotion4, 3–18.
6.
BaeyensFEelenPVan den BerghOCrombezG (1989). Acquired affective evaluative value: Conservative but not unchangeable.Behaviour Research and Therapy27, 279–287.
7.
BaeyensFHermansREelenP (1993). The role of CS–US contingency in human evaluative conditioning.Behaviour Research & Therapy31, 731–737.
DaveyGCL (1994a). Defining the important theoretical questions to ask about evaluative conditioning: A reply to Martin and Levey (1994).Behaviour Research and Therapy32, 307–310.
10.
DaveyGCL (1994b). Is evaluative conditioning a qualitatively distinct from of classical conditioning?.Behaviour Research and Therapy32, 291–299.
11.
De HouwerJBaeyensFVansteenwegenDEelenP (2000). Evaluative conditioning in the picture–picture paradigm with random assignment of conditioned stimuli to unconditioned stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes26, 237–242.
12.
De HouwerJHermansDEelenP (1998). Affective and identity priming with episodically associated stimuli.Cognition & Emotion12, 145–169.
13.
De HouwerJThomasSBaeyensF (2001). Associative learning of likes and dislikes: A review of 25 years of research on human evaluative conditioning.Psychological Bulletin126, 853–869.
14.
FieldAP (1996). An appropriate control condition for evaluative conditioning(Cognitive Science Research Paper No. 431) Brighton, UK:University of Sussex, School of Cognitive and Computing Science.
15.
FieldAP (1997). Re-evaluating evaluative conditioningUnpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
16.
FieldAP (2000). Evaluative conditioning is Pavlovian conditioning: issues of definition, measurement and the theoretical importance of contingency awareness.Consciousness and Cognition9, 41–49.
17.
FieldAPDaveyGCL (1997). Conceptual conditioning: Evidence for an artifactual account of evaluative learning.Learning and Motivation28, 446–464.
18.
FieldAPDaveyGCL (1999). Reevaluating evaluative conditioning: A nonassociative explanation of conditioning effects in the visual evaluative conditioning paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes25, 2211–224.
19.
FieldAPMooreAC (2005). Dissociating the effects of Attention and contingency awareness on evaluative conditioning effects in the visual paradigm.Cognition & Emotion19, 217–243.
20.
HammerlMGrabitzHJ (1993). Human evaluative conditioning—order of stimulus presentation.Integrative Physiological & Behavioural Science28, 191–194.
21.
HammerlMGrabitzHJ (1996). Human evaluative conditioning without experiencing a valued event.Learning & Motivation27, 278–293.
22.
LangPJBradleyMMCuthbertBN (1997a). International Affective Picture System (IAPS) [CD-Rom].Gainesville, FL:NIMH Center for Emotion & Attention (CSEA).
23.
LangPJBradleyMMCuthbertBN (1997b). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Technical manual and affective ratingsGainesville, FL:NIMH Center for Emotion and Attention (CSEA).
24.
LascellesKRRFieldAPDaveyGCL (2003). Using foods as CSs and body shapes as UCSs: Selective conditioning effects during picture–picture evaluative conditioning.Behaviour Therapy34, 213–235.
25.
LascellesKRRStevensAFieldAPMatthiasRSiddens-CorbyRIvesR (1999). ECtests version 1.2 for Windows™[Computer program] Brighton, UK:University of Sussex.
26.
LeveyABMartinI (1975). Classical conditioning of human “evaluative” responses.Behaviour Research and Therapy13, 221–226.
27.
LovibondPFShanksDR (2002). The role of awareness in Pavlovian conditioning: Empirical evidence and theoretical implications.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes28, 3–26.
28.
MackintoshNJ (1983). Conditioning and associative learningOxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
29.
MartinILeveyAB (1987). Learning what will happen next: Conditioning, evaluation and cognitive processes. In G. C. L. Davey (Ed.), Cognitive processes and Pavlovian conditioning in humans(pp. 57–81)Chichester, UK:John Wiley.
30.
ShanksDRDickinsonA (1990). Contingency awareness in evaluative conditioning: A comment on Baeyens, Eelen and van den Bergh.Cognition and Emotion4, 19–30.
StevensonRJBoakesRAPrescottJ (1998). Changes in odor sweetness resulting from implicit learning of a simultaneous odor–sweetness association: An example of learned synesthesia.Learning & Motivation29, 113–132.
33.
VansteenwegenDCrombezGBaeyensFEelenP (1998). Extinction in fear conditioning: Effects of startle modulation and evaluative self-reports.Psychophysiology35, 729–736.
34.
ZellnerDARozinPAronMKulishC (1983). Conditioned enhancement of human's liking for flavour by pairing with sweetness.Learning & Motivation14, 338–350.
