Contingency Aware Research Articles

Unaware Attitude Formation in the Surveillance Task? Revisiting the Findings of Moran et al. (2021)

Moran et al. (2021) report a multi-lab registered replication of Olson and Fazio’s (2001) surveillance task. The surveillance task is an incidental learning procedure over the course of which participants observe pairings of conditioned stimuli (CSs) and unconditioned stimuli (USs) while engaging in a distracting secondary task. Unaware evaluative conditioning (EC) effects are inferred if participants who fail to report the CS–US contingencies on a post-hoc measure show preference for the CS_pos over the CS_neg. Moran et al. claimed to establish such effects relying on the criteria used by Olson and Fazio to exclude contingency aware participants from analyses. Here we reexamine Moran et al.’s data using more fine-grained analytic strategies. We show that the contingency awareness measures used by Olson and Fazio and, by extension, Moran et al. lack adequate reliability and validity. Moreover, even assuming valid awareness measures, Bayesian analyses did not provide unambiguous evidence for unaware EC effects under any exclusion criterion and provided decisive evidence against such effects in most models. Finally, a separate analysis that distinguished between fully aware, partially aware, and fully unaware participants shows that evidence for unaware EC is due to the inclusion of partially aware participants in the purportedly unaware subsample. These reanalyses suggest that unaware EC as indexed by the surveillance task has yet to be convincingly demonstrated. We discuss the conceptual, theoretical, and applied implications of these findings with regard to the potential for unaware attitude formation.

Approach-Avoidance Training Effects Are Moderated by Awareness of Stimulus-Action Contingencies.

Prior research suggests that repeatedly approaching or avoiding a stimulus changes the liking of that stimulus. In two experiments, we investigated the relationship between, on one hand, effects of approach-avoidance (AA) training on implicit and explicit evaluations of novel faces and, on the other hand, contingency awareness as indexed by participants' memory for the relation between stimulus and action. We observed stronger effects for faces that were classified as contingency aware and found no evidence that AA training caused changes in stimulus evaluations in the absence of contingency awareness. These findings challenge the standard view that AA training effects are (exclusively) the product of implicit learning processes, such as the automatic formation of associations in memory.

Evaluative Conditioning: the Role of Display Duration, Valence Intensity and Contingency Awareness

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to the change of an attitude toward an affectively neutral object (conditioned stimulus, or CS), following that the object’s pairing with another positively or negatively valenced stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, or US). EC is theoretically regarded as an associative learning process in associative-propositional evaluation (APE) model, but many controversies have arisen in empirical studies of EC. Some researchers found EC could not occurred without awareness of CS-US contingencies (supports propositional account), but others didn’t. It is also still unclear whether EC relies on much attention or not. Based on propositional account, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of display duration of US, retest the effect of valence intensity, CS-US awareness, and their integrated mechanism on EC, measured by explicit evaluative rating, combined with four-picture recognition test and item-based analyses. The hypotheses were tested in a sample of 122 college students (38 males). In a 2(display duration) × 2 (valence intensity) × 2 (CS type) mixed design, with CS type as a within-group factor (CS+ means that CS was paired with positive pictures and CS- means that CS was paired with negative pictures), the participants were randomly assigned to four groups: US short display (120ms)-strong valence, US long display (1000ms)-strong valence, US short display-mild valence, and US long display-mild valence. The CSs were real pictorial trademarks but unfamiliar to the participants. USs were chosen partially from the International Affective Picture System and partially from the Internet. All pictures used in the experiment were selected based on pilot rating of valence. The experiment consisted of four sequential phases: the conditioning phase, evaluative rating phase, four-picture recognition phase and questionnaire phase. The results were analyzed by MANOVA on a global method of statistical analysis (participant-based), and on the participants’ responses to individual items (item-based) which was particularly for awareness. Multiple regression analysis and chi-square test were also conducted. Results showed that evidence was obtained for EC effect on the global level, with more positive ratings of CS+ than of the CS-. For display duration, EC emerged only on long display level, M (CS+) = 4. 68, M (CS?) = 3. 86, F (1, 111) = 25. 19, p 0. 001, 0. 21. For valence intensity, EC was found only on strong valence level, M (CS+) = 4. 57, M (CS?) = 3. 93, F (1, 111) = 14. 57, p 0. 001, 0. 16. Only the participants who were categorized as contingency aware showed significant EC effect. In addition, no effect of demand awareness and inference strategy was obtained. However, awareness neither significantly mediated the relationship between display duration and EC effects, nor that between valence intensity and EC effects. This pattern of results partly supported the hypotheses, and emphasized the role of attention and awareness on EC effect. EC relies on US display duration, US valence intensity and CS-US awareness, which in line with propositional account. Results also raise doubts about the views in implicit misattribution mechanism and APE model. EC is unlikely to be an associative evaluation process which requires little cognitive capacity and awareness. Nonetheless, the insignificant mediation effect also indicates that propositional account needs to be further modified.

Aversive Conditioning under Conditions of Restricted Awareness: Effects on Spatial Cueing

In the literature on aversive conditioning there is still debate on the role of awareness. According to some authors, affective learning can occur with or without contingency learning (dual-process model), whereas others argue that a single process produces both affective responses and contingency knowledge. Although many studies have investigated these models, the results to date are inconclusive. Based on a review of the literature, a new series of experiments was designed to examine aversive conditioning in the absence of contingency awareness. In the present study we examined the effects of subliminal aversive conditioning on a spatial cueing task. Awareness was stringently tested after conditioning. Three kinds of awareness were distinguished: contingency awareness (awareness of the CS-US contingencies, where CS is the conditioned stimulus, and US is the unconditioned stimulus), perceptual awareness (awareness of the perceptual differences between the CSs), and US expectancy (awareness of a threat feeling when confronted with the CS+, but not when confronted with the CS-). The results of three experiments demonstrated that responses on the spatial cueing task were modulated by subliminal aversive conditioning. Importantly, none of the participants was contingency aware or able to perceptually discriminate between the conditioned stimuli. However, in Experiment 3, only those participants showing some level of postconditioning expectancy awareness exhibited conditioning effects. These experiments suggest that subliminal aversive conditioning produces small but significant effects, which may be modulated by expectancy awareness.

Learning to like or dislike by association: No need for contingency awareness

One way to learn to like or dislike a neutral target stimulus is through associations with positive or negative context stimuli. The present research investigates whether people need to be aware of the association between a target and a context stimulus (i.e., contingency aware) in order for associative learning of likes and dislikes to occur. We predicted that awareness of the association between context and target is necessary when target novelty is low, but not when target novelty is high. We conducted two experiments in which we varied target novelty and measured contingency awareness using a picture-bound recognition task. This allowed us to separately investigate evaluative conditioning for “contingency awareness” and “contingency unawareness” context–target pairs. The results show, as predicted, that awareness of the association between context and target is needed for low-novelty targets but not needed for high-novelty targets.

Contingency learning in human fear conditioning involves the ventral striatum

The ability to detect and learn contingencies between fearful stimuli and their predictive cues is an important capacity to cope with the environment. Contingency awareness refers to the ability to verbalize the relationships between conditioned and unconditioned stimuli. Although there is a heated debate about the influence of contingency awareness on conditioned fear responses, neural correlates behind the formation process of contingency awareness have gained only little attention in human fear conditioning. Recent animal studies indicate that the ventral striatum (VS) could be involved in this process, but in human studies the VS is mostly associated with positive emotions. To examine this question, we reanalyzed four recently published classical fear conditioning studies (n = 117) with respect to the VS at three distinct levels of contingency awareness: subjects, who did not learn the contingencies (unaware), subjects, who learned the contingencies during the experiment (learned aware) and subjects, who were informed about the contingencies in advance (instructed aware). The results showed significantly increased activations in the left and right VS in learned aware compared to unaware subjects. Interestingly, this activation pattern was only found in learned but not in instructed aware subjects. We assume that the VS is not involved when contingency awareness does not develop during conditioning or when contingency awareness is unambiguously induced already prior to conditioning. VS involvement seems to be important for the transition from a contingency unaware to a contingency aware state. Implications for fear conditioning models as well as for the contingency awareness debate are discussed.

Neural, electrodermal and behavioral response patterns in contingency aware and unaware subjects during a picture–picture conditioning paradigm

One way of investigating affective learning is the use of aversive pictures as unconditioned stimuli (UCS) in conditioning paradigms. In the last decades, there has been a heated debate on the influence of contingency awareness on conditioned responses (CRs). Only a few studies found CRs in contingency unaware subjects whereas other studies only reported conditioned reactions in contingency aware participants. However, as a shortcoming, most studies employing picture–picture paradigms only investigated one response level (e.g. changes in subjective ratings). Further, changes in brain activity have so far been neglected in this field of research. The aim of the present study was to investigate different response levels with respect to contingency awareness: brain activity measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), skin conductance responses (SCRs) and valence ratings. A neutral geometric shape (conditioned stimulus, CS+) was followed by aversive pictures, whereas another shape (CS−) preceded neutral pictures. Unaware participants showed CRs in brain activity (e.g. the insula). Generally more activity was observed in the fear network (e.g. the amygdala, the lateral orbitofrontal cortex) in aware participants and in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). Investigation of SCRs and valence ratings revealed that only aware participants showed conditioned reactions. Our results point toward dissociations between response levels (e.g. brain activity) not affected by contingency awareness and more cognitive response levels (e.g. subjective ratings and SCRs) which are affected by contingency awareness. As a unique finding in human aversive conditioning, we discuss the role of the nucleus accumbens as well as practical implications for affective learning models.

Flavor evaluative conditioning and contingency awareness

The relationship between flavor evaluative conditioning and contingency awareness was examined intwo experiments using flavored drinks. In Experiment 1, one flavor was always paired with sugar and the other with bitter tween (polysorbate20) during conditioning. In a subsequent test phase, participants tasted the two flavors, and their evaluative ratings indicated an overall preference for the sugar-paired flavor. Moreover, participants were generally able to report which flavor had been paired with sugar and which with tween. This finding was replicated and confirmed in Experiment 2A. Furthermore, in both experiments, evaluative conditioning was seen only in those participants who were aware of the contingencies. Experiment 2B demonstrated that evaluative conditioning does not occur to colors, although participants are contingency aware. The differences between the present findings and prior studies, in which apparently unaware flavor conditioning has been found, are discussed.

Aware and (Dis)Liking: Item-Based Analyses Reveal That Valence Acquisition via Evaluative Conditioning Emerges Only When There Is Contingency Awareness.

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to changes in the liking of an affectively neutral stimulus (the conditioned stimulus, or CS) following the pairing of that stimulus with another stimulus of affective value (the unconditioned stimulus, or US). In 3 experiments, the authors assessed contingency awareness, that is, awareness of the CS-US associations, by relying on participants' responses to individual items rather than using a global method of assessment. They found that EC emerged on contingency aware CSs only. Of note, whether the CSs were evaluated explicitly (Experiments 1 and 2) or implicitly (Experiment 3) did not make a difference. This pattern supports the idea that awareness of the CS-US associations may be required for valence acquisition via EC.

The acquisition of taste properties by odors

Certain odors are routinely described as smelling sweet. This phenomenon may result from the co-occurrence of such odors and tastes outside the laboratory. Experiment 1 tested this possibility by pairing a selected odor with sucrose and another with citric acid in a masked design, using 24-h spaced sessions, preceded and followed by ratings of the odors' taste attributes when sniffed and when rated with tastes in solution. Following conditioning, the odor paired with sucrose smelled sweeter and with citric acid, sourer. In Experiment 2, contingency awareness was examined using a recognition measure, in an otherwise similar design. Again, odors smelled sweeter and sourer postconditioning. Contingency aware and unaware subjects did not differ in performance. Experiment 3 examined an exposure account of these changes, using a similar paradigm to Experiment 1, but with no exposures to sucrose or citric acid. No changes in odor taste attributes were observed, Overall, these findings demonstrate that associative learning, irrespective of awareness, has an important role in the acquisition of odor-taste qualities.

Assessing the Role of Contingency Awareness in Attitudinal Conditioning with Implications for Advertising Research

The authors investigate a basic mechanism for shaping attitudes that has largely been ignored by empirical researchers in the marketing discipline. Two experiments are reported in which traditional Pavlovian procedures are merged with a view of conditioning that encourages theorizing about attendant cognitive processes. The data indicate that contingency learning or awareness may be a requirement for successful attitudinal conditioning. Contingency awareness entails conscious recognition of the relational pattern between the conditioned and unconditioned stimuli used in a conditioning procedure. In experiment 1, the conditioning procedure affected the evaluative judgments of subjects who were classified ( post hoc) as contingency aware. In experiment 2, instructions that promoted contingency learning as part of the procedure again influenced participants’ attitude judgments. Implications are offered for theory development and for constructing advertisements to foster attitudinal conditioning. Specific suggestions for further research on how one might structure television commercials to foster contingency learning also are presented.

Contingency awareness and interpersonal attraction

The role of contingency awareness in research concerned with attitude similarity and interpersonal attraction was investigated by using both a traditional attitude questionnaire and a correlated attitude questionnaire procedure for manipulating attitude similarity. The results showed that the correlated questionnaire procedure led to fewer subjects who were judged to be contingency aware. Both of the procedures led to replications of the often reported finding that interpersonal attraction is directly related to the proportion of attittude similarity between two people. This effect was obtained both for subjects who were judged to be contingency aware and for subjects who were not so judged.

Contingency awareness, partial reinforcement effects, and curiosity motivation in children

Third- and fourth-grade children were given a two-choice discrimination learning task, designed to associate each of three syllables with a different reward schedule: 100% reward, 50% reward, and 0% reward. Subsequent to the conditioning phase, measures were made of the subject's awareness of the reward contingencies associated with the syllables, as well as the pleasantness and curiosity which these syllables had acquired during the conditioning. The results showed that a partially rewarded cue was evaluated as somewhat less “pleasant” than a continuously rewarded cue, but evoked more “curiosity” than either the continuous or nonrewarded cues. These effects emerged only for the contingency aware groups.