10.6084/m9.figshare.8293454.v1
Ryan J. Hutchings
Ryan J.
Hutchings
Jimmy Calanchini
Jimmy
Calanchini
Lisa M. Huang
Lisa M.
Huang
Heather R. Rees
Heather R.
Rees
Andrew M. Rivers
Andrew M.
Rivers
Jenny Roth
Jenny
Roth
Jeffrey W. Sherman
Jeffrey W.
Sherman
Retrieval cues fail to influence contextualized evaluations
Taylor & Francis Group
2019
Contextualised attitude change
retrieval cues
evaluative conditioning
2019-06-19 07:38:27
Journal contribution
https://tandf.figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Retrieval_cues_fail_to_influence_contextualized_evaluations/8293454
<p>Initial evaluations generalise to new contexts, whereas counter-attitudinal evaluations are context-specific. Counter-attitudinal information may not change evaluations in new contexts because perceivers fail to retrieve counter-attitudinal cue-evaluation associations from memory outside the counter-attitudinal learning context. The current work examines whether an additional, counter-attitudinal retrieval cue can enhance the generalizability of counter-attitudinal evaluations. In four experiments, participants learned positive information about a target person, Bob, in one context, and then learned negative information about Bob in a different context. While learning the negative information, participants wore a wristband as a retrieval cue for counter-attitudinal Bob-negative associations. Participants then made speeded as well as deliberate evaluations of Bob while wearing or not wearing the wristband. Internal meta-analysis failed to find a reliable effect of the counter-attitudinal retrieval cue on speeded or deliberate evaluations, whereas the context cues influenced speeded and deliberate evaluations. Counter to predictions, counter-attitudinal retrieval cues did not disrupt the generalisation of first-learned evaluations or the context-specificity of second-learned evaluations (Experiments 2–4), but the counter-attitudinal retrieval cue did influence evaluations in the absence of context cues (Experiment 1). The current work provides initial evidence that additional counter-attitudinal retrieval cues fail to disrupt the renewal and generalizability of first-learned evaluations.</p>