Affect priming

Affective priming, also called affect priming, is a type of response priming and was first proposed by Russell H. Fazio.[1] This type of priming entails the evaluation of people, ideas, objects, goods, etc., not only based on the physical features of those things, but also on affective context. The affective context may come from previous life experiences, and therefore, primes may arouse emotions rather than ideas. Most research and concepts about affective priming derive from the affective priming paradigm, which looks to make judgments of neutral affective targets following positive, neutral, or negative primes.[2] A prominent derivation of affective priming paradigm is the Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP), developed by Payne, Cheng, Govorun, and Stewart.[3] The main idea of AMP is to measure implicit attitudes, therefore, if the evaluation of the prime stimuli of an object is positive, it is said that the person has a positive attitude toward the object exposed.[4]

Affective priming paradigm

The intent of this affective priming paradigm had initially the intent of eliminating the bias created by affective priming research self-reports.[1] As a consequence, Fazio created the affective priming paradigm, which focuses on the evaluation of automatic stimuli. One finding of studies that use this paradigm says that “performance is typically faster and more accurate when a prime and target are congruent and have the same emotional information (e.g., “flower”–“wedding”) compared with when they are incongruent and have different emotional information (e.g., “party’ –“corpse”).”[5]

Affective automatic response

Affective priming has been long said to be related to implicit attitudes . Some research suggests that affective priming is triggered by multiple, simultaneous mechanisms. Added to this, it has found that deeper processing of the target being evaluated can significantly hinder the influence of the prime. On the other hand, deeper processing prime significantly increases the prime's influence and it is retrieved more easily in subsequent occasions.[6]

There is still a great need of research related to affective priming and automatic processing. Some arguments in favor of a strong relationship between the two argue that these affective priming processes 1) lack intentionality, 2) are highly efficient, 3) have reduced controllability, 4) are triggered at a high speed, especially when there is a motivationally relevant stimulus, and 5) there is reduced awareness of the origin, meaning, and occurrence of the response.[7]

Seib-Pfeifer and Gibbons have suggested that affective priming processing is linked to the right central-to-parieto-occipital positive slow wave (PSW).[6]

Other factors that contribute to this relationship between affective priming and automatic processing include switching tasks,[8] salience asymmetry,[9] and potentially strategic recoding.[8][4]

Valence vs arousal

There is much discussion in the world of psychology about the effects of valence and arousal in affect priming, since they both seem to affect it, but there has been little research on which of the two has a greater effect on this type of priming. For example, one study by Yao, Shu, and Luo asserts that valence has a greater effect, based on their findings regarding the stability of valence-driven priming effects against arousal-driven effects and their information in the semantic system.[5]

References
  1. Fazio, Russell H. (March 2001). "On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: An overview". Cognition & Emotion. 15 (2): 115–141. doi:10.1080/02699930125908. ISSN 0269-9931. S2CID 7087714.
  2. Gibbons, Henning; Seib-Pfeifer, Laura-Effi; Koppehele-Gossel, Judith; Schnuerch, Robert (2017-09-21). "Affective priming and cognitive load: Event-related potentials suggest an interplay of implicit affect misattribution and strategic inhibition". Psychophysiology. 55 (4): e13009. doi:10.1111/psyp.13009. ISSN 0048-5772. PMID 28940207.
  3. Payne, B. Keith; Cheng, Clara Michelle; Govorun, Olesya; Stewart, Brandon D. (September 2005). "An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 89 (3): 277–293. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.277. ISSN 1939-1315. PMID 16248714. S2CID 12209281.
  4. Molden, Daniel C. (ed.). Understanding priming effects in social psychology. ISBN 978-1-4625-1938-5. OCLC 891081586.
  5. Yao, Zhao; Zhu, Xiangru; Luo, Wenbo (2019-10-01). "Valence makes a stronger contribution than arousal to affective priming". PeerJ. 7: e7777. doi:10.7717/peerj.7777. ISSN 2167-8359. PMC 6777477. PMID 31592186.
  6. Seib-Pfeifer, Laura-Effi; Gibbons, Henning (November 2019). "Independent ERP predictors of affective priming underline the importance of depth of prime and target processing and implicit affect misattribution". Brain and Cognition. 136: 103595. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2019.103595. ISSN 0278-2626. PMID 31450044. S2CID 201414877.
  7. Ranganath, Kate A.; Smith, Colin Tucker; Nosek, Brian A. (March 2008). "Distinguishing automatic and controlled components of attitudes from direct and indirect measurement methods". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 44 (2): 386–396. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.008. ISSN 0022-1031. PMC 2350226. PMID 18443648.
  8. Mierke, Jan. (2003-12-01). "Method-specific variance in the implicit association test". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. American Psychological Association. 85 (6): 1180–92. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1180. OCLC 926304965. PMID 14674823.
  9. Rothermund, Klaus; Wentura, Dirk (2004). "Underlying Processes in the Implicit Association Test: Dissociating Salience From Associations". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 133 (2): 139–165. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.139. ISSN 1939-2222. PMID 15149248. S2CID 7497635.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.