Evaluative conditioning of conflict aversiveness and its effects on adaptive control

IF 1.7 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Ivan I. Ivanchei, Senne Braem, Luc Vermeylen, Wim Notebaert
{"title":"Evaluative conditioning of conflict aversiveness and its effects on adaptive control","authors":"Ivan I. Ivanchei, Senne Braem, Luc Vermeylen, Wim Notebaert","doi":"10.1007/s11031-024-10091-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Cognitive conflict is typically experienced as negative, which has been argued to drive adaptive behavior following a conflict. We tried to change the negative value of conflict using evaluative conditioning, and measured changes in conflict adaptation in a subsequent Stroop task (<i>N</i> = 416 Prolific participants, English native speakers from different countries). We did not find evidence for decreased conflict adaptation following positive evaluative conditioning of conflict. However, we also did not find evidence for the change of conflict evaluation measured with the affect misattribution procedure in the follow-up experiment (<i>N</i> = 70). Interestingly, the exploratory follow-up analysis showed that people with low goal motivation (as measured through BAS Drive) did show the expected effect. A memory test for the evaluative conditioning pairings and the follow-up experiment suggest that, although the affective value of conflict was difficult to change, people with low goal motivation experienced less difficulty remembering the association between conflict stimuli and positive pictures. Our findings show additional evidence that conflicts are inherently negative, however, there is no clear support for, or against, the affective signaling hypothesis, that is the idea that conflict negativity drives control adaptations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48282,"journal":{"name":"Motivation and Emotion","volume":"200 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Motivation and Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-024-10091-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cognitive conflict is typically experienced as negative, which has been argued to drive adaptive behavior following a conflict. We tried to change the negative value of conflict using evaluative conditioning, and measured changes in conflict adaptation in a subsequent Stroop task (N = 416 Prolific participants, English native speakers from different countries). We did not find evidence for decreased conflict adaptation following positive evaluative conditioning of conflict. However, we also did not find evidence for the change of conflict evaluation measured with the affect misattribution procedure in the follow-up experiment (N = 70). Interestingly, the exploratory follow-up analysis showed that people with low goal motivation (as measured through BAS Drive) did show the expected effect. A memory test for the evaluative conditioning pairings and the follow-up experiment suggest that, although the affective value of conflict was difficult to change, people with low goal motivation experienced less difficulty remembering the association between conflict stimuli and positive pictures. Our findings show additional evidence that conflicts are inherently negative, however, there is no clear support for, or against, the affective signaling hypothesis, that is the idea that conflict negativity drives control adaptations.

Abstract Image

冲突规避的评价条件及其对适应性控制的影响
认知冲突通常是负面的,这被认为是冲突后适应行为的驱动力。我们尝试使用评价性条件反射来改变冲突的负面价值,并在随后的 Stroop 任务中测量冲突适应性的变化(N = 416 名来自不同国家、以英语为母语的 Prolific 参与者)。我们没有发现在对冲突进行积极的评价性调节后,冲突适应性下降的证据。然而,在后续实验中,我们也没有发现用情感错误归因程序测量的冲突评价变化的证据(N = 70)。有趣的是,探索性后续分析表明,目标动机低(通过 BAS 驱动力测量)的人确实表现出了预期的效果。对评价性条件配对的记忆测试和后续实验表明,尽管冲突的情感价值难以改变,但目标动机低的人在记忆冲突刺激和积极图片之间的联系时遇到的困难较少。我们的研究结果提供了更多证据,证明冲突本质上是负面的,但是,对于情感信号假说,即冲突的负面性推动控制适应的观点,并没有明确的支持或反对。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Motivation and Emotion publishes articles on human motivational and emotional phenomena that make theoretical advances by linking empirical findings to underlying processes. Submissions should focus on key problems in motivation and emotion, and, if using non-human participants, should contribute to theories concerning human behavior.  Articles should be explanatory rather than merely descriptive, providing the data necessary to understand the origins of motivation and emotion, to explicate why, how, and under what conditions motivational and emotional states change, and to document that these processes are important to human functioning.A range of methodological approaches are welcome, with methodological rigor as the key criterion.  Manuscripts that rely exclusively on self-report data are appropriate, but published articles tend to be those that rely on objective measures (e.g., behavioral observations, psychophysiological responses, reaction times, brain activity, and performance or achievement indicators) either singly or combination with self-report data.The journal generally does not publish scale development and validation articles.  However, it is open to articles that focus on the post-validation contribution that a new measure can make.  Scale development and validation work therefore may be submitted if it is used as a necessary prerequisite to follow-up studies that demonstrate the importance of the new scale in making a theoretical advance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信