No abstract

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is one of the most widely-studied procedures for establishing and changing attitudes. The surveillance-task (Olson & Fazio, 2001) is a highly cited EC paradigm, and one that is claimed to generate attitudes without awareness. The potential for EC effects to occur without awareness continues to fuel conceptual, theoretical, and applied developments. Yet few published studies have used this task, and most are characterized by small samples and small effect sizes. We conducted a high-powered (N =1478), preregistered close replication of the original surveillance-task study. We obtained evidence for a small EC effect when ‘aware’ participants were excluded using the original criterion – therefore replicating the original effect. However, no such effect emerged when three other awareness criteria were used. We suggest that there is a need for caution when using evidence for the surveillance task effect to make theoretical and practical claims about ‘unaware’ EC effects.

Evaluative conditioning is one of the most widely studied procedures for establishing and changing attitudes. The surveillance task is a highly cited evaluative-conditioning paradigm and one that is claimed to generate attitudes without awareness. The potential for evaluative-conditioning effects to occur without awareness continues to fuel conceptual, theoretical, and applied developments. Yet few published studies have used this task, and most are characterized by small samples and small effect sizes. We conducted a high-powered ( N = 1,478 adult participants), preregistered close replication of the original surveillance-task study (Olson & Fazio, 2001). We obtained evidence for a small evaluative-conditioning effect when “aware” participants were excluded using the original criterion—therefore replicating the original effect. However, no such effect emerged when three other awareness criteria were used. We suggest that there is a need for caution when using evidence from the surveillance-task effect to make theoretical and practical claims about “unaware” evaluative-conditioning effects.

Lying is essential to social communication. Despite years of research, its detection still poses many challenges. This is partly because some individuals are perceived as truthful and reliable, even when lying. However, relatively little is known about these effective liars. In our study, we focused on the cognitive functioning of effective liars. We tested 400 participants who completed tasks measuring executive functions, verbal fluency, and fluid intelligence, and also made four statements (two true and two false, half of them written and half oral). The reliability of the statements was then assessed. Only fluid intelligence was found to be relevant for reliable lying. This relationship was only evident for oral statements, suggesting that the importance of intelligence is highlighted when statements are made spontaneously without prior preparation.