Dual and Single-Process Perspectives on the Role of Threat Detection in Evaluation

Ruisch, Benjamin C.; Cone, Jeremy; Shen, Xi; Ferguson, Melissa J.

doi:10.1080/1047840x.2018.1435619

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, there is widespread support for relatively independent slow versus fast learning processes in humans and nonhuman animals (e.g., Kumaran, Hassabis, & McClelland, 2016). However, our contention is that there is currently not enough evidence to support a two-system or two-process approach that assumes different learning constraints for implicit versus explicit impression updating (Amodio & Ratner, 2011; De Houwer, 2014; see also Ferguson et al, 2014; Ruisch, Cone, Shen, & Ferguson, 2018). Instead, the evidence is more thoroughly consistent with perspectives positing that propositional thinking can strongly impact implicit cognition (e.g., De Houwer, 2014; Kurdi & Banaji, 2017).…”

Section: Implications and Outstanding Questionsmentioning

confidence: 91%

When and How Implicit First Impressions Can Be Updated

Ferguson

Mann

Cone

et al. 2019

Curr Dir Psychol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human perceivers continually react to the social world implicitly —that is, spontaneously and rapidly. Earlier research suggested that implicit impressions of other people are slower to change than self-reported impressions in the face of contradictory evidence, often leaving them miscalibrated from what one learns to be true. Recent work, however, has identified conditions under which implicit impressions can be rapidly updated. Here, we review three lines of work showing that implicit impressions are responsive to information that is highly diagnostic, believable, or reframes earlier experience. These findings complement ongoing research on mechanisms of changing implicit impressions in a wider variety of groups, from real people to robots, and provide support for theoretical frameworks that embrace greater unity in the factors that can impact implicit and explicit social cognition.

show abstract

Section: Implications and Outstanding Questionsmentioning

confidence: 91%

When and How Implicit First Impressions Can Be Updated

Ferguson

Mann

Cone

et al. 2019

Curr Dir Psychol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These two sets of findings of the rapid reversal of initial implicit impressions suggest that implicit cognition can, at least under some conditions, be sensitive to relevant new information about other people, allowing a perceiver to remain functionally wellcalibrated in navigating the social world. Furthermore, such findings provide data for use in ongoing theoretical work on the representations and processes involved in implicit versus explicit cognition, advocating for increased attention to common processes underlying the two types of measures (Cone et al, 2017;De Houwer, 2014;Ferguson, Mann, & Wojnowicz, 2014;Ferguson & Wojnowicz, 2011;Ruisch, Cone, Shen, & Ferguson, 2018;Wojnowicz, Ferguson, Dale, & Spivey, 2009; see also Gawronski, Rydell, De Houwer, Brannon, Ye, Vervliet, & Hu, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%