Greebles actually do look like faces (but not in the way you thought).

Shafto, Juliet; Pyles, John A.; Jew, Carol A.; Tarr, Michael J.

doi:10.1167/15.12.1161

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the conditioned Greebles were either social Greebles or less-social Greebles that were pre-tested for social appearance (Shafto, Pyles, Jew and Tarr, 2015). The latter authors showed a stronger activation of the Fusiform Face Area for curvilinear Greebles (i.e., the social Greebles) compared to the rectilinear Greebles (i.e., the less-social Greebles).…”

Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentiated evaluation of counter-conditioned stimuli as a function of right-wing authoritarianism

Bret¹,

Beffara²,

Mierop³

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RWA is associated with higher social prejudice. It is unclear, however, (i) whether RWA plays a role in attitude acquisition or attitude change (or both), and (ii) whether it influences attitudes unrelated to in/outgroup concerns. We relied on an evaluative conditioning-then-counterconditioning paradigm simulating prejudice formation and change to examine this question. Neutral fictive group exemplars were first conditioned positively or negatively (attitude learning) and then counter-conditioned with the opposite valence (attitude change). We then measured the evaluative outcome of the conditioning and counter-conditioning phases. Experiment 1 (N=55) shows smaller attitude change in higher RWA. Experiment 2 (N=115) replicates and extends this finding to both social and less-social categories of stimuli, and rules out the role of contingency memory in the effect. Experiment 3 (N=399) shows that attitude change rather than attitude formation is the key contributor. A meta-analysis suggests that this RWA effect is mainly observed for negative attitude change.Keywords: socio-political ideologies, attitude formation, attitude change, evaluative conditioning, evaluative counter-conditioning. Highlights :RWA is linked with weaker attitude change.Weaker change is devoid from prior knowledge and social motivation.The change in deliberate evaluations and not attitude learning seems compromised. FundingThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not for profit sectors.Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) is characterized by a covariation of authoritarian aggression, authoritarian submission, and conventionalism (Altemeyer, 1981). It is positively associated with negative attitudes about outgroups (Altemeyer, 1998, Duriez & Van Hiel, 2002, Duckitt & Sibley, 2007, Hodson, MacInnis, & Busseri, 2017. A core assumption in RWA theory is that social attitudes held by high RWA, besides being more polarized and prejudiced, are more stable in time and resistant to change after exposition to counter-attitudinal information. So far, however, the latter assumption has been examined for attitudes about existing social groups, which are associated with prior information and are relevant to a diversity of social motivations. Although such strategy has advanced our understanding of how RWA correlates with attitudes and attitudes change about socially meaningful groups, it has made it difficult to examine whether pure attitude learning and change mechanisms vary across RWA scores.The present research sought to provide answers to the latter questions by examining for the first time how RWA predicts attitude formation and change about a set of new, socially irrelevant, stimuli for which parameters such as prior knowledge, time and frequency of exposure, social relevance, or group variability are equated. This paradigmatic change allowed examining whether RWA predicts variations in attitude acquisition or attitude change (or both) and whether it does so as a function of the valence...

show abstract

Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%