• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

简短内隐联想测验测量的是语义表征还是情感效价表征?

Does the Brief Implicit Association Test measure semantic or affective valence representations?

作者信息

Argaman Yiftach, Heimer Orit, Bar-Anan Yoav, Kron Assaf

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Haifa.

School of Psychological Science, Tel Aviv University.

出版信息

Emotion. 2025 Jun;25(4):907-921. doi: 10.1037/emo0001480. Epub 2024 Dec 16.

DOI:10.1037/emo0001480
PMID:39680000
Abstract

Valence, the representation of a stimulus as positive or negative, is fundamental to conceptualizing attitudes and their empirical research. Valence has two potential representations: semantic and affective. The current line of studies investigates the degree to which the congruency effect of the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT), often used as an indirect evaluation measure, reflects affective or semantic aspects of valence. In three preregistered experiments ( = 1,056, with 352 participants each), we examined how the congruency effect of the BIAT reflects these aspects. In all three experiments, we used a repeated exposure manipulation, which typically causes a habituation effect on affective but not on semantic aspects of valence, to differentiate between the two types. In the first experiment, repeated exposure occurred before the BIAT, while in the second and third experiments, it was performed in the context of the BIAT task. We utilized three dependent variables: feelings-focused self-reports (measuring participants' reports about their feelings), knowledge-focused self-reports (measuring semantic evaluations), and the BIAT congruence effect. Supported by Bayesian analysis, we found consistent evidence that the repeated exposure manipulation influenced feelings-focused self-reports but did not affect knowledge-focused self-reports or the BIAT. The results suggest that the BIAT effect is sensitive to semantic (and not affective) representations of valence. Implications for attitude theory and measurement are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

效价,即将刺激表征为积极或消极,是态度概念化及其实证研究的基础。效价有两种潜在表征:语义表征和情感表征。当前的一系列研究探讨了常被用作间接评估手段的简版内隐联想测验(BIAT)的一致性效应在多大程度上反映了效价的情感或语义方面。在三项预先注册的实验中(N = 1056,每项实验有352名参与者),我们考察了BIAT的一致性效应如何反映这些方面。在所有三项实验中,我们采用了重复暴露操作,这种操作通常会对效价的情感方面而非语义方面产生习惯化效应,以区分这两种类型。在第一个实验中,重复暴露发生在BIAT之前,而在第二个和第三个实验中,它是在BIAT任务的背景下进行的。我们使用了三个因变量:以感受为重点的自我报告(测量参与者对自己感受的报告)、以知识为重点的自我报告(测量语义评估)以及BIAT一致性效应。在贝叶斯分析的支持下,我们发现了一致的证据,即重复暴露操作影响了以感受为重点的自我报告,但没有影响以知识为重点的自我报告或BIAT。结果表明,BIAT效应对价的语义(而非情感)表征敏感。文中讨论了对态度理论和测量的启示。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2025美国心理学会,保留所有权利)

相似文献

1
Does the Brief Implicit Association Test measure semantic or affective valence representations?简短内隐联想测验测量的是语义表征还是情感效价表征?
Emotion. 2025 Jun;25(4):907-921. doi: 10.1037/emo0001480. Epub 2024 Dec 16.
2
Semantic and affective representations of valence: Prediction of autonomic and facial responses from feelings-focused and knowledge-focused self-reports.效价的语义和情感表示:从关注感觉和关注知识的自我报告预测自主和面部反应。
Emotion. 2020 Apr;20(3):486-500. doi: 10.1037/emo0000567. Epub 2019 Feb 4.
3
A divergent effect of stimulus perceptual details on affective and semantic representations of valence.刺激知觉细节对情感和语义效价表征的发散效应。
Emotion. 2023 Aug;23(5):1236-1253. doi: 10.1037/emo0001148. Epub 2022 Sep 8.
4
Dissociating affective and semantic valence.区分情感效价和语义效价。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2017 Jul;146(7):924-942. doi: 10.1037/xge0000291. Epub 2017 Apr 17.
5
The spread of affective and semantic valence representations across states.情感和语义效价表示在状态间的传播。
Cognition. 2024 Mar;244:105714. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105714. Epub 2024 Jan 3.
6
Semantic and affective manifestations of ambi (valence).双关(多义)的语义和情感表现。
Cogn Emot. 2019 Nov;33(7):1356-1369. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2018.1564249. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
7
Temporal dynamics of the semantic versus affective representations of valence during reversal learning.反转学习过程中效价的语义与情感表征的时间动态。
Cognition. 2023 Jul;236:105423. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105423. Epub 2023 Mar 16.
8
Uninstructed BIAT faking when ego depleted or in normal state: differential effect on brain and behavior.自我耗竭或处于正常状态时非指导性生物行为评估测试(BIAT)的伪装:对大脑和行为的不同影响
BMC Neurosci. 2016 May 3;17(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12868-016-0249-8.
9
The Brief Death Implicit Association Test: Scoring recommendations, reliability, validity, and comparisons with the Death Implicit Association Test.简短死亡内隐联想测验:评分建议、信度、效度及与死亡内隐联想测验的比较。
Psychol Assess. 2018 Oct;30(10):1356-1366. doi: 10.1037/pas0000580. Epub 2018 May 21.
10
Affective experiences and implicit representation of affect valence in young, middle-aged and older adults: Evidence based on ecological momentary assessment and implicit association test.年轻人、中年人和老年人的情感体验及情感效价的内隐表征:基于生态瞬时评估和内隐联想测验的证据
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2025 Jun;256:105046. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105046. Epub 2025 Apr 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Is Kiki angry and Bouba happy? Association between emotions, shapes, and sounds.琪琪生气而布巴开心吗?情绪、形状和声音之间的关联。
Psychol Res. 2025 Jul 14;89(4):124. doi: 10.1007/s00426-025-02158-5.