Lewicki P, Hill T, Czyzewska M
Department of Psychology, University of Tulsa, Oklahoma 74104, USA.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1997 Jan;23(1):221-8. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.23.1.221.
H. Hendrickx, J. De Houwer, F. Baeyens, P. Eelen, and E. Van Avermaet (1997) reported a series of (mostly unsuccessful) studies on nonconscious hidden covariation detection (HCD); for example, they reported that out of 3 attempts to replicate P. Lewicki et al.'s studies, only 1 produced the expected results. They concluded that HCD may be not as general and robust as the previous research suggested, and they considered boundary conditions. In this article, the authors discuss a number of weaknesses of H. Hendrickx et al.'s experiments (and systematic deviations from the original methodology) that are potentially responsible for the lack of the expected results and discuss missing facts in their arguments (e.g., they failed to mention any published replications of the HCD studies from other than the present authors' laboratories). It is argued that when all evidence is considered, the proper conclusion is that nonconscious processing of covariations is not only general and robust but also a ubiquitous phenomenon mediating a variety of processes of acquisition of information.
H. 亨德里克斯、J. 德霍维尔、F. 贝扬斯、P. 埃伦和E. 范阿韦尔马特（1997年）报告了一系列关于非意识隐藏协变检测（HCD）的研究（大多未成功）；例如，他们报告称，在3次复制P. 莱维茨基等人研究的尝试中，只有1次得到了预期结果。他们得出结论，HCD可能不像先前研究所表明的那样普遍和可靠，并且他们考虑了边界条件。在本文中，作者讨论了H. 亨德里克斯等人实验的一些弱点（以及与原始方法的系统性偏差），这些弱点可能是导致未得到预期结果的原因，并讨论了他们论点中缺失的事实（例如，他们没有提及除作者所在实验室之外其他地方发表的HCD研究的任何复制结果）。有人认为，当考虑所有证据时，恰当的结论是，协变的非意识加工不仅普遍且可靠，而且是介导各种信息获取过程的普遍现象。
