The contribution of uncontrolled processes to evaluative learning has been examined in evaluative conditioning procedures by comparing evaluations of conditioned stimuli between tasks or within tasks but between learning instruction conditions. In the present research, we introduced a new procedure that keeps both tasks and instructions constant. In addition, we introduced ambivalence measures to address this uncontrollability question. The new procedure involves forming an impression of conditioned stimuli based on their pairing with one unconditioned stimulus while attending but discarding the influence of another unconditioned stimulus holding the same (congruent trials) vs. a different (incongruent trials) valence. When the to-be-used and to-be-discarded unconditioned stimuli share the same (vs. a different) valence, controlled and uncontrolled processes should support the same (vs. opposite) responses. We used this approach in two preregistered experiments (N_total = 467) using dichotomous evaluative classifications (Experiments 1 and 2), evaluative ratings, and two measures of attitudinal ambivalence: mouse trajectories and felt ambivalence (Experiment 2). While we failed to find evidence for uncontrolled processes in evaluative classification frequencies separately in Experiments 1 and 2, analyses of aggregated classification frequencies across Experiments 1 and 2 suggested a small contribution of uncontrolled processes. In addition, we found larger felt ambivalence for incongruent than congruent trials. Overall, the present findings are mixed but support the possibility of a contribution of uncontrolled processes to evaluative learning, even when control is applied to a focal stimulus and additional influences come from a to-be-disregarded stimulus.

中文翻译：

---

EXPRESS：不受控制的过程有助于评价性学习吗？新的两国进程分离程序和矛盾措施的见解

通过比较任务之间或任务内但学习教学条件之间的条件刺激的评估，在评价性调节程序中检查了不受控制的过程对评价性学习的贡献。在本研究中，我们引入了一种新的程序，可以保持任务和指令不变。此外，我们还引入了矛盾措施来解决这种不可控问题。新程序涉及根据条件刺激与一个无条件刺激的配对形成对条件刺激的印象，同时注意但丢弃另一个具有相同（一致试验）与不同（不一致试验）效价的无条件刺激的影响。当要使用和要丢弃的无条件刺激具有相同（相对于不同）价时，受控和不受控过程应该支持相同（相对于相反）的反应。我们在两个预先注册的实验（N_total = 467）中使用了这种方法，使用二分评价分类（实验 1 和 2）、评价评级和两种矛盾态度测量：小鼠轨迹和感觉矛盾心理（实验 2） ）。虽然我们未能在实验 1 和 2 中分别找到评估分类频率中不受控制的过程的证据，但对实验 1 和 2 的聚合分类频率的分析表明，不受控制的过程的贡献很小。此外，我们发现不一致的试验比一致的试验更让人感到矛盾。总体而言，目前的研究结果好坏参半，但支持不受控制的过程对评价性学习做出贡献的可能性，即使控制应用于焦点刺激并且额外的影响来自于被忽视的刺激。