Effects of Self-Control Resources on the Interplay between Implicit and Explicit Attitude Processes in the Subliminal Mere Exposure Paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies have shown that the mere exposure effect under subliminal conditions is more likely to emergefor implicit attitudes than explicit attitudes. We tested whether the implicit effects of subliminal mere exposurecould spill over to the explicit level by depleting self-control resources. Participants were subliminally exposedto a novel female photograph. Then, implicit and explicit attitudes toward an exposed and an unexposedphotograph were measured. This basic design was crossed with a cognitive load manipulation, which shoulddeplete the capacity of self-control resources (low cognitive load vs. high cognitive load). Results showed thatthe subliminal mere exposure effect occurred for not only implicit attitudes but also explicit attitudes whenparticipants’ cognitive resources were depleted in the high cognitive load condition. In contrast, when cognitiveresources were not depleted, the subliminal mere exposure effect only emerged for implicit attitudes. Thesefindings support the contention that self-control failures could facilitate implicit effects of subliminal mereexposure toward the explicit level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".