Attitude change via repeated evaluative pairings versus evaluative statements: Shared and unique features.

When tested immediately, evaluative statements (ES; verbal information about upcoming categories and their positive/negative attributes) surprisingly shift implicit (IAT) attitudes more effectively than repeated evaluative pairings (REP; actual pairing of category members with positive/negative attributes). The present project (total N = 5,317) explored the shared and unique features of these two attitude change modalities by probing (a) commonalities visible in the extent to which propositional inferences created by ES infiltrate REP learning and (b) differences visible in performance of ES and REP learning over time. In REP, the number of stimulus pairings (varied parametrically from 4 to 24) produced no effect (Study 1), but verbally describing stimulus pairings as diagnostic versus nondiagnostic did modulate learning (Study 2), suggesting that even REP give rise to some form of propositional representation. On the other hand, learning from ES decayed quickly, whereas learning from REP remained stable over time both within an immediate session of testing (Study 3) and following a 15-min delay (Study 4), revealing a difference between these two forms of learning. Beyond their theoretical import, these findings may inform interventions designed to produce short- and long-term change in implicit attitudes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)