Jay J. Van Bavel*, Y. Jenny Xiao*, & William A. Cunningham**
*New York University **The Ohio State University
Author’s Introduction
For nearly a century, psychologists have sought to understand the unconscious and conscious processes that allow people to evaluate their surroundings. Many contemporary psychologists have characterized the unconscious and conscious mind as discrete processes or systems: one that is evolutionarily older, reflexive, automatic, fast, affective, associative, and another that is deliberative, controlled, slow, cognitive, and propositional Over the past few decades, dual attitude/process/system models have emerged as the dominant framework for understanding a wide range of psychological phenomena. Indeed, a dual system model of the human mind permeates research in a wide range of psychological domains, such as attitudes and persuasion, stereotypes and prejudice, person perception, self-regulation, moral cognition, learning and memory, and decision-making. Although these models serve as a useful heuristic for characterizing the human mind, recent developments in social and cognitive neuroscience suggest that the human evaluative system, like most of cognition, is widely distributed and highly dynamic. Integrating these advances with current attitude theory, we review how the recently proposed Iterative Reprocessing Model can account for apparent dual systems as well as discrepancies between traditional dual system models and recent research revealing the dynamic nature of evaluation. Furthermore, we describe important implications this dynamical system approach has for various social psychological domains.
Author Recommends:
Bargh, J. A. (1994). The Four Horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, efficiency, intention, and control in social cognition (2 ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
The notion of automaticity has been extremely influencial in social psychology. In this chapter, Bargh provides a review of automaticity research across different several different domains. This chapter is organized by the four defining qualities of automaticity—the extent to which thought and behavoir are unintentional, occur outside of awareness, are uncontrollable, and are efficient in their use of attentional resources. These features of automaticity continue to inform conceptualizations of dual process and systems models, as well as many other domains in social psychology.
Cunningham, W. A., Zelazo, P. D., Packer, D. J., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2007). The iterative reprocessing model: A multi-level framework for attitudes and evaluation. Social Cognition, 25, 736-760.
Dual process models of attitudes highlight the fact that evaluative processes are complex and multifaceted. Nevertheless, many of these modesl typically neglect important interactions among processes that can contribute to evaluation. In this article, the authors propose a multi-level model of attitudes and evaluation in which curent evaluations are constructed from relatively stable attitude representations through the iterative reprocessing of informaiton. This model provides an early formulation of some of the ideas presented in the current manuscript. In this paper, the authors outline the Iterative Reprocessing Model at the computational, algorithmic, and implementational levels of analysis.
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.
In this empirical paper, Devine presents three studies testing basic assumptions derived from a theoretical model based on the dissociation of automatic and controlled processes involved in prejudice. The model suggests that stereotypes are automatically activated in the presence of a member of the stereotyped group and that low-prejudice responses require controlled inhibition of the automatically activated stereotype. This paper also discusses the relationship between stereotypes and prejudice, and implications for prejudice reduction.
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118, 247-279.
In this paper, the authors propose a dynamic interactive theory of person construal. This theory assumes that the perception of other peopls is accomplished by a dynamical system involving continuous interaction between social categories, stereotypes, high-level cognitive states, and the low-level processing of facial, vocal, and bodily cues. This model permits lower-level sensory perception and higher-order social cognition to dynamically coordinate across multiple interactive levels of processing to give rise to stable person construals. The authors also discuss the implications of a rapidly adaptive, dynamic, and interactive person construal system.
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692-731.
The article provides an integrative review of the available evidence on implicit and explicit attitude change that is guided by a distinction between associative and propositional processes. Whereas associative processes are characterized by mere activation independent of subjective truth or falsity, propositional reasoning is concerned with the validation of evaluations and beliefs. The proposed associative-propositional evaluation (APE) model makes specific assumptions about the mutual interplay of the two processes, implying several mechanisms that lead to symmetric or asymmetric changes in implicit and explicit attitudes. The model integrates a broad range of empirical evidence and implies several new predictions for implicit and explicit attitude change.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4-27.
This paper reviews evidence suggesting that attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes have implicit and explicit modes of operation. Methodologically, this review calls for increased use of indirect measures in studies of implicit cognition. The theorized ordinariness of implicit stereotyping is consistent with findings of discrimination by people who explicitly disavow prejudice. The finding that implicit cognitive effects are often reduced by focusing judges’ attention on their judgment task provides a basis for evaluating applications (such as affirmative action) aimed at reducing unintended discrimination.
Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Understanding implicit and explicit attitude change: A systems of reasoning analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 995-1008.
There is considerable controversy about how to conceptualize implicit and explicit attitudes, reflecting substantial speculation about the mechanisms involved in implicit and explicit attitude formation and change. To investigate this issue, these authors examine the processes by which new attitudes are formed and changed and how these attitudes predict behavior. Five experiments support a systems of reasoning approach to implicit and explicit attitude change. Specifically, explicit attitudes are shaped in a manner consistent with fast-changing processes, affected by explicit processing goals, and uniquely predict more deliberate behavioral intentions. Conversely, implicit attitudes reflect an associative system characterized by a slower process of repeated pairings between an attitude object and related evaluations, are unaffected by explicit processing goals, uniquely predict spontaneous behaviors, and are exclusively affected by associative information about the attitude object that is not available for higher order cognition.
Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-Process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131.
Models postulating two distinct processing modes have been proposed in several areas within social and cognitive psychology. The authors advance a new conceptual model of the two processing modes. The structural basis of the new model is the idea, supported by psychological and neuropsychological evidence, that humans possess two memory systems. The authors also review existing dual-process models in several areas, emphasizing their similar assumptions of a quick, effortless processing mode that rests on well-learned prior associations and a second, more effortful processing mode that involves rule-based inferences and is employed only when people have both cognitive capacity and motivation.
Van Bavel, J. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (2011). A social neuroscience approach to self and social categorisation: A new look at an old issue. European Review of Social Psychology, 21, 237-284.
The authors take a social neuroscience approach to self and social categorization in which the current self-categorization(s) is constructed from relatively stable identity representations stored in memory (such as the significance of one’s social identity) through iterative and interactive perceptual and evaluative processing. This approach describes these processes across multiple levels of analysis, linking the effects of self-categorization and social identity on perception and evaluation to brain function. They review several studies showing that self-categorization with an arbitrary group can override the effects of more visually salient, cross-cutting social categories on social perception and evaluation. The top-down influence of self-categorization represents a powerful antecedent-focused strategy for suppressing racial bias without many of the limitations of a more response-focused strategy. Finally, they discuss the implications of this approach for our understanding of social perception and evaluation and the neural substrates of these processes.
Online Materials:
Society for Social Neuroscience
social-neuroscience.org/
Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience
ccsn.uchicago.edu/
Scientific American Frontiers: The Hidden Prejudice
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RSVz6VEybk
Dateline NBC: Psychological Dispositions in Black & Whit
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYQVDik69Nw
Project Implicit
implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/
www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5Q5FQfXZag
Project Implicit blends basic research and educational outreach in a virtual laboratory at which visitors can examine their own hidden biases. Project Implicit is the product of research by three scientists whose work produced a new approach to understanding of attitudes, biases, and stereotypes. The Project Implicit site (implicit.harvard.edu) has been functioning as a hands-on science museum exhibit, allowing web visitors to experience the manner in which human minds display the effects of stereotypic and prejudicial associations acquired from their socio-cultural environment.
Sample Syllabus:
Topic/Course: Attitudes
Readings:
Week I: Dual process/systems perspective of attitudes
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692-731.
Bargh, J. A. (1994). The Four Horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, efficiency, intention, and control in social cognition (2 ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4-27.
Week II: Dynamical and interactive perspective of attitudes
Van Bavel, J. J., Xiao, Y. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (in press). Evaluation is a dynamic process: Moving beyond dual system models. Social & Personality Psychology Compass.
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118, 247-279.
Cunningham, W. A., Zelazo, P. D., Packer, D. J., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2007). The iterative reprocessing model: A multi-level framework for attitudes and evaluation. Social Cognition, 25, 736-760.
OPTIONAL:
Focus Questions
Eg. 1. What are the differences between different dual process/system models?
Eg. 2. What are the similarities between dual process/system models and dynamical system models?
Eg. 3. What are the differences between dual process/system models and dynamical system models?
Eg., 4. Why are these differences important?
Eg., 5. What are some novel experiments you could design to test dual process/system models against dynamical system models?
Seminar/Project Idea:
Have students complete a Black-White Implicit Association Test (IAT) and talk about all the potential sources of influence that might bias their score on the task. Then have students complete a simple version on the task using mouse-tracking (mousetracker.jbfreeman.net/). Many students should be able to see the online dynamical responses to Black and White faces in real time. This should help provoke talk about the role of multiple processes even during what is normally considered an implicit/automatic response.
