Randomized trial reveals unreliable cues in implicit evaluations, suggesting inaccessible mental content influences predictions.
= 6,794) designed to minimize these nonintrospective routes to predictive accuracy. We introduced participants to novel targets and shifted implicit and explicit evaluations of these targets in opposite directions, rendering explicit evaluations an unreliable cue. Under these conditions, predictive accuracy ranged from low to nonexistent; participants frequently anticipated shifts in their implicit evaluations in the opposite direction of the actual change. These results generalized across two learning paradigms (impression formation and attribute conditioning), two implicit evaluation measures (Implicit Association Test and evaluative priming task), and between-participant and within-participant designs. We consider multiple interpretations of these findings, including the possibility that implicit evaluations reflect mental content that is largely or even entirely inaccessible to conscious awareness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kurdi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: