Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Reply addresses misrepresentations and refocuses the definition debate on evaluative conditioning.
In this paper, I respond to the paper by Corneille and Béna (2026; CB) which itself was a response to my earlier paper (De Houwer, 2026) in which I evaluated the proposal of Corneille et al. (2026) for a new definition of evaluative conditioning. I argue that CB hamper the debate by misrepresenting my opinions and by shifting the focus away from the core concerns that I raised in my previous paper. In addition to correcting the errors, I shift attention back to the main issues under discussion, thereby trying to advance the debate on the definition of evaluative conditioning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jan De Houwer (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: