The Psychological Record

, Volume 64, Issue 3, pp 475–485 | Cite as

A Derived Transformation of Evaluative Preferences Using Implicit Association Tests

  • Micah AmdEmail author
  • Dermot Barnes-Holmes
Original Article


In the current experiment, multiple implicit association tests (IATs) were employed to examine the transformation of emotional functions across stimuli that have been related along a comparatively valenced (“happier” to “unhappier”) dimension. Ten human participants were exposed to a matching-to-sample (MTS) procedure where they were trained to select the more positively valenced (“happier”) stimulus in the presence of a yellow contextual cue or otherwise to select the more negatively valenced (“unhappier”) stimulus in the presence of a red cue. Next, the cues were employed to establish the relations A > B, B > C and C > D where “>” indicates “happier than.” Following tests for mutual and combinatorial entailment, participants underwent two single-category IATs, where the A-D and B-C stimulus pairs were alternatively paired with happy and unhappy words. Our results indicate that individuals who demonstrated evidence of mutual and combinatorial entailed relations paired Stimulus A (more so than Stimulus D) and Stimulus B (more so than Stimulus C), with happy words more fluently then with unhappy words.


Implicit association test Comparative relations Valence 


Authors Notes

The current study was conducted as part of the doctoral research program undertaken by the first author at the National University of Ireland, Maynooth. The research was initially funded by the John Hume scholarship and subsequently by the Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology. The author thanks Bryan Roche for the clarification of select conceptual issues.


  1. Amd, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Ivanoff, J. (2013). A derived transfer of eliciting emotional functions using electroencephalograms as a dependent measure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 99(3), 318–334. doi: 10.1002/jeab.19.
  2. Cai, H., Sriram, N., & Greenwald, A. (2002). The implicit association test’s D measure can minimize a cognitive skill confound: comment on McFarland and Crouch. Social Cognition, 22(6), 673–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dougher, M. J., Hamilton, D. A., Fink, B. C., & Harrington, J. (2007). Transformation of the discriminative and eliciting functions of generalized relational stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88(2), 179–197. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2007.45-05.
  4. Dymond, S., & Barnes, D. (1995). A transfer of self-discrimination functions in accordance with the derived stimulus relations of sameness, more-than, and less-than. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64(2), 163–184. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.64-163.
  5. Dymond, S., & Whelan, R. (2010). Derived relational responding: a comparison of match-to-sample and the relational completion procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 94(1), 37–55. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2010.94-37.
  6. De Houwer, J., Thomas, S., & Baeyens, F. (2001). Associative learning of likes and dislikes: a review of 25 years of research on human evaluative conditioning. Psychological Bulletin, 127(6), 853–869. doi: 10.1037//D033-29O9.127.6.853.
  7. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464.
  8. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197.
  9. Gregg, A. P., Seibt, B., & Banaji, M. B. (2006). Easier done than undone: asymmetry in the malleability of implicit preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(1), 1–20. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.
  10. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.Google Scholar
  11. Hoon, A., Dymond, S., Dixon, M. R., & Jackson, J. W. (2008). Contextual control of slot machine gambling: replication and extension. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 467–470. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-467.
  12. Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & De Houwer, J. (2011). The dominance of associative theorising in implicit attitude research: propositional and behavioral alternatives. The Psychological Record, 61, 465–498.Google Scholar
  13. Hinojosa, J. A., Bertolo, C. M., & Pozo, M. A. (2010). Looking at emotional words is not the same as reading emotional words: behavioral and neural correlates. Psychophysiology, 47(4), 748–757. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.00982.x.
  14. Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2006). The single category implicit association test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1), 16–32. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.16.
  15. Lane, S., & Critchfield, T. (1996). Verbal self-reports of emergent relations in a stimulus equivalence procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65(2), 355–374. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1996.65-355.
  16. Langner, O., Dotsch, R., Bijlstra, G., Wigboldus, D. H. J., Hawk, S. T., & Knippenberg, A. V. (2010). Presentation and validation of the Radboud Faces Database. Cognition & Emotion, 24(8), 1377–1388. doi: 10.1080/02699930903485076.
  17. Munnelly, A., Dymond, S., & Hinton, E. C. (2010). Relational reasoning with derived comparative relations: A novel model of transitive inference. Behavioural Processes, 85(1), 8–17. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2010.05.007.
  18. Munnelly, A., Freegard, G., & Dymond, S. (2013). Constructing relational sentences: Establishing arbitrarily applicable comparative relations with the relational completion procedure. The Psychological Record, 63(4), 751–768. doi: 10.11133.j.tpr.2013.63.4.004.
  19. O’Toole, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smyth, S. (2007). A derived transfer of functions and the implicit association test. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88(2), 263–283. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2007.76-06.
  20. Schupp, H. T., Markus, J., Weike, A. I., & Hamm, A. O. (2003). Emotional facilitation of sensory processing in the visual cortex. Psychological Science, 14(1), 7–13. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.01411.
  21. Smith, A. P., Dolan, R. J., & Rugg, M. D. (2004). Event-related potential correlates of the retrieval of emotional and nonemotional context. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(5), 760–775. doi: 10.1162/089892904970816.
  22. Vitale, A., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Campbell, C. (2008). Facilitated responding in accordance with the relational frame of comparison: systematic empirical analyses. The Psychological Record, 58(3), 365–390.Google Scholar
  23. Wallaert, M., Ward, A., & Mann, T. (2010). Explicit control of implicit responses: Simple directives can alter IAT performance. Social Psychology, 41(3), 152–157. doi: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000022.

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National University of Ireland, MaynoothMaynoothIreland
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyNational University of Ireland, MaynoothMaynoothIreland

Personalised recommendations