ArticleExperimental brain research2020
Modulation of preference for abstract stimuli following competence-based social status primes.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- People are less likely to selfishly deceive those who achieved status through virtue rather than dominance or competence.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of aesthetic preferences in Chinese freehand paintings among Chinese retired elders beyond gender.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Who should be first? How and when AI-human order influences procedural justice in a multistage decision-making process.PloS one · 2023Article
- Subliminal Priming Effects of Masked Social Hierarchies During a Categorization Task: An Event-Related Brain Potentials Study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Competence-based social status and implicit preference modulate the ability to coordinate during a joint grasping task.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- The Effects of Emotional Design on Multimedia Learning and Appreciation of Chinese Poetry.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- A registered report on how implicit pro-rich bias is shaped by the perceiver's gender and socioeconomic status.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- Oculomotor behavior tracks the effect of ideological priming on deception.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the present study, we measured whether competence-related high and low social status attributed to two unknown individuals affects participants' implicit reactivity to abstract stimuli associated to the identity of the same individuals. During a status-inducing procedure, participants were asked to play an interactive game with two (fake) players coded as high vs low status based on their game competence. Before and after the game, a modified version of the Affective Misattribution Procedure (AMP) was administered in which the players' faces were used as primes. The evaluation target, as is typical to AMP, was a Chinese ideogram. There were two different presentation timings for the prime image: 75 ms and 17 ms. After the status-inducing procedure, the evaluation targets preceded by the high-status prime (i.e. best player's face) were rated as more pleasant than those preceded by the low-status prime (i.e. worst player's face). This effect was only found, however, for the 75 ms lasting prime. Moreover, explicit ratings of the primes showed that the high-status player was rated as more intelligent, competent and dominant than the low status one. These results indicate that implicit preference and explicit evaluation of unacquainted individuals are rapidly modulated by competence-based social status attribution, thus hinting at the plastic nature of social categorization and, relatedly, the malleability of visual preference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31832705What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.