ArticleBehavior research methods2023
Effects on the Affect Misattribution Procedure are strongly moderated by influence awareness.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- How Contact Experience Shapes Peer's Attitudes: Investigating Typically Developing Children's Attitudes Toward Autistic Typically Developing Siblings in Inclusive Education.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- Hear it here: Built environments predict ratings and descriptions of ambiguous sounds.PloS one · 2025Article
- Incidental affect influences choice preference among competing alternatives in a modified Affect Misattribution Procedure.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Testing the automaticity features of the affect misattribution procedure: The roles of awareness and intentionality.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP) is used in many areas of psychological science based on the assumption that it not only taps into attitudes and biases but does so without a person's awareness. Across eight preregistered studies (N = 1603) plus meta-analyses, we reexamined the 'implicitness' of AMP effects, and in particular, the idea that people are unaware of the prime's influence on their evaluations. Results indicated that AMP effects and their predictive validity are primarily moderated by a subset of influence-aware trials (within individuals), and high rates of influence awareness (between individuals). Interestingly, an individual's influence-awareness rate on one AMP predicted how they performed on an earlier AMP, even when the two assessed different attitude domains. Taken together, our results suggest that AMP effects are not implicit in the way that has been claimed, a finding that has implications for the procedure, past findings, and theory. All materials and data are available at osf.io/gv7cm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35689167What 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.