Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 30;27(6):1397–1415. doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01764-1

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Schematic of affective priming paradigm contrasts and selected hypotheses. a Congruence in the affective priming paradigm is defined by the prime–target pairs. The trial is classified as congruent when a most liked food prime is paired with a positive target, and incongruent when paired with a negative target. Additionally, the trial is congruent when a least liked food prime is paired with a negative target, and incongruent when paired with a positive target. A priming effect for all foods (H2a) would be shown by faster sample means of median RTs (ms) in congruent versus incongruent trials (RTcon < RTinc). (Details for all RT calculations can be found in the Measures and Indices section.) Priming effects for RTs (H2) are shown here only for demonstration purposes, but the priming effects in terms of ERs are in the same direction (ERcon < ERinc; see H3 predictions). b Priming effects were expected for both healthy (H2b) and unhealthy food primes (H2c). It was also hypothesized that the priming effect would be greater for unhealthy than for healthy food primes (H2d). The RT priming effect was calculated as the difference in median RTs for incongruent and congruent trials (medianRTinc − medianRTcon) at the participant level, and the sample means of these difference scores were then compared across conditions (healthy vs. unhealthy). c The probability of choosing unhealthy over healthy most liked foods in the unhealthy versus healthy food-choice task trials was hypothesized to positively correlate (linearly) with individual differences in RT priming effects between unhealthy (∆RTunhealthy) and healthy (∆RThealthy) most liked food prime trials (H4c). The latter was examined using difference scores (∆RTunhealthy − ∆RThealthy) in which a positive value indicates that participants had a larger priming effect for unhealthy most liked food primes. H4a and H4b are not shown here, but also posit expected positive linear correlations between variables. Note. Hypotheses graphs are not based on actual or simulated data and are for illustrative purposes only. RT = reaction time; RTcon = RTs in congruent trials; RTinc = RTs in incongruent trials; ER = error rate; ∆RT = RT difference score (as shown in the formulas)