Intention Invention and the Affect Misattribution Procedure: Reply to Bar-Anan and Nosek (2012)

B. Keith Payne, Jazmin Brown-Iannuzzi, Melissa Burkley, Nathan L. Arbuckle, Erin Cooley, C. Daryl Cameron, Kristjen B. Lundberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

76 Scopus citations


A recent study of the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) found that participants who retrospectively reported that they intentionally rated the primes showed larger effect sizes and higher reliability. The study concluded that the AMP's validity depends on intentionally rating the primes. We evaluated this conclusion in three experiments. First, larger effect sizes and higher reliability were associated with (incoherent) retrospective reports of both (a) intentionally rating the primes and (b) being unintentionally influenced by the primes. A second experiment manipulated intentions to rate the primes versus targets and found that this manipulation produced systematically different effects. Experiment 3 found that giving participants an option to "pass" when they felt they were influenced by primes did not reduce priming. Experimental manipulations, rather than retrospective self-reports, suggested that participants make post hoc confabulations to explain their responses. There was no evidence that validity in the AMP depends on intentionally rating primes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)375-386
Number of pages12
JournalPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Issue number3
StatePublished - Mar 2013

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Intention Invention and the Affect Misattribution Procedure: Reply to Bar-Anan and Nosek (2012)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this