Social Cognition
Evaluative Priming Task
Also called: affective priming task, attitude priming task, evaluative priming paradigm
Measure how a brief good or bad picture speeds or slows the next judgment. Primes and targets are emoji, so the task needs no word list.
5-6 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 243
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 2
What it measures
Measures how a brief good or bad picture speeds or slows the judgment of the next one. A prime emoji flashes for 200 ms, and participants then judge a target emoji as good or bad. The main score is the response time difference between mismatched and matched trials.
Constructs
- Automatic evaluation
- Attitudes
- Affective processing
Research uses
- Attitude and social cognition research
- Emotion and affect research
- Within-study group comparison
How the paradigm works
Evaluative priming measures how a brief good or bad picture changes the judgment of the next one. On each trial a prime emoji appears at the center of the screen for 200 ms, the screen goes blank for 100 ms, and a target emoji stays until the participant answers or 2,000 ms pass. Participants press one key if the target shows something good and the other if it shows something bad, as quickly and accurately as they can, and give no answer to the prime. Fazio and colleagues (1986) found faster judgments when prime and target share a valence, and read this as an attitude switching on by itself. The effect appears when the target comes about 300 ms after the prime starts and not at 1,000 ms (Fazio, 2001), and a meta-analysis of 73 studies found it across a quarter century of research (Herring and colleagues, 2013).
More about the paradigm
Primes and targets are emoji, so the task needs no word list and shows the same pictures in every language. The pictures are 32 Noto Emoji chosen by a stated rule: 16 with an obvious good reading and 16 with an obvious bad one, with 8 faces and 8 things on each side. No rating study was run. Each session's seed splits them into a prime set and a target set with the same mix, so no picture is both a prime and a target in a session. Each of the four pairings of prime and target valence comes equally often, 30 times each in the standard 120 trials, in a seeded order with one short break halfway. The F and J keys for good and bad are counterbalanced across sessions. Practice shows 8 pictures alone, then 8 pairs, with feedback; the test gives none, except a message after a missed response. The prime and the gap switch on screen frames, and the frames requested and measured are saved on every trial.
The primary score is the priming effect: the median correct response time on incongruent trials, where prime and target differ in valence, minus congruent trials, where they match. A positive value means a matching prime sped the judgment. Scores also give the effect for good and for bad targets, accuracy on each trial type, the overall median response time, anticipations (responses under 100 ms, left out of the response times) and the frames measured. The effect is meant for group comparisons rather than for one person's score: in a large comparison of seven indirect attitude measures, evaluative priming came last for psychometric quality (Bar-Anan and Nosek, 2014). Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Priming Effectms
- Median correct response time on incongruent trials minus congruent trials.
- Positive means a prime of the same valence sped the judgment
- Priming Effect, Good Targetsms
- For good targets: median correct response time after a bad prime minus after a good prime.
- Context for the priming effect
- Priming Effect, Bad Targetsms
- For bad targets: median correct response time after a good prime minus after a bad prime.
- Context for the priming effect
- Median RT, Congruentms
- Median correct response time when prime and target share a valence.
- Lower is faster
- Median RT, Incongruentms
- Median correct response time when prime and target differ in valence.
- Lower is faster
- Median RT, All Trialsms
- Median correct response time across the test.
- Lower is faster
- Accuracy, Good Prime and Good Target%
- Share of these trials answered correctly.
- Higher is better
- Accuracy, Bad Prime and Good Target%
- Share of these trials answered correctly.
- Higher is better
- Accuracy, Good Prime and Bad Target%
- Share of these trials answered correctly.
- Higher is better
- Accuracy, Bad Prime and Bad Target%
- Share of these trials answered correctly.
- Higher is better
- Accuracy, Congruent%
- Share of congruent trials answered correctly.
- Higher is better
- Accuracy, Incongruent%
- Share of incongruent trials answered correctly.
- Higher is better
- Overall Accuracy%
- Share of all test trials answered correctly. A missed response is incorrect.
- Under 80% is flagged for review
- Fewest Correct Trials in a Trial Typetrials
- Correct response times in the trial type with the fewest. The medians rest on these.
- Fewer than 12 is flagged for review
- Anticipationscount
- Responses under 100 ms, left out of the response times.
- Context for the scores
- Missed Responsescount
- Test trials with no response within 2,000 ms.
- Context for the scores
- Prime Time as Measuredms
- Mean measured duration of the prime on screen.
- Should be close to the setting
- Gap as Measuredms
- Mean measured duration of the blank before the target.
- Should be close to the setting
- Prime Frames as Measuredcount
- Mean number of screen frames the prime stayed on.
- Compare with the frames requested
- Gap Frames as Measuredcount
- Mean number of screen frames the blank stayed on.
- Compare with the frames requested
- Trials Off Timingtrials
- Test trials with the prime or the gap more than one frame off, or with no measure.
- Over 20% of trials is flagged for review
Use and evidence
243 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, down 17% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 103 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 74 |
| 2024 | 46 |
| 2023 | 40 |
| 2022 | 42 |
| 2021 | 41 |
| 2020 | 49 |
| 2019 | 60 |
| 2018 | 58 |
| 2017 | 59 |
| 2016 | 68 |
| 2015 | 59 |
| 2014 | 69 |
| 2013 | 63 |
| 2012 | 87 |
| 2011 | 71 |
| 2010 | 68 |
| 2009 | 41 |
| 2008 | 36 |
| 2007 | 49 |
| 2006 | 47 |
| 2005 | 30 |
| 2004 | 40 |
| 2003 | 36 |
| 2002 | 21 |
| 2001 | 24 |
| 2000 | 10 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 4
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 74
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 2
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Trial
- A cross for 500 ms, an empty panel for 500 ms, a prime for 200 ms, a blank for 100 ms, then a target until a response or 2,000 ms.
- Timing
- 300 ms from the start of the prime to the start of the target. The prime can run from 100 to 300 ms and the gap from 50 to 300 ms. Displays switch on screen frames, and the frames requested and measured are saved on every trial.
- Pictures
- Primes and targets are emoji, so no word list is needed: 32 pictures from Noto Emoji, a freely licensed set, shown as the same image files on every device. 16 have an obvious good reading and 16 an obvious bad one, with 8 faces and 8 things on each side.
- Prime and target sets
- Each session's seed splits the emoji into separate prime and target sets with the same mix, so no picture is both in one session.
- Trial mix
- 120 trials (standard; 80 to 160), 30 for each pairing of good and bad primes and targets.
- Trial order
- A seeded order, saved with the trial data, with no more than 3 targets of one valence in a row, never one target twice in a row, and one short break halfway.
- Keys
- F and J for good and bad, counterbalanced across sessions.
- Practice
- 8 pictures alone, then 8 pairs, with feedback. The test gives none, except a message after a missed response.
- Response times
- Correct responses of 100 ms or more enter the medians.
- Selection rule
- Emoji with an obvious everyday good or bad reading across cultures, the same number of faces on each side. No weapons, violence, religious symbols, flags, hand gestures, alcohol or gore, and the bad emoji stay mild, such as a crying face or a broken heart. No rating study was run.
Most evaluative priming studies use words or photographs. This version shows emoji in their place, so its scores are not comparable with values from those studies. The effect is meant for group comparisons rather than one person's score.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: evaluative_priming_test from the scored run, F or J for a good or bad target (chance 50%, half the targets are good) within 2,000 ms, correctness from the key for the target. Below chance invalidates and not above chance is flagged. One key on 90% of answers invalidates when accuracy is not above chance. Missed responses and responses under 100 ms follow the timed-test rule: more than max(3, 25%) missed or more than max(2, 20%) under 100 ms invalidate, and any is flagged. Completing fewer than half the planned trials invalidates, and any other incomplete run is flagged. Accuracy under 80%, fewer than 12 correct responses in any of the four trial types, or the prime or the gap more than one frame off on over 20% of trials is flagged for review.
Why these rules
Accuracy significantly below chance (one-sided exact test, p < .05) cannot come from guessing; it means the response mapping was reversed or the task was not followed (Slick, Sherman and Iverson 1999 treat below-chance forced-choice performance as definite response bias). Chance-level accuracy can be a real result in impaired participants, so it is only flagged. One option on at least 90% of answered trials, when the correct options are balanced and accuracy is not above chance, means the answers did not depend on the items (the task counterpart of long-string responding in surveys; Curran 2016). Missed responses and responses under 100 ms keep the platform's timed-test rule: more than max(3, 25%) missed responses or more than max(2, 20%) responses under 100 ms invalidate, and any is flagged. A response under 100 ms cannot be a reaction to the stimulus. The pictures have an obvious good or bad reading, so accuracy under 80% means the response times may not reflect the judgment asked for. The effect is a difference between median correct response times, so it needs enough of them in each trial type. The effect depends on the time from prime to target: it appears at 300 ms and not at 1,000 ms (Fazio, 2001, https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930125908), so a display that could not hold the timing changes the measure. A hidden tab lets the study, delay or response timers run without the participant, so a percentile is withheld after one.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Test trials | 120 | 80 to 160 |
| Prime time (ms) | 200 | 100 to 300 |
| Gap before the target (ms) | 100 | 50 to 300 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Evaluative Priming task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Fazio et al., 1986), with the standard settings (test trials: 120; prime time (ms): 200; gap before the target (ms): 100). The main score was priming effect (median correct response time on incongruent trials minus congruent trials).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Fazio, R. H., Sanbonmatsu, D. M., Powell, M. C., & Kardes, F. R. (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.229
- Fazio, R. H. (2001). On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: An overview. Cognition & Emotion, 15(2), 115-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930125908The 300 ms interval, and primes balanced across kinds of target.
- Herring, D. R., White, K. R., Jabeen, L. N., Hinojos, M., Terrazas, G., Reyes, S. M., Taylor, J. H., & Crites, S. L. (2013). On the automatic activation of attitudes: A quarter century of evaluative priming research. Psychological Bulletin, 139(5), 1062-1089. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031309Meta-analysis of 73 studies.
- Klauer, K. C., & Musch, J. (2003). Affective priming: Findings and theories. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation. Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606853-7Review of the findings and theories.
- Hermans, D., De Houwer, J., & Eelen, P. (2001). A time course analysis of the affective priming effect. Cognition and Emotion, 15(2), 143-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930125768How the effect changes with the time from prime to target.
- Smith, C. T., & De Houwer, J. (2015). Hooked on a feeling: Affective anti-smoking messages are more effective than cognitive messages at changing implicit evaluations of smoking. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01488The cross, the blank and the 200 ms prime.
- Gurbuz, E., Rohr, M., & Wentura, D. (2024). Independent effects of emotional expression and group membership in the evaluative priming task. Experimental Psychology, 71(4), 214-224. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000628The 2,000 ms limit on the target.
- Stoianov, D., Beyersmann, E., Kemp, N., Wegener, S., & Popov, S. (2026). The impact of awareness on affective emoji priming in visual word recognition. Scientific Reports, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-34117-wEmoji as affective primes.
- Bar-Anan, Y., & Nosek, B. A. (2014). A comparative investigation of seven indirect attitude measures. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 668-688. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0410-6Psychometric quality beside other indirect measures.
Source papers
- Fazio RH, Sanbonmatsu DM, Powell MC, Kardes FR (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2):229-238.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Evaluative Priming Task take?
About 5 to 6 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Priming Effect, Priming Effect, Good Targets, Priming Effect, Bad Targets, Median RT, Congruent, Median RT, Incongruent, Median RT, All Trials, Accuracy, Good Prime and Good Target, Accuracy, Bad Prime and Good Target, Accuracy, Good Prime and Bad Target, Accuracy, Bad Prime and Bad Target, Accuracy, Congruent, Accuracy, Incongruent, Overall Accuracy, Fewest Correct Trials in a Trial Type, Anticipations, Missed Responses, Prime Time as Measured, Gap as Measured, Prime Frames as Measured, Gap Frames as Measured and Trials Off Timing. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Evaluative Priming Task used in research?
243 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, down 17% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 103 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Evaluative Priming Task have?
In the published research, 4 papers report its test-retest reliability and 2 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Test trials (80 to 160), prime time (ms) (100 to 300) and gap before the target (ms) (50 to 300). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.