How preference change induced by mere action versus inaction persists over time

Zhang Chen · Rob W. Holland · Julian Quandt · Ap Dijksterhuis · Harm Veling

20 citations0/0 files storedJudgment and Decision Making

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies Behavioral Health and Interventions

Abstract

Abstract Understanding how sustainable preference change can be achieved is of both scientific and practical importance. Recent work shows that merely responding or not responding to objects during go/no-go training can influence preferences for these objects right after the training, when people choose with a time limit. Here we examined whether and how such immediate preference change in fast choices can affect choices without time limit one week later. In two preregistered experiments, participants responded to go food items and withheld responses toward no-go food items during a go/no-go training. Immediately after the training, they made consumption choices for half of the items (with a time limit in Experiment 1; without time limit in Experiment 2). One week later, participants chose again (without time limit in both experiments). Half of the choices had been presented immediately after the training (repeated choices), while the other half had not (new choices). Participants preferred go over no-go items both immediately after the training and one week later. Furthermore, the effect was observed for both repeated and new choices after one week, revealing a direct effect of mere (non)responses on preferences one week later. Exploratory analyses revealed that the effect after one week is related to the memory of stimulus-response contingencies immediately after the training, and this memory is impaired by making choices. These findings show mere action versus inaction can directly induce preference change that lasts for at least one week, and memory of stimulus-response contingencies may play a crucial role in this effect.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

References

1988Toward an instance theory of automatization.1911Animal intelligence; experimental studies 2015Does inhibitory control training improve health behaviour? A meta-analysis 2017Reminders of past choices bias decisions for reward in humans 2010Do Decisions Shape Preference?2008When approach motivation and behavioral inhibition collide: Behavior regulation through stimulus devaluation 2014Targeting impulsive processes of eating behavior via the internet. Effects on body weight 2012Is Choice-Induced Preference Change Long Lasting?

Cited by

2023Is there a difference between stopping and avoiding? A review of the mechanisms underlying Go/No-Go and Approach-Avoidance training for food choice 2022A computational model for individual differences in non-reinforced learning for individual items 2022Testing Go/No-Go training effects on implicit evaluations of unhealthy and healthy snack foods 2024The dual-feature approach-avoidance task: validity, training efficacy, and the role of contingency awareness in changing food preference 2025Action Interpretation Determines the Effects of Go/No-Go and Approach/Avoidance Actions on Food Choice

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.