Primming researchers have long investigated how providing information about traits in one context can influence the impressions people Jorm of social targets in another. The literature has demonstrated that this can have 3 different effects: Sometimes primnes become incorporated in the impression of the target (assimilation), sometimes they are used as standards of comparison (anchoring), and sometimes they cause people to consciously alter their judgments (correction). In this article, we present meta-analyses of these 3 effects. The mean effect size was significant in each case, such that assimilation resulted in impressions biased toward the primes, whereas anchoring and correction resulted in impressions biased away from the primes. Additionally, moderator analyses uncovered a number of variables that influence the strength of these effects, such as applicability, processing capacity, and the type of response measure. Based on these results, we propose a general model of how irrelevant information can bias judgments, detailing when and why assimilation and contrast effects result from default and corrective processes.
