Past meta-analyses of the effects of priming on overt behavior have not examined whether the effects and processes of priming behavioral or nonbehavioral concepts (e.g., priming action through the word go and priming religion through the word church) differ, even though these possibilities are important to our understanding of concept accessibility and behavior. Hence, we meta-analyzed 351 studies (224 reports and 862 effect sizes) involving incidental presentation of behavioral or nonbehavioral primes, a neutral control group, and at least one behavioral outcome. Our random-effects analyses, which used the correlated and hierarchical effects model with robust variance estimation (Pustejovsky & Tipton, 2021; Tanner-Smith et al., 2016), revealed a moderate priming effect (d = 0.37) that remained stable across behavioral and nonbehavioral primes and across different methodological procedures and adjustments for possible inclusion/publication biases (e.g., sensitivity analyses from Mathur & VanderWeele, 2020; sensitivity analyses from Vevea & Woods, 2005). Although the findings suggest that associative processes explain both the effects of behavioral and nonbehavioral primes, lowering the value of a behavior weakened the effect only when the primes were behavioral. These findings support the possibility that even though both types of primes activate associations that promote behavior, behavioral (vs. nonbehavioral) primes may provide a greater opportunity for goals to control the effect of the primes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

启动行为：行为和非行为启动对明显行为结果影响的荟萃分析。

过去关于启动对公开行为影响的荟萃分析并未检验启动行为或非行为概念（例如，通过“go”一词启动行动和通过“church”一词启动宗教）的效果和过程是否不同，尽管这些可能性是不同的。对于我们理解概念的可访问性和行为很重要。因此，我们对 351 项研究（224 份报告和 862 项效应量）进行了荟萃分析，涉及行为或非行为启动因素的偶然呈现、中立对照组和至少一种行为结果。我们的随机效应分析使用具有稳健方差估计的相关和分层效应模型（Pustejovsky & Tipton，2021；Tanner-Smith 等人，2016），揭示了适度的启动效应（d = 0.37），该效应在整个行为中保持稳定和非行为素数以及不同的方法程序和可能的纳入/发表偏差的调整（例如，Mathur & VanderWeele, 2020 的敏感性分析；Vevea & Woods, 2005 的敏感性分析）。尽管研究结果表明联想过程可以解释行为和非行为素数的影响，但只有当素数是行为素数时，降低行为的价值才会削弱效果。这些发现支持这样一种可能性：尽管两种类型的启动因素都会激活促进行为的关联，但行为（与非行为）启动因素可能为目标提供更大的机会来控制启动因素的影响。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。