The current study investigated the dynamics of arbitrarily applicable relational responding involving emotional pictographs (emojis) used in electronic messages by means of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP). College students (N = 41) were trained to establish two classes of equivalent stimuli, each comprising a happy or an angry emoji, and three pseudo-words that presumably became symbols of the emotional pictographs. In a subsequent IRAP test, combinations of symbols (labels) and emojis (targets) generated four trial-types (with the consistent response within parentheses): happy symbol–happy emoji (true); happy symbol–negative emoji (false) negative symbol–happy emoji (false); and negative symbol–negative emoji (true), referred to as trial types 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. A positive score occurred only for trial-type 1 [happy symbol–happy emoji (true)]. Scores for trial-types 2 and 4 were close to zero, and the score for trial-type 3 [negative symbol-happy emoji (false)] was negative. This negative D-IRAP score means that participants were faster to respond true than false for the combination of negative symbol and happy emoji. These results are discussed in terms of the Differential Arbitrarily Applicable Relational Responding Effects (DAARRE) model. It is hypothesized that the orienting and evoking (functional) properties of the positive target stimulus (happy emoji) and the positive response option (true) had a stronger bearing on participants’ responding in trial type 3 than the relation between the label and target stimuli presented in this trial. We argue that the current study provides an empirical demonstration of a dissonant target trial type effect (DTTTE) that appeared to counter equivalence relations trained within the experimental session and discuss implications for IRAP research.

当前的研究通过隐式关系评估程序 (IRAP) 调查了涉及电子消息中使用的情感象形文字 (emoji) 的任意适用关系响应的动态。大学生（N = 41）被训练建立两类等效刺激，每类包括一个快乐或愤怒的表情符号，以及三个可能成为情感象形符号的伪词。在随后的 IRAP 测试中，符号（标签）和表情符号（目标）的组合产生了四种试验类型（括号内的响应一致）：快乐符号-快乐表情符号（真）；快乐符号-负面表情符号（假）负面符号-快乐表情符号（假）；和否定符号-否定表情符号（真），分别称为试验类型 1、2、3 和 4。仅在试验类型 1 [快乐符号-快乐表情符号（真）] 中出现正分。试验类型 2 和 4 的得分接近于零，试验类型 3 [负符号-快乐表情符号（假）] 的得分为负。这个负的 D-IRAP 分数意味着参与者的反应更快对于否定符号和快乐表情符号的组合，真比假。这些结果是根据微分任意适用的关系响应效应 (DAARRE) 模型进行讨论的。据推测，与标签和目标刺激之间的关系相比，积极目标刺激（快乐表情符号）和积极响应选项（真）的定向和唤起（功能）特性对参与者在试验类型 3 中的反应有更大的影响本次审判中提出。我们认为，当前的研究提供了一个不协调的目标试验类型效应 (DTTTE) 的实证证明，该效应似乎对抗了在实验会议中训练的等效关系，并讨论了对 IRAP 研究的影响。