Halo effect is implicit attitude diffusion from one attribute to unrelated judgments.

Evidence

As a general interpretation of halo effects, the present analysis supposes that the subject’s learning that an unfamiliar target person possesses Attribute B tends to produce a diffuse positive or negative attitude (depending on the affective value of B) toward the target person; that attitude is then likely to generalize to any specific attribute (A) that the subject is asked to judge. The attitude toward B is said to operate implicitly when the subject does not notice that B is influencing the judgment of A. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 97

Categorization

• XREF: This mechanistically frames halo effects as implicit attitude generalization — directly relevant to whether implicit measures track other group-defense/motivated cognition phenomena. — connects to: People misattribute halo-effect influence onto wrong causes while denying it — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 95; A diffuse attitude toward one attribute can implicitly inflect judgments of unrelated attributes.; Attitudes activated by one object can be misattributed to another — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 30 (+5 more)
• DEFINE: Defines the implicit operation of halo-effect attitudes.

Broader Connections

• A diffuse attitude toward one attribute can implicitly inflect judgments of unrelated attributes. #expands (0.97)
• Attitudes activated by one object can be misattributed to another #expands (0.86) — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 30
• Mere exposure to subliminal affects can transfer value to neutral stimuli via misattribution #exemplifies (0.82) — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 105
• Group esteem threat can spill attitudes onto unrelated outgroups #exemplifies (0.80) — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 57
• Attitude generalization, not in-group deprioritization, drives secondary transfer effects #exemplifies (0.78) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 570
• General mood states (‘incidental affect’) demonstrably shape intergroup judgments. #exemplifies (0.76) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2257
• Bias risk rises under emotional, ambiguous, and low-effort decision conditions #qualifies (0.72) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 1395