Explicit Self-Report Measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1369-1385. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205275613 (Original work published 2005)
Implicit attitudes (IAT) toward the same goods tended to skew more positive, suggesting that the negative side of ambivalence was less automatically activated. In contrast, brands with strong identity signalling (e.g., Nike vs. Adidas) often showed smaller implicit–explicit gaps — people’s brand preferences were more consistently positive or negative.
Nordgren, L. F., van Harreveld, F., & van der Pligt, J. (2006). Ambivalence, discomfort, and motivated information processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.004
Shows that contradictory attitudes trigger increased cognitive effort to resolve conflict.
Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107(1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.1.101
Apparent contradictions are explained as two attitudes existing in different memory systems, only one of which is active at a given moment.
van Harreveld, F., van der Pligt, J., & de Liver, Y. N. (2009). The agony of ambivalence and ways to resolve it: Introducing the MAID model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308324518
Ambivalence leads to discomfort, motivating attitude change, information seeking, or avoidance.
Zeki, S., & Romaya, J. P. (2008). Neural correlates of hate. PLoS ONE, 3(10), e3556.
Research shows that love and hate share two areas of the brain, namely the putamen and the insula.