We planned the study to test the hypothesis that deliberate evaluation adjusts from the evaluation that is activated automatically. In other words, that automatic evaluation is an anchor, and deliberate evaluation adjusts from that anchor. Based on that hypothesis, we assumed that people would report weaker preference for creatures that ended unpleasant events over creatures that ended pleasant event if the evaluation is done under time pressure (not much time to adjust from the anchor) than if it is done with no time pressure (plenty of time to adjust from the anchor). That because we assumed that the anchor is automatic evaluation, and automatic evaluation is very sensitive to the associations that reflect the co-occurrence (the targets that ended pleasant events would elicit a positive automatic evaluation where the targets that ended the unpleasant events would elicit a negative automatic evaluation). However, in retrospect, we realized that we cannot say for sure that the difference between the time-pressure condition and the no-time-pressure condition is adjustment. Therefore, it is more conservative to acknowledge that the test speaks mostly to the difference between evaluation under time-pressure and evaluation with no time-pressure. That could still provide an important theoretical contribution because no prior study has tested that question.