We planned the study to test if the effect of opposition relations on deliberate evaluation (that was found in our previous studies) is a result of an anchor and adjustment process. We manipulated time pressure during evaluation of targets that has an opposition or similarity relations with affective stimuli. We predicted that the preference of targets that ended a negative event over targets that ended a positive event would be smaller when the evaluation is done under time pressure. The reason: people would have less time to adjust from the automatic evaluation (the anchor). We found very strong support for our prediction, much stronger than anticipated: under time pressure, participants reported a more positive evaluation of the targets that ended a pleasant sound than of the targets that ended an unpleasant sound. One problem with our initial framing of the experiment is that perhaps rather than providing support for the anchor-and-adjustment hypothesis, we simply provided more support to our previous findings: automatic evaluation is more sensitive to the co-occurrence than the relational information. In other words, perhaps the evaluation under time-pressure was simply a measure of automatic evaluation. If that is the case, then the most conservative interpretation of our results is that it is a support for the parallel EC hypothesis: CS-US co-occurrence has an assimilative effect on the CS evaluation even when relational information suggests that the co-occurring stimuli are of opposite valence. As for evidence pertaining to anchor and adjustment, the present study provides results that are definitely compatible with that hypothesis, but the design of the study is not appropriate for providing strong evidence in support of the hypothesis.