A Comparative Investigation of 18 Interventions to Reduce Implicit Racial Preferences

Lai, Calvin K.; Marini, Maddalena; Lehr, Steven A.; Cerruti, Carlo; Shin, Jiyun Elizabeth L.; Joy-Gaba, Jennifer A.; Ho, Arnold K.; Teachman, Bethany A.; Wojcik, Sean P.; Koleva, Spassena; Frazier, Rebecca S.; Heiphetz, Larisa; Chen, Eva E.; Turner, Rhiannon; Haidt, Jonathan; Kesebir, Selin; Hawkins, Carlee Beth; Schaefer, Hillary S.; Rubichi, Sandro; Sartori, Giuseppe; Dial, Christopher M.; Narayanan, Sriram; Banaji, Mahzarin R.; Nosek, Brian A.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2155175

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 106 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If a stimulus, such as a social group, was originally implicitly evaluated as negative, for example, perhaps repeatedly pairing group members with positive cues – without any context, explanation, or reasoning – might nudge the evaluation toward positivity. To be sure, this method has shown that such change of implicit evaluations through evaluative conditioning is possible (e.g., Karpinski & Hilton, 2001; Lai et al, in press; Olson & Fazio, 2006; Rydell et al, 2006). …”

Section: Can Implicit Evaluations Be Undone?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we undo our first impressions? The role of reinterpretation in reversing implicit evaluations.

Mann¹,

Ferguson²

2015

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

123

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little work has examined whether implicit evaluations can be effectively “undone” after learning new revelations. Across 7 experiments, participants fully reversed their implicit evaluation of a novel target person after reinterpreting earlier information. Revision occurred across multiple implicit evaluation measures (Experiments 1a and 1b), and only when the new information prompted a reinterpretation of prior learning versus did not (Experiment 2). The updating required active consideration of the information, as it emerged only with at least moderate cognitive resources (Experiment 3). Self-reported reinterpretation predicted (Experiment 4) and mediated (Experiment 5) revised implicit evaluations beyond the separate influence of how thoughtfully participants considered the new information in general. Finally, the revised evaluations were durable three days later (Experiment 6). We discuss how these results inform existing theoretical models, and consider implications for future research.

show abstract

Section: Can Implicit Evaluations Be Undone?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we undo our first impressions? The role of reinterpretation in reversing implicit evaluations.

Mann¹,

Ferguson²

2015

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

123

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another central question in this area is how rapidly the representations underlying responses on implicit measures can be updated and changed. Whereas some studies suggest that responses on implicit measures are rather difficult to change (Lai et al, 2014), other research suggests that responses on implicit measures can change rapidly in response to minimal information (Cone, Mann, & Ferguson, 2017). Given that the former line of work has focused predominantly on preexisting representations of well-known social categories (i.e., African Americans) and the latter on updating and change of newly created representations of previously unknown individuals, a potential explanation for the discrepant findings is that they are driven by the extent to which the underlying representations have become crystallized in response to multiple experiences over time.…”

Section: Updating and Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty-Five Years of Research Using Implicit Measures

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The year 2020 marks the 25th anniversary of two seminal publications that have set the foundation for an exponentially growing body of research using implicit measures: Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, and Williams's (1995) work using evaluative priming to measure racial attitudes, and Greenwald and Banaji's (1995) review of implicit social cognition research that served as the basis for the development of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The current article provides an overview of (1) two conceptual roots that continue to shape interpretations of implicit measures; (2) conflicting interpretations of the term implicit; (3) different kinds of dissociations between implicit and explicit measures; (4) theoretical developments inspired by these dissociations; and (5) research that used implicit measures to address domain-specific and applied questions. We conclude with a discussion of challenges and open questions that remain to be addressed, offering guidance for the next generation of research using implicit measures.

show abstract

“…A possible second step could potentially take the form of an “intervention tournament” (Bruneau, Kteily, & Falk, ; Lai et al, ), in which the efficacy of number of interventions is evaluated simultaneously. By assessing the personalization parameters described above, exposing participants to various intergroup interventions (e.g., in the form of short texts, online messaging, or short video clips) in a between‐subjects design and testing their effect immediately and several weeks later, it would be possible to assess both their cognitive and affective impact (i.e., changes in appraisals, levels of relevant intergroup emotions, outgroup perceptions, etc.…”

Section: Roadmap For Future Studies: How Should We Study Personalizedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a new framework of personalized psychological interventions to improve intergroup relations and promote peace

Halperin

Schori‐Eyal

2020

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent increases in intergroup tensions and violence have global negative implications and underline the need for effective interventions to ameliorate conflictual relations. Despite the ongoing trend in social psychology toward an interventionist approach, there is still a theoretical and empirical gap in personalizing intergroup interventions to achieve optimal effectiveness. Integrating interventions aimed at prejudice reduction and promoting peace, we present a theoretical framework for personalizing these intergroup interventions. We propose a three-layer model: personalization parameters, intergroup interventions, and mechanisms that link parameter and intervention. To illustrate the model, three sample parameters are described (ideology, dominant emotional sentiments, and Big Five personality types) and three corresponding mechanisms (level of intervention congruency; the degree to which an intervention addresses core appraisal theme; and a needs-based mechanism). We demonstrate how the parameters and mechanisms map onto different established intergroup interventions, and suggest some empirical directions to test and later apply the theoretical framework. Finally, we discuss the potential of personalized interventions to substantially improve intergroup relations.The issue of intergroup conflicts-their creation, preservation, and escalation-has drawn the attention of social scientists in general and social psychologists more specifically for many years, leading them to research concepts such as prejudice (

show abstract

A Comparative Investigation of 18 Interventions to Reduce Implicit Racial Preferences

Cited by 7 publications

References 106 publications

Can we undo our first impressions? The role of reinterpretation in reversing implicit evaluations.

Can we undo our first impressions? The role of reinterpretation in reversing implicit evaluations.

Twenty-Five Years of Research Using Implicit Measures

Towards a new framework of personalized psychological interventions to improve intergroup relations and promote peace

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About