A Meta-Analysis of Procedures to Change Implicit Measures

Abstract

Using a novel technique known as network meta-analysis, we synthesized evidence from 492 studies (87,418 participants) to investigate the effectiveness of procedures in changing implicit measures, which we define as response biases on implicit tasks. We also evaluated these procedures’ effects on explicit and behavioral measures. We found that implicit measures can be changed, but effects are often relatively weak (|ds| < .30). Most studies focused on producing short-term changes with brief, single-session manipulations. Procedures that associate sets of concepts, invoke goals or motivations, or tax mental resources changed implicit measures the most, whereas procedures that induced threat, affirmation, or specific moods/emotions changed implicit measures the least. Bias tests suggested that implicit effects could be inflated relative to their true population values. Procedures changed explicit measures less consistently and to a smaller degree than implicit measures and generally produced trivial changes in behavior. Finally, changes in implicit measures did not mediate changes in explicit measures or behavior. Our findings suggest that changes in implicit measures are possible, but those changes do not necessarily translate into changes in explicit measures or behavior.

Understanding Implicit Bias: Putting the Criticism into Perspective

“…) and that changes in scores on implicit measures may not be associated with changes in behavior (Forscher et al . ). Prominent philosophers have questioned the validity of research on implicit social cognition altogether (e.g., Buckwalter ; Hermanson ,b, ; Machery , ,b; Yao and Reis‐Dennis n.d.).…”

Does Implicit Bias Predict Dictator Giving?

“…7 For instance, Norton et al [9] hypothesize that not wanting to appear biased (or wanting to appear race neutral) can cause a "race-paralysis" in IAT tasks, while Arkes and Tetlock [30] highlight non-prejudicial reasons for 'failing' IAT scores. Further, Forscher et al [31] find that changing one's IAT score does not bring about a behavioral change. A potential reason for these conflicting findings is that external forces, such as social pressures, may mitigate this bias.…”

Dual attitudes in retail, its predictive capacity and interaction with empathy in mitigating negative responses of dissociated consumers

“…Ao observar a pista social "idade", jovens tendem a categorizar os idosos de maneira estereotipada como um grupo social distinto (Nelson, 2009), desenvolvendo atitudes duplas (Fazio & Olson 2014) em relação a este grupo, principalmente quando não fazem parte de seu convívio (Kornadt, Meissner, & Rothermund, 2016), e mesmo em grupos sociais mais preparados para conflitos de idade (Ruiz et al, 2015). Se desenvolve, então, uma atitude implícita desfavorável e outra atitude explícita favorável, devido à necessidade de gestão da impressão (Leary & Kowalski, 1990) e imposição social (Nelson, 2009;Ruiz et al, 2015;Forscher, Lai, Axt, Ebersole, Herman, Devine & Nosek, 2017). Desta forma a primeira hipótese que se estabelece é: H1: As atitudes duplas irão divergir quando grupos sociais dissociativos se encontram;…”