A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept.

Abstract

This theoretical integration of social psychology's main cognitive and affective constructs was shaped by 3 influences: (a) recent widespread interest in automatic and implicit cognition, (b) development of the Implicit Association Test (IAT; A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz, 1998), and (c) social psychology's consistency theories of the 1950s, especially F. Heider's (1958) balance theory.The balanced identity design is introduced as a method to test correlational predictions of the theory. Data obtained with this method revealed that predicted consistency patterns were strongly apparent in the data for implicit (IAT) measures but not in those for parallel explicit (self-report) measures. Two additional not-yet-tested predictions of the theory are described.

Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.

“…Comparison of social sensitivity's large effect on ECCs, compared with its much weaker effect on ICCs, fits with previous conclusions that impression management can undermine validity of self-report measures in socially sensitive domains (e.g., Greenwald et al, 2002;Nosek et al, 2007). An estimate of the magnitude of this interfering effect can be obtained by applying the unstandardized regression parameter estimates from the univariate regression of ECCs on social sensitivity.…”

“…A useful property of IAT measures is their presumed reliance on associative processes that can operate automatically (Devine, Plant, Amodio, Harmon-Jones, & Vance, 2002;Greenwald et al, 2002;see Conrey, Sherman, Gawronski, Hugenberg, & Groom, 2005, for an investigation aimed at distinguishing the contributions of automatic and controlled processes to IAT measures). The sensitivity of IAT measures to automatically activated associations is sometimes credited with making IAT scores resistant (even if not immune) to faking.…”

“…Excluded, therefore, were studies focusing on correlations among IAT measures of different constructs (e.g., Greenwald et al, 2002) or studies in which use of the IAT was limited to investigating correlations between IAT and parallel self-report measures. Numerous studies of the latter type were recently reviewed meta-analytically by Hofmann, Gawronski, Gschwendner, Le, and Schmitt (2005) and this was also the subject of a 57-topic study by Nosek (2005).…”

Anxiety and avoidance in psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: The role of implicit and explicit anxiety

“…Implicit and explicit measures are typically unrelated or only modestly related [20]. Discrepancies between the two would ar-guably be more pronounced among patients with limited self-awareness and have, for instance, been demonstrated in patients with borderline personality disorder [21].…”

Lateralisation of self-esteem: An investigation using a dichotically presented auditory adaptation of the Implicit Association Test

“…Despite this conceptual limitation of the IAT, however, there is considerable evidence that the standard self-esteem IAT is a valid measure of self-esteem (see, for example, Bosson et al, 2000;Greenwald et al, 2002;Meagher and Aidman, 2004). Nevertheless, it is worth noting that a new IAT methodology has been developed -The Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT; Karpinski & Steinman, 2006) -that overcomes the above limitations by using only a single attitude category (e.g.…”